Our most basic axioms

Author: secularmerlin

Posts

Total: 1,302
#151
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 14,582
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@Tarik
“it’s fair to question why do we care if the universe is so uncaring, after all aren’t we at our core extensions of the universe?”
We care about our own individual well-being because we are born with survival instinct.

We care about our family and friends because we are incapable of surviving alone.
#152
Tarik
Tarik's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 2,481
3
3
5
Tarik's avatar
Tarik
3
3
5
-->
@3RU7AL
How do you know what to do?
I don’t know
#153
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 14,582
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@secularmerlin
 whether or not someone is looking does not have any effect on the ethical content of your actions.
Plato: Ethics - The Ring of Gyges
#154
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 14,582
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@Tarik
How do you know what to do?
I don’t know
Then it seems, you and I are in the same boat.
Topic's author
#155
secularmerlin
secularmerlin's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 7,093
3
3
3
secularmerlin's avatar
secularmerlin
3
3
3
-->
@Tarik
Is your highest ethical priority your own personal wellbeing? 
My highest ethical priority is simply being ethical.
Great. A+ idea. Now how do you determine what is ethical?
I am not mocking you.
Then why’d you mention a cosmic hall monitor?
It could as easily be a regular hall monitor. Unless being perceived to be ethical is your highest ethical priority then someone(thing) judging you is not what actually makes an action ethical. If you don't like the impression of god I have gotten from your posts (that of some cosmic hall monitor who spanks the guilty) perhaps you should reevaluate how you discuss the matter.
whether or not someone is looking does not have any effect on the ethical content of your actions.
Please take your own advice here, if you’re not going to demonstrate your definition of ethics then you can’t make an argument for it.
I have a personally preferred standard. It is human wellbeing. My best guess of why I care about human wellbeing is that as a human it is evolutionarily beneficial for me to promote human wellbeing so genes that promote this behavior are moreprevelent in humans than not but even if that is not why I feel this way I still do feel this way. I am not actually claiming to know definitively however. 
On a separate note I am starting to think you are conflating moral pronouncements for a moral standard.
What makes you think that?
That when I ask about morality your answers usually contain something to the effect of don't kill, don't steal, don't lie. These are moral pronouncements not the standard they are built on. You have not shared the underlying reason it is in your opinion wrong to kill. For me it is wellbeing. I am looking for the measurement. Your highest ethical concern. The thing you are trying to accomplish by being "good" whatever it is that you believe that to be.
#156
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 14,582
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@secularmerlin
Great. A+ idea. Now how do you determine what is ethical?
DECALOGUE + unspecified "other sources".
#157
Tarik
Tarik's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 2,481
3
3
5
Tarik's avatar
Tarik
3
3
5
-->
@secularmerlin
Great. A+ idea. Now how do you determine what is ethical?
I don’t always know.

someone(thing) judging you is not what actually makes an action ethical.
We clearly have different views on ethics so I suggest you demonstrate yours.

I have a personally preferred standard.
Personal preference isn’t demonstrable.

That when I ask about morality your answers usually contain something to the effect of don't kill, don't steal, don't lie.
That was before I said

“in order for our lives to have meaning we need to be punished or rewarded in some capacity otherwise it’s fair to question why do we care if the universe is so uncaring, after all aren’t we at our core extensions of the universe?”
This is my CURRENT argument not morality.
Topic's author
#158
secularmerlin
secularmerlin's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 7,093
3
3
3
secularmerlin's avatar
secularmerlin
3
3
3
-->
@Tarik
You haven't explained how punishment or reward equals meaning. Please explain.

