A good point. I suspect that this is why religion was invented. It gives people an identifiable concept for the consequences of their actions. Those who act morally or generously will go to heaven while those who do not will go to hell.Ginkgo wrote:[
Prof, what about the person who doesn't want to make things morally better because they choose to pursue something that is only in their interest? In other words, they don't or won't acknowledge the fact that looking after other people's interest is really in their interest?
The case for ethics - best presentation yet
Re: The case for ethics - best presentation yet
Re: The case for ethics - best presentation yet
A good point. I suspect that this is the reason for the invention of religion. It gives people something to identify morality with. Those who act morally or generously will go to heaven those who do not will go to hell.Ginkgo wrote:[Prof, what about the person who doesn't want to make things morally better because they choose to pursue something that is only in their interest? In other words, they don't or won't acknowledge the fact that looking after other people's interest is really in their interest?
Re: The case for ethics - best presentation yet
The aim of this thread is to construct a secular ethical theory that will be taught in public schools that are non-religious ...in the sense that they favor no particular religion over others.
Yes, it is true, as Seagull says, that in earlier times children were told: Be good because God is watching you and you will come up before him and his angels on Judgment Day!!!
Religion was the main method used to keep people in line.
The object of this new approach to Ethics is to get away from all this and have the ethical life be appealing and attractive on its own merits.
Once people are conscious enough to realize the benefits of living ethically they will want to conduct themselves that way. When we cooperate, work together to achieve shared goals, the feeling can be very sweet indeed. The Psalms of David affirming this were set to music and have inspired people for ages to build, not burn. The mental poison, the cognitive error, of "REVENGE! is the path to Justice." has brought people down for centuries. Revenge is the lowest form of justice, with a value near zero; everyone wants justice to prevail, but they aren't aware enough of the higher forms. Education in Ethics is desperately needed. Hamas and Hezbollah, and Zionists all share in this mental poison; and so the unrest will go on until their minds are detoxed, until education in moral value sets in.
Let's not get diverted into side issues. I am not here to debate, but rather to build. Let's find a consensus, let's see what we can agree on, and then let's work out a solid Ethical Theory (as the forum title says) that we like, and that we think the intelligent people of this planet will like. And let's all be teachers. Let's spread the word about the new 'science.' Let's make it so logical, so exact, and so precise that virtually no one will argue with it ...although Philosophy of (Ethics) Science will always be exploring the outer boundaries of the new discipline. Let's get to work - and BUILD.
If you don't like my system, show me a better one. - Thank you.
I welcome your comments !!
Yes, it is true, as Seagull says, that in earlier times children were told: Be good because God is watching you and you will come up before him and his angels on Judgment Day!!!
Religion was the main method used to keep people in line.
The object of this new approach to Ethics is to get away from all this and have the ethical life be appealing and attractive on its own merits.
Once people are conscious enough to realize the benefits of living ethically they will want to conduct themselves that way. When we cooperate, work together to achieve shared goals, the feeling can be very sweet indeed. The Psalms of David affirming this were set to music and have inspired people for ages to build, not burn. The mental poison, the cognitive error, of "REVENGE! is the path to Justice." has brought people down for centuries. Revenge is the lowest form of justice, with a value near zero; everyone wants justice to prevail, but they aren't aware enough of the higher forms. Education in Ethics is desperately needed. Hamas and Hezbollah, and Zionists all share in this mental poison; and so the unrest will go on until their minds are detoxed, until education in moral value sets in.
Let's not get diverted into side issues. I am not here to debate, but rather to build. Let's find a consensus, let's see what we can agree on, and then let's work out a solid Ethical Theory (as the forum title says) that we like, and that we think the intelligent people of this planet will like. And let's all be teachers. Let's spread the word about the new 'science.' Let's make it so logical, so exact, and so precise that virtually no one will argue with it ...although Philosophy of (Ethics) Science will always be exploring the outer boundaries of the new discipline. Let's get to work - and BUILD.
If you don't like my system, show me a better one. - Thank you.
I welcome your comments !!
Re: The case for ethics - best presentation yet
...Speaking of working out a solid Ethical theory, I like the way Shermer defines ethical terms in the following passage quoted from the Sam Harris blog entitled "Being Right about Riight and Wrong."
Michael Shermer, editor of Reason Magazine, writes: "[My starting point is] “the survival and flourishing of sentient beings.”By survival I mean the instinct to live, and by flourishing I mean having adequate sustenance, safety, shelter, bonding, and social relations for physical and mental health. I am trying to make an evolutionary/biological case for starting here by arguing that any organism subject to natural selection—which includes all organisms on this planet and most likely on any other planet as well—will by necessity have this drive to survive and flourish. If it didn’t, it would not live long enough to reproduce and would therefore not be subject to natural selection.
By sentient I mean emotive, perceptive, sensitive, responsive, conscious, and therefore able to feel and to suffer. Here I’m following the argument made by Jeremy Bentham with regard to animals: It isn’t their intelligence, language, tool use, or reasoning power that should elicit our moral concerns, but their capacity to feel and suffer. To this I add the recent Cambridge Declaration on Consciousness—issued by an international group of prominent cognitive neuroscientists, neuropharmacologists, neuroanatomists, and computational neuroscientists—that there is continuity between humans and non-human animals, and that sentience is the common characteristic across species. " (emphasis added)
Your comments?