|
|
|||||||
| View Poll Results: yes, but how much have you lost playing poker during your lifetime? | |||
| Less than 50k |
   
|
16 | 32.65% |
| 50 - 100k |
  
|
1 | 2.04% |
| 100 - 200k |
  
|
2 | 4.08% |
| 200 - 300k |
  
|
0 | 0% |
| 300 -500k |
  
|
0 | 0% |
| 500k - 1mm |
  
|
3 | 6.12% |
| 1mm-2mm |
|
0 | 0% |
| 2mm-3mm |
|
0 | 0% |
| 3mm-4mm |
|
0 | 0% |
| 4mm+ |
|
27 | 55.10% |
| Voters: 49. You may not vote on this poll | |||
 |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#61
08-28-2007, 02:02 PM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: For moral relativists
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] You are being intentionally obtuse. Living in my hypothetical community with shared land ownership requires that you consent to living according to the town charter. [/ QUOTE ] Stop right there. I already asked if the person in question consented to the charter. You dismissed my question thusly: [ QUOTE ] What does Jerry's agreement have to do with consistency? [/ QUOTE ] I've repeatedly mentioned that my characterization of this as inconsistent is dependent upon it being *imposed*. I've emphasized that word several times. If he consents, consistency is possible. Further, the moral system I have supported in the politics forum is entirely 100% compatible with what you're describing. [/ QUOTE ] I said participation in this society was voluntary. Jerry knows about the charter as he is a member of this society. He may not agree with every provision, nor his agreement on every provision required for the society's "rules" to be consistently decided upon and applied. By making this the central issue, you are advocating only one moral system: one in which every member of the voluntary society is free from any action by the other members if he chooses. This is not an issue of "consistency". It's like: Hey my system is the only one consistent. Why? Because I define consistency as a moral system identical to mine. [/ QUOTE ] If it's voluntary, it's entirely compatible with what I'm supporting. So I'm not sure what you're getting at. 
|
|
#62
08-28-2007, 02:04 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: For moral relativists
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] Yes, yet I think that it might change the discussion away from the main point, and on to specific logical issues with the example. A vast majority of people decide what morally is right vs what is wrong based of how they feel about it regardless of consistency issues. There is always an attempt to rationalize away the consistency issues when they are brought up. However most often these attempts are nothing more than making up stories ex post facto. [/ QUOTE ] I agree with this. Most people haven't thought about what they support enough to even realize whether it is consistent or not. [/ QUOTE ] If you agree with this, and you also agree that most people get along well enough in life in spite of it then you understand my point. It is a successful strategy. I will gladly address the rest of your post if you can rebut it. I will also address the rest of your post for any reason you choose. [/ QUOTE ] Most people isn't all. You're looking at an aggregate, and ignoring the effects on individuals. If 99 people gang up and kick 1 person to death, well, this seems like "most people" are getting along, so it must be OK. Right?
|
|
#63
08-28-2007, 04:58 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: For moral relativists
[ QUOTE ]
If it's voluntary, it's entirely compatible with what I'm supporting. So I'm not sure what you're getting at. [/ QUOTE ] What if it's voluntary in the sense that you are free to join another society. However there is no guarantee that another society will let you join and there's no guarantee that a society with rules to your liking exists.
|
|
#64
08-28-2007, 06:02 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: For moral relativists
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] Yes, yet I think that it might change the discussion away from the main point, and on to specific logical issues with the example. A vast majority of people decide what morally is right vs what is wrong based of how they feel about it regardless of consistency issues. There is always an attempt to rationalize away the consistency issues when they are brought up. However most often these attempts are nothing more than making up stories ex post facto. [/ QUOTE ] I agree with this. Most people haven't thought about what they support enough to even realize whether it is consistent or not. [/ QUOTE ] If you agree with this, and you also agree that most people get along well enough in life in spite of it then you understand my point. It is a successful strategy. I will gladly address the rest of your post if you can rebut it. I will also address the rest of your post for any reason you choose. [/ QUOTE ] Most people isn't all. You're looking at an aggregate, and ignoring the effects on individuals. If 99 people gang up and kick 1 person to death, well, this seems like "most people" are getting along, so it must be OK. Right? [/ QUOTE ]The 99 might also decide to gang up and help the 1 person to wealth. What do you have against "People should do what they feel is right."?
|
|
#65
08-28-2007, 06:14 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: For moral relativists
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] If it's voluntary, it's entirely compatible with what I'm supporting. So I'm not sure what you're getting at. [/ QUOTE ] What if it's voluntary in the sense that you are free to join another society. However there is no guarantee that another society will let you join and there's no guarantee that a society with rules to your liking exists. [/ QUOTE ] off topic reply so I don't want this to derail the thread, but why would you want to have your life and the rules you live by defined by some people who lived 200 years ago?
|
|
#66
08-28-2007, 06:18 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: For moral relativists
