Philosophy Now Forum

Compassion is a human sensibility a foundation upon which morality is created. What is good to man is what is life-supporting and what is bad is life-negating.

popeye1945 wrote: ↑Fri Apr 29, 2022 2:51 am Compassion is a human sensibility a foundation upon which morality is created. What is good to man is what is life-supporting and what is bad is life-negating.

life-supporting is the same as say that what is good is what we reach us to eternity.... to God....

what room is better? a room with a sick people or a room with a health people?....

is the same argument.

CHNOPS wrote: ↑Fri Apr 29, 2022 1:32 pm

popeye1945 wrote: ↑Fri Apr 29, 2022 2:51 am Compassion is a human sensibility a foundation upon which morality is created. What is good to man is what is life-supporting and what is bad is life-negating.

life-supporting is the same as say that what is good is what we reach us to eternity.... to God....
what room is better? a room with a sick people or a room with a health people?....
is the same argument.

No not the same argument, that which is life-supporting or life-negating has nothing to do with eternity or god. Food is life-sustaining as is shelter, community is life-sustaining while being exposed to the harsh elements of nature unprotected unsheltered is life-negating. An essential element necessary for the rise of compassion in the individual is that the individual identifies himself with the self in others. This is extended to include other creatures where one can identify another self in the animal that like oneself is capable of both suffering and joy.

popeye1945 wrote: ↑Fri Apr 29, 2022 6:30 pm

CHNOPS wrote: ↑Fri Apr 29, 2022 1:32 pm

popeye1945 wrote: ↑Fri Apr 29, 2022 2:51 am Compassion is a human sensibility a foundation upon which morality is created. What is good to man is what is life-supporting and what is bad is life-negating.

life-supporting is the same as say that what is good is what we reach us to eternity.... to God....
what room is better? a room with a sick people or a room with a health people?....
is the same argument.

No not the same argument, that which is life-supporting or life-negating has nothing to do with eternity or god. Food is life-sustaining as is shelter, community is life-sustaining while being exposed to the harsh elements of nature unprotected unsheltered is life-negating. An essential element necessary for the rise of compassion in the individual is that the individual identifies himself with the self in others. This is extended to include other creatures where one can identify another self in the animal that like oneself is capable of both suffering and joy.

That is what the 99% of people will say. Is a common thougth, I know that.

But that is the problem with humankind now, that the ultimate argument for moral is that, and they dont go beyond that.

In some societies, hit the wife is "life-supporting", they say, because "the wife need to fear to stay in home and to do the work in house to take care of babies".

What is your argument against them? You dont have one.

Unless..... you diference what "life-supporting" is better than other.

You may say that fear is not good, is not good for the body so is less "life-suporting" that love, for example.

So, is not about saying "life-supporting" and nothing more. You need to say how "life-supporting" has to be, because more societies will last longer than others, so one society has BETTER actions of "life-supporting".

And when you do that, you will start to see other "arists" of that Good that is "life-supporting".

Staying Active is Better than stay in a chair all the day, for example. So, Active is Good.

The ones who are more Active, are the one who will live longer.


We want to reach eternity. We want to reach God.


If you know what God is, then you know how to live longer, because you know the better ways of "life-supporting", because if you know that God is Active, then you will survive being more Active.

If you know God is Truth, then you will live learning, and that will make you live longer.

If you know God is "maximum hot", then, you will be near hot and not cold, and you will live longer.

If you know God is "uniform", then, you will try to live conecting to other instead of separate from them... and you will live longer.

popeye1945 wrote: ↑Fri Apr 29, 2022 12:55 am

Eodnhoj7 wrote: ↑Fri Apr 29, 2022 12:45 am

popeye1945 wrote: ↑Fri Apr 29, 2022 12:43 am Sorry I cannot make sense of that.

Morality is a thing.
Immorality is a thing.
\God sees all things as good.

As seeing all things as good God sees the contradiction of morality/immorality as good as God sees both things as Good.

Eodnhoj7,
Morality is a concept not an object in the physical world. Immortality is a concept and not an object in the physical world. God sees all things as well and good is an inference that in fact, in god/nature there is no morality, there is only morality to a man who finds some things are good and something are not.

Due to the necessity of the brain in thinking all concepts are emergences from the brain. The brain emerges from matter thus the concept emerges from matter. The thought of matter is matter self-referencing. Why do I say this? Because from matter, or nature, the concept emerges as a phenomenon.

