Philosophy Now Forum

Lacewing wrote: ↑Thu Feb 06, 2020 9:00 pm Anything can be harmful.

Precisely! Which is why only thing that can't be harmful is NO HARM.

It is self-enforcing. If application of the no-harm principle results in harm.... DON'T DO IT.

Lacewing wrote: ↑Thu Feb 06, 2020 9:00 pm Limiting love to what you describe is based on your own experience/issues/agenda. Real unconditional love solves all kinds of things.

I am not limiting it to anything. I am assuming that whatever conception of "real, unconditional love" you have, is only a best intention.

The road to hell is paved with those.

Skepdick wrote: ↑Thu Feb 06, 2020 9:11 pm

Lacewing wrote: ↑Thu Feb 06, 2020 9:00 pm Anything can be harmful.

Precisely! Which is why only thing that can't be harmful is NO HARM.

It is self-enforcing. If application of the no-harm principle results in harm.... DON'T DO IT.

Can everyone agree on what "no harm" is?

Skepdick wrote: ↑Thu Feb 06, 2020 9:11 pmI am assuming that whatever conception of "real, unconditional love" you have, is only a best intention.

And why would you assume that?

Lacewing wrote: ↑Thu Feb 06, 2020 9:38 pm Can everyone agree on what "no harm" is?

Mostly. Sometimes.

Lacewing wrote: ↑Thu Feb 06, 2020 9:38 pm And why would you assume that?

Because best intentions is all we, humans have. We are still incompetent in the face of navigating complex reality.

Hanlon's razor: never assume malice when ignorance is a sufficient explanation.

Skepdick wrote: ↑Thu Feb 06, 2020 9:44 pm Because best intentions is all we, humans have. We are still incompetent in the face of navigating complex reality.

So, what's your point? Are you going to argue with any answer? Maybe especially "LOVE" because you can only perceive it as a shallow and flawed idea/version? Like I said, limitations you are imposing.

If someone has unconditional love, they might be more inclined toward "no harm". What are people thinking before they do "no harm"?

Lacewing wrote: ↑Thu Feb 06, 2020 10:03 pm So, what's your point? Are you going to argue with any answer? Maybe especially "LOVE" because you can only perceive it as a shallow and flawed idea/version? Like I said, limitations you are imposing.

For all intents and purposes I could trivially say that my deep desire for "no harm" is equivalent to your deep desire for "love".

In practice it should be no different. By not harming I am loving.

Lacewing wrote: ↑Thu Feb 06, 2020 10:03 pm If someone has unconditional love, they might be more inclined toward "no harm". What are people thinking before they do "no harm"?

I am going with Occam's razor on this one.

What I am thinking is "I shouldn't do harm", I am not thinking "I shouldn't do harm because I love everybody". I love everybody because... ?

A principle that requires another principle to justify it is no principle at all.

Skepdick wrote: ↑Thu Feb 06, 2020 10:07 pm

Lacewing wrote: ↑Thu Feb 06, 2020 10:03 pm What are people thinking before they do "no harm"?

What I am thinking is "I shouldn't do harm"?

Why?

Lacewing wrote: ↑Thu Feb 06, 2020 10:11 pm Why?

Because I don't want to.
Because it is in everybody's best interest.
Because it's what everybody wants.

To not be harmed. Safety.

Skepdick wrote:Love can be harmful.

So can do no harm if you choose to do no harm to the guy rapin' your child in front of you.

And, btw, why you are lyin' to Gary? And isn't a lie a kind of harm?

henry quirk wrote: ↑Thu Feb 06, 2020 10:36 pm So can do no harm if you choose to do no harm to the guy rapin' your child in front of you.

Exactly! You are using the "no harm" principle against itself. That's self-justification.

henry quirk wrote: ↑Thu Feb 06, 2020 10:36 pm And, btw, why you are lyin' to Gary? And isn't a lie a kind of harm?

It may be harm. If it was a lie, but the metaphor (and the context of the conversation) went over your head.

Skepdick wrote: ↑Thu Feb 06, 2020 10:12 pm

Lacewing wrote: ↑Thu Feb 06, 2020 10:11 pm Why?

Because I don't want to.
Because it is in everybody's best interest.
Because it's what everybody wants.

To not be harmed. Safety.

Why do you care?

Lacewing wrote: ↑Thu Feb 06, 2020 10:39 pm Why do you care?

Because I do.

Look! You are falling into the same trap/pattern as ALL philosophy has been falling into for the last 2000+ years. Justification + Infinite regress.

If I need to justify my principle, then I also need to justify my justification, and the justification of the justification.... Where does it end?

It ends with a self-justifying principle!

Skepdick wrote: ↑Thu Feb 06, 2020 10:40 pm

Lacewing wrote: ↑Thu Feb 06, 2020 10:39 pm Why do you care?

Because I do.

Maybe that's because our most basic understanding is of connection...and what feels right and good. All qualities of LOVE. An unconditional kind of love that informs us. Innate -- not dependent on, nor exclusive to, any theist ideas. Much greater than small and controlling human distortions of it.

Lacewing wrote: ↑Thu Feb 06, 2020 10:59 pm

Skepdick wrote: ↑Thu Feb 06, 2020 10:40 pm

Lacewing wrote: ↑Thu Feb 06, 2020 10:39 pm Why do you care?

Because I do.

Maybe that's because our most basic understanding is of connection...and what feels right and good. All qualities of LOVE. An unconditional kind of love that informs us. Innate -- not dependent on, nor exclusive to, any theist ideas. Much greater than small and controlling human distortions of it.

No... you miss the point. Why do you LOVE?

The "Why?" question isn't profitable - it pulls the rug out from under your feet.

Skepdick wrote: ↑Thu Feb 06, 2020 11:00 pm

Lacewing wrote: ↑Thu Feb 06, 2020 10:59 pm

Skepdick wrote: ↑Thu Feb 06, 2020 10:40 pm
Because I do.

Maybe that's because our most basic understanding is of connection...and what feels right and good. All qualities of LOVE. An unconditional kind of love that informs us. Innate -- not dependent on, nor exclusive to, any theist ideas. Much greater than small and controlling human distortions of it.

No... you miss the point. Why do you LOVE?

Well, I just explained it above. It's what I understand and feel when I push aside all the noise and distortions.

Skepdick wrote: ↑Thu Feb 06, 2020 10:40 pm The "Why?" question isn't profitable - it pulls the rug out from under your feet.

It has its uses. I was just playin' to see where it would lead.

Lacewing wrote: ↑Thu Feb 06, 2020 11:06 pm Well, I just explained it above. It's what I understand and feel when I push aside all the noise and distortions.

Yeah but... WHY do you feel that?

Lacewing wrote: ↑Thu Feb 06, 2020 11:06 pm It has its uses. I was just playin' to see where it would lead.

Always to the same place - into the abyss.