~ Ethics Applied ~

[Bill Wiltrack]

.

















..........................................................................................















.

[The Voice of Time]

yes, I can see the immense wisdom radiating out of your video clip <cough>...

I guess you want to discuss blackmail? ^^ I can't really see how showing a nasty thing (though, humours for its bizarre shockingness) makes a subject. Subjects usually starts with somebody raising an opinion and somebody else countering it...

[Bill Wiltrack]

.



Well, I think we started.



What was your impression of what you actually saw within the original post?




.

[The Voice of Time]

nothing philosophical. A person tried to blackmail a couple of girls to show their boobs. My impression is that it's wrong... do you have another impression?

[Bill Wiltrack]

.




Yes I do have an impression.

A philosophical impression.


I think somewhere else upon this forum I stated, once or twice, that EVERYTHING is philosophical.


Everything can be seen philosophically IF you look with philosophical eyes.





Could you try again - WITH philosophical eyes?



Then I will tell you what I saw, or rather felt, the first time I saw this exchange.



I'm not trying to be evasive but, what I think is really unimportant. I posted this here at the Philosophy Now Forums to better understand other perspective. So if you will humor me...












...............................................................................









.

[The Voice of Time]

Which other perspective? Which other perspective do you see that makes you post this? The perspective of an awkward-humoured person? If you're looking for philosophical eyes you are probably looking for an instinct of "wonder". Does the video make you "wonder"?

I think somewhere else upon this forum I stated, once or twice, that EVERYTHING is philosophical.

You can put your wonder everywhere, that's true. But there's a reason why we don't call ordinary conversations "philosophical", because they don't trigger the philosophical instinct. It's like having sex without getting a boner. It doesn't make sense, though I guess it somehow is possible.

[Bill Wiltrack]

.






.................................................................





so...that is your answer to my question, Could you try again - WITH philosophical eyes?





.

[puto]

bill first you have to understand logic if you want understand philosophy. applied ethics ls only a recent branch of philosophy. Aristotle would be a good place to start.

[Bill Wiltrack]

.






OK, good try.


But you are still focusing-in on me.


Let me refocus you to what I had hoped this thread would be about -

What is YOUR impression of what this thread is about?


What is YOUR impression of what you actually saw within the original post of ~Ethics Applied ~?


Please use your Applied Ethic skills. Look with a philosophical eye.


Then tell us what you say.



Don't worry, there are no right or wrong answers.



I thank you in advance...









...................................................

.................................................................................................................Use YOUR logic.






.

[Arising_uk]

If the clip was real then the ethical thing would be to report a possible grooming paedophile. But apparently you Bill think the best thing is to re-promote it?

[Bill Wiltrack]

.




You may perceive me as a superman but - believe me, my powers to do good are limited.




....................................................................................






.

[Arising_uk]

I don't but I do believe you. Although I think you don't.

[Bill Wiltrack]

.


I feel the two of you nipping at my heels.


I can't give you the credibility that I enjoy.


Credibility must be earned.





I did not destroy the credibility of Barbara Brooks or the other guy. I exposed it.



I now am beginning to understand that the poster & former member here did not actually destroy your credibility, he exposed it.



Perhaps you can slowly earn credibility here. I don't know.



It would be easier to continue to explore the fact of grabbing another phoney moniker, and then use that new one to hide behind. Perhaps eventually, you could gain philosophical & moral credibility.



In the mean time, I will tell you, it doesn't matter how many magazines you subscribe to or how many books you read, morals, credibility, philosophy, is something that is lived & expressed in the moment. You can't fake it.



All the best.


Bill







.............................................................

.............................................................................................Until then, just - hang-out for a while...




.

[Arising_uk]

Still no reply as to why you appear to be promoting an example of blackmail with the intent to get minors to sexually display themselves?

[Bill Wiltrack]

.






Again, this thread was an experiment by me to see how other members viewed the GIF I provided in the original post.


I don't want to lose sight of that.

If you see minors sexually displaying themselves then that's what you see.



At this point I won't say if that is right or wrong.


At this point, there isn't a right or a wrong.





A lot of character, a lot of ethics applied has been discussed within this thread already.




Unfortunately, not a lot of applied ethics has been discerned.






..........................................




When we think about it, aren't we all like this monkey within this GIF?


When it comes to ethics, to knowledge, to basic necessities? Don't we all apply ethics as a way to cover for what we do?





.