A chat with a philosophical layman about Ethics

[prof]

Prof, you don't think that you are starting out with a normative position and then switching to a denontological position?

Greetings, Ginkgo

I don't think so. I think deontological positions are also normative posititions.

It helps to keep in mind that the Ethicist was addressing a philosophical Layman. Of course Normative Ethics came into it. Maybe the whole exercise was too theoretical for the average working person. Likely the thread was written for the philosopher after all. Did it give you something to think about? If so, it succeeded in its goal.

Did it direct you to some action you could take? ...such as looking up the Axiogenics website of Peter Demerest and then following through - at http://www.amindforsuccess.com/ or going to Roots Action to uoin in the petition drives.... If so, you have put Ethics into live action!!

[tbieter]

LOoOOoooOong talkative post about excatly nothing, it could in princip be the start for anything, a sales speech about yoga or wellness.

Didn't have a tiny piece of actual ethics.

Where is your contribution to this thread? Or to any other thread on ethics?

I have known this prof for many years, he must have had a massive stroke at some point thus he doesn't comprehend simple logic. Reasoning with him is futile.

He will for an eternity leech of others to do his work, which he can't do himself.

It would be a fools errand to cast pearls before him, not only will he not understand the importaince, nor the relevance or irrelevance of what has been presented and thus foul everything up.

During my reading this morning of G. K. Chesterton's biography of St. Francis of Assisi, I thought of the disrespect and abuse of prof that you expressed above. (My reading is in preparation for the Feb. 25 meeting of the Chesterton Society at the University Club.)

This text at pages 80-81 caused me to think of you and prof:

"He honoured all men; that is, he not only loved but respected them all. What gave him his extraordinary personal power was this; that from the Pope to the beggar' from the sultan of Syria in his pavilion to the ragged robbers crawling out of the wood, there was never a man who looked into those brown burning eyes without being certain that Francis Bernardone was really interested in him; in his own inner individual life from the cradle to the grave; that he himself was being valued and taken seriously, and not merely added to the spoils of some social policy or the names of some clerical document. Now for this particular moral and religious idea there is no external expression except courtesy. Exhortation does not express it, for it is not mere abstract enthusiasm; beneficence does not express it, for it is not mere pity. It can only be conveyed by a certain grand manner which may be called good manners."

You are lacking in love and respect; in being really interested in prof, and taking him seriously; in courtesy; in good manners. You owe him an apology here.

I'm reading prof's ethical philosophy. His thinking is very close to Francis' words and deeds. And he expresses some praise for virtue ethics, which is often absent from the thought of many contemporary professors of philosophy. He writes above:

"A good moral principle would have everything a moral principle should have. …It would put people first – over things and stuff. And it would give a higher priority to things and material than it would give to numbers and passing thoughts of the mind. Good principles show us which way is “up.” They help us get our priorities straight. Okay?"

Hex, you should really adopt St. Francis and prof as role models. Try some humility. Start with the apology.

http://www.amazon.com/Francis-Assisi-Do ... st+francis

https://www.chesterton.org/

http://www.universityclubofstpaul.com/

[henry quirk]

Article One. The people of the planet, Earth, shall exhibit compassion and respect for all others regardless of creed, complexion, location, gender, occupation, status, origin, beliefs, or who they love.

For myself: I could not care less about another's "creed, complexion, location, gender, occupation, status, origin, beliefs, or who they love".

Got a major problem, however, when folks try to cajole me from 'indifference about' to 'advocacy for' (or, 'submission to') another's "creed, complexion, location, gender, occupation, status, origin, beliefs, or who they love".

Seems to me 'so what?' is the goal, not "compassion and respect".

#

"Burglary subtracts value. Love adds value."

Again: eye (and mind) of the beholder.

[HexHammer]

My good tbieter

Your intend are very admireable, standing up for a fellow cozy chatter here on the forum, against the vile and unforgiving HexHammer, but I'm afraid that you don't really see the full perspective of things.

Western ethics and morals are very evolved and elaborate, why would one start over and not come with anything new or specific, if there was actually points that needed improved I could understand prof's ways, but he starts over like he never knew there was any well written ethics before his works.

To aid him in his works, is a fool's errand!

When I worked back in the days, I had least 10 people fired, even 1 degradated. I was very skilled and deep understanding of what I did, worked in Administration and Quality Department. All those feelings and emotions are irrelevant, incompetent people cost money, and in many cases millions, will slow the process, etc.

I can't see a simple point where prof actually comes up with something useful, maybe you could point out something. Nor in his other works that he have displayed for years in other fora, nor could anyone else, well except for very stupid people.

So, what is the true good action, to let him in the illusion of being relevant or burst his bubble and make him realise he is utterly incompetent and make him do something else that is actually useful?
Life is cruel, and sometime cruelty can be the best ethical way.

[duszek]

It´s never wrong to repeat the basics and to see how we can make things more complicated in a new way.

I agree with Tom B. that some people here owe Prof an apology.

Insulting someone is dishonouring for the insulter, in the first place. And hardly for the attacked party.

One gets dishonoured only by one´s OWN actions, not by what other people do to you.

That´s one moral principle I could formulate for myself.

::::::::::::::::::::::::.

Moral principles combine to sets of principles and when adopted by an individual become their personal morality.
If people share a morality they can get along in a harmonious way.

To make 6 billion people share the same morality is a big project.