Dually:

Morality, as a concept, is a thing as a concept is a thing. Immorality, as a concept, is a thing as a concept is a thing. To see all things as good does not necessitate that there is no evil as evil is one good that is lesser than another good. The grades of good, which is relative, necessitates evil as observed due to the nature of everything being subject to context but this universality of context necessitates a universality of goodness (as what exists is good)

Eodnhoj7,
{"Morality is a concept not an object in the physical world. Immortality is a concept and not an object in the physical world. God sees all things as well and good is an inference that in fact, in god/nature there is no morality, there is only morality to a man who finds some things are good and something are not.
[/quote]

Due to the necessity of the brain in thinking all concepts are emergences from the brain. The brain emerges from matter thus the concept emerges from matter. The thought of matter is matter self-referencing. Why do I say this? Because from matter, or nature, the concept emerges as a phenomenon. Dually: Morality, as a concept, is a thing as a concept is a thing. Immorality, as a concept, is a thing as a concept is a thing. To see all things as good does not necessitate that there is no evil as evil is one good that is lesser than another good. The grades of good, which is relative, necessitates evil as observed due to the nature of everything being subject to context but this universality of context necessitates a universality of goodness (as what exists is good)
[/quote]

Eodnhoj7,
Morality is a sentiment as in emotional thought and not physically tangible. The concept is thought not physically tangible. The saying that to god all things are right and good is underlining that right and wrong arise with biological intelligence and otherwise does not exist in the physical world. All meaning belongs to a conscious subject, never to the object/physical world. There is only good and evil or good and bad relative to a biological subject. While it is true that the physical world gave arise to life it does not mean that there is morality innate to the physical world in the absence of a conscious subject. All meaning is bestowed upon a meaningless world by a conscious subject/man or animal. The phenomenal world if you are speaking of the world of things, is also a creation of biology, for in ultimate reality according to modern science it is a place of no things. God is a fictional character and fictional characters are creations of the human imagination and can only think what an author/s puts in their mouths.

popeye1945 wrote: ↑Thu May 05, 2022 2:07 am Eodnhoj7,
{"Morality is a concept not an object in the physical world. Immortality is a concept and not an object in the physical world. God sees all things as well and good is an inference that in fact, in god/nature there is no morality, there is only morality to a man who finds some things are good and something are not.

Due to the necessity of the brain in thinking all concepts are emergences from the brain. The brain emerges from matter thus the concept emerges from matter. The thought of matter is matter self-referencing. Why do I say this? Because from matter, or nature, the concept emerges as a phenomenon. Dually: Morality, as a concept, is a thing as a concept is a thing. Immorality, as a concept, is a thing as a concept is a thing. To see all things as good does not necessitate that there is no evil as evil is one good that is lesser than another good. The grades of good, which is relative, necessitates evil as observed due to the nature of everything being subject to context but this universality of context necessitates a universality of goodness (as what exists is good)
[/quote]

Eodnhoj7,
Morality is a sentiment as in emotional thought and not physically tangible. The concept is thought not physically tangible. The saying that to god all things are right and good is underlining that right and wrong arise with biological intelligence and otherwise does not exist in the physical world. All meaning belongs to a conscious subject, never to the object/physical world. There is only good and evil or good and bad relative to a biological subject. While it is true that the physical world gave arise to life it does not mean that there is morality innate to the physical world in the absence of a conscious subject. All meaning is bestowed upon a meaningless world by a conscious subject/man or animal. The phenomenal world if you are speaking of the world of things, is also a creation of biology, for in ultimate reality according to modern science it is a place of no things. God is a fictional character and fictional characters are creations of the human imagination and can only think what an author/s puts in their mouths.
[/quote]

1. As processes of the brain morality and the concept are physically tangible.

2. The saying "to god all thing are right and good" is a result of biological intelligence thus a movement beyond right/wrong by biological intelligence thus right/wrong is not the limit of biological intelligence.

3. The physical world resulted in the emergence of morality.

4. The conscious subject mandating meaning is the physical world as mandating meaning as the consciousness is the interplay of atoms self-referencing themselves by observing atoms; this self-referentiality is meaning.

5. God is a result of the physical world if biological entities created God; if the physical world is all that there is then God is the physical world.

I'll take two of the blue ones and three of the red moralities. Your brain is working overtime, great stuff will come of it, but in the meantime try focusing on the limited reality of what is said.