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] Yes, yet I think that it might change the discussion away from the main point, and on to specific logical issues with the example. A vast majority of people decide what morally is right vs what is wrong based of how they feel about it regardless of consistency issues. There is always an attempt to rationalize away the consistency issues when they are brought up. However most often these attempts are nothing more than making up stories ex post facto. [/ QUOTE ] I agree with this. Most people haven't thought about what they support enough to even realize whether it is consistent or not. [/ QUOTE ] If you agree with this, and you also agree that most people get along well enough in life in spite of it then you understand my point. It is a successful strategy. I will gladly address the rest of your post if you can rebut it. I will also address the rest of your post for any reason you choose. [/ QUOTE ] Most people isn't all. You're looking at an aggregate, and ignoring the effects on individuals. If 99 people gang up and kick 1 person to death, well, this seems like "most people" are getting along, so it must be OK. Right? [/ QUOTE ]The 99 might also decide to gang up and help the 1 person to wealth. What do you have against "People should do what they feel is right."? [/ QUOTE ] Your kidding, right? I"m horny and your backside looks inviting. I could care less about what you think, what matters is what I 'feel is right' so get ready to be bent over. And depending on my particular mood/feeling I might get greater feelings of satisfaction if I hear pleading and sounds like your in pain and scared for your life. This is all fine and good with me and I feel it is right.
|
|
#67
08-28-2007, 06:28 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: For moral relativists
[ QUOTE ]
off topic reply so I don't want this to derail the thread, but why would you want to have your life and the rules you live by defined by some people who lived 200 years ago? [/ QUOTE ] What are you talking about?
|
|
#68
08-28-2007, 06:33 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: For moral relativists
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] Yes, yet I think that it might change the discussion away from the main point, and on to specific logical issues with the example. A vast majority of people decide what morally is right vs what is wrong based of how they feel about it regardless of consistency issues. There is always an attempt to rationalize away the consistency issues when they are brought up. However most often these attempts are nothing more than making up stories ex post facto. [/ QUOTE ] I agree with this. Most people haven't thought about what they support enough to even realize whether it is consistent or not. [/ QUOTE ] If you agree with this, and you also agree that most people get along well enough in life in spite of it then you understand my point. It is a successful strategy. I will gladly address the rest of your post if you can rebut it. I will also address the rest of your post for any reason you choose. [/ QUOTE ] Most people isn't all. You're looking at an aggregate, and ignoring the effects on individuals. If 99 people gang up and kick 1 person to death, well, this seems like "most people" are getting along, so it must be OK. Right? [/ QUOTE ]The 99 might also decide to gang up and help the 1 person to wealth. What do you have against "People should do what they feel is right."? [/ QUOTE ] Your kidding, right? I"m horny and your backside looks inviting. I could care less about what you think, what matters is what I 'feel is right' so get ready to be bent over. And depending on my particular mood/feeling I might get greater feelings of satisfaction if I hear pleading and sounds like your in pain and scared for your life. This is all fine and good with me and I feel it is right. [/ QUOTE ] I guess if that's your moral feelings. Doesn't stop me from feeling that you are wrong and defending myself. Or putting you in involuntary custody with the help of other people who think you are wrong.
|
|
#69
08-28-2007, 07:50 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: For moral relativists
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] off topic reply so I don't want this to derail the thread, but why would you want to have your life and the rules you live by defined by some people who lived 200 years ago? [/ QUOTE ] What are you talking about? [/ QUOTE ] Just because you were born into a society that is a certain way does not mean that it 'should' be that way, or that it is desirable. The status quo is not 'correct' because it is the status quo.
|
|
#70
08-28-2007, 07:54 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: For moral relativists
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] Yes, yet I think that it might change the discussion away from the main point, and on to specific logical issues with the example. A vast majority of people decide what morally is right vs what is wrong based of how they feel about it regardless of consistency issues. There is always an attempt to rationalize away the consistency issues when they are brought up. However most often these attempts are nothing more than making up stories ex post facto. [/ QUOTE ] I agree with this. Most people haven't thought about what they support enough to even realize whether it is consistent or not. [/ QUOTE ] If you agree with this, and you also agree that most people get along well enough in life in spite of it then you understand my point. It is a successful strategy. I will gladly address the rest of your post if you can rebut it. I will also address the rest of your post for any reason you choose. [/ QUOTE ] Most people isn't all. You're looking at an aggregate, and ignoring the effects on individuals. If 99 people gang up and kick 1 person to death, well, this seems like "most people" are getting along, so it must be OK. Right? [/ QUOTE ]The 99 might also decide to gang up and help the 1 person to wealth. What do you have against "People should do what they feel is right."? [/ QUOTE ] Your kidding, right? I"m horny and your backside looks inviting. I could care less about what you think, what matters is what I 'feel is right' so get ready to be bent over. And depending on my particular mood/feeling I might get greater feelings of satisfaction if I hear pleading and sounds like your in pain and scared for your life. This is all fine and good with me and I feel it is right. [/ QUOTE ] I guess if that's your moral feelings. Doesn't stop me from feeling that you are wrong and defending myself. Or putting you in involuntary custody with the help of other people who think you are wrong. [/ QUOTE ] In that case I better bring a gang with me who feel like I do and maybe some weapons too.
|
|
|
|
Linear Mode