I'm not sure what you mean by demonstrate my ethics. I have told you my preferred standard. I can hardly use anyone else's. If you mean demonstrate their superiority to some other ethical standard you are begging a question. Superior in what sense? If you mean demonstrate that I care about human wellbeing I'm not sure what I can do beyond saying honestly that I do. If you mean something else please by all means let me know.
#159
Tarik
Tarik's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 2,481
3
3
5
Tarik's avatar
Tarik
3
3
5
-->
@secularmerlin
You haven't explained how punishment or reward equals meaning. Please explain.
Yes I have, you’re starting a circle by asking me the same question twice.
#160
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 14,582
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@secularmerlin
Please take your own advice here, if you’re not going to demonstrate your definition of ethics then you can’t make an argument for it.
I have a personally preferred standard. It is human wellbeing.
How many humans are needed in order to sustain and grow a steady population in a habitable area? Assume resources are adequate and the environment is favorable.

The closer a population gets to the minimum, the more cross-breeding would be required. With a high population, couples can produce several offspring. With a low population, it would be advisable for each woman to have a pregnancy only once with any given man, and for subsequent pregnancies to be with men as distantly related from the previous partners as possible, to boost genetic diversity. [**]
Topic's author
#161
secularmerlin
secularmerlin's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 7,093
3
3
3
secularmerlin's avatar
secularmerlin
3
3
3
-->
@Tarik
You haven't explained how punishment or reward equals meaning. Please explain.
Yes I have, you’re starting a circle by asking me the same question twice.
I have seen no adequate explanation. Perhaps you could put your argument into some other form. Perhaps a logical syllogism. 

#162
Tarik
Tarik's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 2,481
3
3
5
Tarik's avatar
Tarik
3
3
5
-->
@secularmerlin
It MEANS if you live this way you’ll be punished and if you live another you’ll be rewarded therefore you should live by the latter.
Why isn’t this “adequate”?
Topic's author
#163
secularmerlin
secularmerlin's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 7,093
3
3
3
secularmerlin's avatar
secularmerlin
3
3
3
-->
@Tarik
Because it details a consequence not a standard. Live what way? Why? What is the end goal? Just to avoid punishment and garner rewards?

I don't care what punishment I am threatened with I still view human wellbeing as the end goal of ethics. If a man threatens to torcher me if I don't kill you it doesn't become ethical to do so. By the same rationale it is not more ethical to save your life if I am promised a million dollars to do so.
#164
Tarik
Tarik's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 2,481
3
3
5
Tarik's avatar
Tarik
3
3
5
-->
@secularmerlin
Because it details a consequence not a standard.
The standard is you should live in a way that avoids punishment and garners reward.
Topic's author
#165
secularmerlin
secularmerlin's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 7,093
3
3
3
secularmerlin's avatar
secularmerlin
3
3
3
-->
@Tarik
The standard is you should live in a way that garners reward.
So is being a bank robber an ethical lifestyle then? Why or why not? It is certainly a lifestyle built around garnering personal reward.
#166
Tarik
Tarik's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 2,481
3
3
5
Tarik's avatar
Tarik
3
3
5
-->
@secularmerlin
It’s not because I believe they’ll be punished someway somehow if they’re not sorry.
Topic's author
#167
secularmerlin
secularmerlin's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 7,093
3
3
3
secularmerlin's avatar
secularmerlin
3
3
3
-->
@Tarik
Sorry for what? Seeking personal rewards? I thought that was what you are advocating for. Perhaps you are not being specific enough. 
#168
Tarik
Tarik's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 2,481
3
3
5
Tarik's avatar
Tarik
3
3
5
-->
@secularmerlin
When did I use the word “personal”?
#169
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 14,582
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@Tarik
I believe they’ll be punished someway somehow if they’re not sorry.
Does this mean we don't need any law enforcement because everyone is guaranteed to "get what they deserve"?
Topic's author
#170
secularmerlin
secularmerlin's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 7,093
3
3
3
secularmerlin's avatar
secularmerlin
3
3
3
-->
@Tarik
Please justify splitting hairs.

Sorry for what? Seeking rewards? I thought that was what you are advocating for. Perhaps you are not being specific enough. 

Here is the same question with the offending word removed and I don't see how it changes what I'm asking overmuch.
#171
Tarik
Tarik's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 2,481
3
3
5
Tarik's avatar
Tarik
3
3
5
-->
@secularmerlin
Please justify splitting hairs.
Their is no justification, good thing that’s not the case here.