[HexHammer]

It´s never wrong to repeat the basics and to see how we can make things more complicated in a new way.

In some cases it may, but cozy chatters do it all the time, thus it's not wisdom, but mere cozy chat, and this is excatly why philosphers are not in demand on the jobmarket, because they can't really dwell in higher learning. They can't solve anything useful nor produce anything useful, only cozy chat.

[duszek]

Let´s assume for the argument´s sake that you are assuming correctly that someone here practices cozy chat.

Would it be the best possible reaction to it to insult this person ?

Are there any other options available ? Some more efficient ones ? Some more promising ones ?

Why do you focus your attentions on someone whose performance (in your view) is sub-optimal ?

Is it YOUR way of dwelling in higher learning ?

[HexHammer]

Let´s assume for the argument´s sake that you are assuming correctly that someone here practices cozy chat.

Would it be the best possible reaction to it to insult this person ?

Are there any other options available ? Some more efficient ones ? Some more promising ones ?

Why do you focus your attentions on someone whose performance (in your view) is sub-optimal ?

Is it YOUR way of dwelling in higher learning ?

I've known this prof since 2008, talked in very respectful terms back then, but when ones posts are ignored, or dismissed as "I don't understsand his works, etc" then my patience falls short, and I cut the chase and go for the point in blunt terms.

So yes, I know it's not good to be blunt, but if EVERYONE disagree with him on the other fora, and in the end doesn't bother to respond to him, then it may not be me who are wrong about him, but that he doesn't understand that he himself is wrong!

If this was back in the days on my job, the only other option would to fire him.

My focus in to make progress, to get results, cozy chat doesn't lead to anything, it's about havin the ability to comprehend the very simple concept of relevance.
I would sorely like to help making far better ethics, but if it's only a house of straw it will fall and blow away by the 4 winds, and the attempt is futile and a good waste of time.

These are things you might some day understand when you have to deal with million dollar contracts and competence, if you have competent people you can make progress and good money, if you have incompetent people you'll lose money and in the end your buisness.
Fortunaly cozy chatters don't lose anything here in this forum, but they get nowhere.

[duszek]

I see what you mean.

But how about employing a cozy chatterer at the reception desk ? Or as a bar-tender ?
He would relax potential customers and thus contribute to the success of your company.

A wise executive knows how to use the potential of his employees.

You seem to be allergic to cozy chatterers.

Have a break then. Have a kit-kat.

[duszek]

Everything can lead to something.

Many of the best inventions were a piece of chance.

A pear fell on someone´s head and .... was discovered (what was it ? I fail to recollect at the moment.)

A cozy atmosphere promotes creativity, didn´t you know ?
Never worked in the marketing ?

Coziness prevents depression and stress and burn-out and cancer.

The more I think about it the more I like it, how can it be ?

Whereas criticism, nagging, picking on someone ... promotes misery and gloom.

[HexHammer]

I see what you mean.

But how about employing a cozy chatterer at the reception desk ? Or as a bar-tender ?
He would relax potential customers and thus contribute to the success of your company.

A wise executive knows how to use the potential of his employees.

You seem to be allergic to cozy chatterers.

Have a break then. Have a kit-kat.

I'm not sure you realise what you are actually saying.

Back in ancient times, philosophers was so skilled they could theorize the world was round, found the atom, found that there was far more than just 4 elements, they had skill!
Cozy chatters these days has hardly any skill, they can only parrot things and navel gaze if things are deterministic through emperical evidense to an ontology and other crappy outdated nonsense and babble.

Yes, I'm VERY allgeric, because they get no where, I like results, I like progress and specially I hate utterly incompetent people as I've seen the CEO having only yes men and drove the buisness in the ground! I realised I wasted my time and quitted, but I am VERY skilled and he called me back 3 times, but 3rd time I refused and I foretold a terrible prophecy (before it all went to Hell). I foretold that his internet buisness would fail, his expansion in Europe would fail and he himself would fail.

Within the year both his buisness would fail, 4 years later he was degraded as CEO, 9 years later he had lost his entire fortune of 3.2 billion crowner and ended up with 200 mill danish crowner in debt.

So yes, I'm very very allgergic to incompetense, and you would most likely too.

[HexHammer]

Everything can lead to something.

Many of the best inventions were a piece of chance.

A pear fell on someone´s head and .... was discovered (what was it ? I fail to recollect at the moment.)

A cozy atmosphere promotes creativity, didn´t you know ?
Never worked in the marketing ?

Coziness prevents depression and stress and burn-out and cancer.

The more I think about it the more I like it, how can it be ?

Whereas criticism, nagging, picking on someone ... promotes misery and gloom.

If you ran a million dollar buisness, would you hire prof?

No, being an asshole like myself, leads to results. I moved mountains and only because I was immensly skilled I could get away of opposing the CEO, else everyone else would get instantly fired.

[duszek]

I would hire Hamlet,

if his skills seemed the right ones for the project in question.

If the project were: find someone for me to practice my motivational skills with.

[HexHammer]

I would hire Hamlet,

if his skills seemed the right ones for the project in question.

If the project were: find someone for me to practice my motivational skills with.

- please be a bit more serious!

- then your analytic skills is very poor!

[duszek]

I would not hire Amundsen for writing cozy stories for children,
nor Andersen for discovering the North Pole.

Perhaps the other way round.

How do you assess "result" ?
By figures delivered by an accountant ?
Or by a statistician ?