Sorry for what?
Engaging in activity that can lead to punishment.

Seeking rewards?
It’s not rewarding if it can lead to punishment.
Topic's author
#172
secularmerlin
secularmerlin's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 7,093
3
3
3
secularmerlin's avatar
secularmerlin
3
3
3
-->
@Tarik
Sorry for what?
Engaging in activity that can lead to punishment.
Firstly... that's it? Sorry because there will be punishment? Not sorry for stealing? Or threatening and possibly hurting people but just sorry that there will be retribution?

Secondly... what punishment? From whom? If we as human beings do not hold this hypothetical bank robber responsible what leads you to believe he will be held accountable at all?

Thirdly... let's say there is a higher power and it doesn't give a fig about killing or stealing or any of that. Let's say it is Odin and the only way to get the reward you seem to be so concerned with is to die bravely in combat? Can you prove that Odin doesn't exist and that you must be more violent in order to be rewarded?
#173
Tarik
Tarik's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 2,481
3
3
5
Tarik's avatar
Tarik
3
3
5
-->
@secularmerlin
Firstly... that's it? Sorry because there will be punishment? Not sorry for stealing? Or threatening and possibly hurting people but just sorry that there will be retribution?
Sure you can add that in if you want.

Secondly... what punishment? From whom? If we as human beings do not hold this hypothetical bank robber responsible what leads you to believe he will be held accountable at all?
Because if not sorry it makes the action have meaning if he is.

Can you prove that Odin doesn't exist and that you must be more violent in order to be rewarded?
No because one of the many rules of logic is you can’t prove a negative.
#174
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 14,582
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@secularmerlin
Can you prove that Odin doesn't exist and that you must be more violent in order to be rewarded?
Pascal's Mugging.
Topic's author
#175
secularmerlin
secularmerlin's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 7,093
3
3
3
secularmerlin's avatar
secularmerlin
3
3
3
-->
@Tarik
Because if not sorry it makes the action have meaning if he is.
I cannot begin to tell you how unhelpful this circular reasoning is. 

How do you know there is meaning? Because people are punished (in some as yet undefined way after we are unable to observe him to determine if he is in fact punished).

How do you know people are punished (in some as yet undefined way after we are unable to observe him to determine if he is in fact punished)? Because there is meaning. 

Do you see how the this is a problem?
Can you prove that Odin doesn't exist and that you must be more violent in order to be rewarded?
No because one of the many rules of logic is you can’t prove a negative.
Well you can prove some negatives but you are correct that depending on our definition of "Odin" it is an unfalsifiable proposition. Still if you cannot prove that god agrees with your moral intuition (don't steal/don't murder/don't lie etc) and instead values only marital prowess then how can you justify not stealing and killing?

I'm not trying to judge you or initiate a gotcha here I am just pointing out, at length, that you have the same problem of justifying your actions that I do the only difference is that I am not trying to solve any mystery by appeals to a larger mystery. 

IF you cannot be certain what some god(s) expectations of you THEN you are still forced to use you own personal moral intuition to discern right from wrong. 

IF you are forced to use your personal moral intuition THEN you must still have some good working standard for what is right and wrong.

This standard, being based on your own personal moral intuition, must by definition be subjective to you.
Topic's author
#176
secularmerlin
secularmerlin's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 7,093
3
3
3
secularmerlin's avatar
secularmerlin
3
3
3
-->
@3RU7AL
Can you prove that Odin doesn't exist and that you must be more violent in order to be rewarded?
Pascal's Mugging.
Indeed do you shoot for the best heaven or try to avoid the worst hell? The spiritual equivalent of being all in or hedging your bets.
#177
Tarik
Tarik's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 2,481
3
3
5
Tarik's avatar
Tarik
3
3
5
-->
@secularmerlin
How do you know there is meaning?
I didn’t argue there was, I just argued what it requires.

Still if you cannot prove that god agrees with your moral intuition (don't steal/don't murder/don't lie etc) and instead values only marital prowess
Why does the former require proof and the latter doesn’t? 🤔 

I am not trying to solve any mystery by appeals to a larger mystery.
What mystery am I trying to solve? 

you are still forced to use you own personal moral intuition to discern right from wrong.
Prove it.
Topic's author
#178
secularmerlin
secularmerlin's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 7,093
3
3
3
secularmerlin's avatar
secularmerlin
3
3
3
-->
@Tarik
Still if you cannot prove that god agrees with your moral intuition (don't steal/don't murder/don't lie etc) and instead values only marital prowess
Why does the former require proof and the latter doesn’t? 🤔 
I don't think you are grasping my most basic criticism of your argument. I know there are people and I know they care about things and behave in ways. That does not need to be demonstrated.

At this point I am not really asking you to demonstrate your god but only why you would believe in something so nebulous that you cannot demonstrate even to yourself and how you justify your method of determining how you ought to behave that in any way resolves the issue of meaning (or at least perceived meaning) that you seem to be saying (through implication when you claim the only two possible positions are theism and nihilism) I must be having trouble with.

Failing that you could admit, to yourself if not to me, that you do not actually have an argument.

Now not having an argument is not in itself a problem but when you  seem to  imply that my life cannot have meaning (by implication when you claim that the only two possible positions are theism or nihilism) without being able to demonstrate any more meaning in yours, well that is kind of an unfair double standard and you might look to see how you can resolve the flaws in your own beliefs before demanding that I defend mine to you.

So far the best argument I've really heard from you is that a universe without any god(s) would in your opinion be meaningless and confusing and upsetting. That isn't a very strong argument as the universe is under no special obligation to provide you with meaning or answers or comfort. I think you mostly get those things from other humans. You definitely get them in an observable measurable way from people more often than from gods.

I hope you understand that this is all a constructive criticism. 
#179
Tarik
Tarik's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 2,481
3
3
5
Tarik's avatar
Tarik
3
3
5
-->
@secularmerlin
believe in something so nebulous
Reward and punishment isn’t nebulous.

when you seem to imply that my life cannot have meaning (by implication when you claim that the only two possible positions are theism or nihilism) without being able to demonstrate any more meaning in yours
Whatever it “seemed” to you is incorrect I never said nor implied my life is more meaningful than yours, in case you’ve read me wrong there’s meaning in punishment as well.

So far the best argument I've really heard from you is that a universe without any god(s) would in your opinion be meaningless and confusing and upsetting.
If you’re gonna attempt to quote me than do it right, I’ve lost count the amount of times you’ve misquoted my argument, I’ve said something along those lines but I never uttered it as an opinion, I have no use for opinions that I can’t control.

the universe is under no special obligation to provide you with meaning or answers or comfort.
Then why aren’t you a nihilist?

You definitely get them in an observable measurable way from people
Prove it.
Topic's author
#180
secularmerlin
secularmerlin's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 7,093
3
3
3
secularmerlin's avatar
secularmerlin
3
3
3
-->
@Tarik
Reward and punishment isn’t nebulous.
They are if you cannot be certain what form they will take or how one goes about following the rules to receive each.

By the by I'm sorry if I'm reading more into your argument than you mean to say. I just don't see what specifically about a mindless universe equals nihilism. 

Are you asking how I avoid the problem of soft nihilism? That there is no inherent meaning in the universe? I don't want to put wards in your mouth but if that is what you are asking then my answer,  ironically, is the same as yours. I just make up some shit and find meaning in that. Like family and love and happiness, not just for me but for everyone and yes to some degree justice in a much as my worldview allows for justice. That is perhaps the only difference between a hard nihilist and literally every other viewpoint and since true nihilism would necessitate not caring about anything enough to argue over I don't expect to find any here and I'm not sure that viewpoint is even something a sabe human can maintain. We seem to need meaning even if it is only something we are pretending to have.