AFSFSM

Author: secularmerlin

Posts

Total: 323
Topic's author
#271
secularmerlin
secularmerlin's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 7,093
3
3
3
secularmerlin's avatar
secularmerlin
3
3
3
-->
@Tarik
It’s not something else if it’s predicated on what YOU SAID.
That does not necessitate that it is relevant to the conversation. Unless you can explain how discussing actions without examining motives pertains to a discussion specifically about the possible motives one might act on you might try addressing the topic at hand.
#272
Tarik
Tarik's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 2,481
3
3
5
Tarik's avatar
Tarik
3
3
5
-->
@secularmerlin
That does not necessitate that it is relevant to the conversation.
If you don’t think asking a question based on what someone said is relevant then you clearly don’t know what that word means.
Topic's author
#273
secularmerlin
secularmerlin's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 7,093
3
3
3
secularmerlin's avatar
secularmerlin
3
3
3
-->
@Tarik
If you don’t think asking a question based on what someone said is relevant then you clearly don’t know what that word means.
I did my best to answer your questions to the best of my ability but as it became clear that we were not having the same discussion I realized that it was not serving the actual conversation. The actual conversation is about what might motivate people. 
#274
fauxlaw
fauxlaw's avatar
Debates: 77
Posts: 3,565
4
7
10
fauxlaw's avatar
fauxlaw
4
7
10
-->
@secularmerlin
IF a THEN b.
As if one can plug any values they wish into that silly syllogistic framework. No. otherwise, my favorite syllogism [of my creation] is true;

P1: Birds fly
P2: Camels walk
C:   Butterflies swim

Obviously not a truth by any means.  And most constructs of syllogisms by non-philosophers [especially those who think they are] do not hold water or logic.

I agree with Edge: your P2 is weak. Weakened also by your sudden inclusion of other animals; animals that do not [and none do other than the human species] have a moral compass guiding thought and action - instinct for care of offspring is not a conscious morality; it's the first word of this string.
Topic's author
#275
secularmerlin
secularmerlin's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 7,093
3
3
3
secularmerlin's avatar
secularmerlin
3
3
3
-->
@fauxlaw
P1: Birds fly
P2: Camels walk
C:   Butterflies swim
Well that certainly is an invalid and unsound syllogism. Good job.
I agree with Edge: your P2 is weak. Weakened also by your sudden inclusion of other animals; animals that do not [and none do other than the human species] have a moral compass guiding thought and action - instinct for care of offspring is not a conscious morality; it's the first word of this string.
I don't understand how this weakens my argument. Ants are following these dictates implicitly even if they cannot or will not explicitly state their goals. I rather regard that as a strength of the argument since it is an argument that only self interest is necessary to motivate "good" behavior. Which is of course not at all the same as saying that only self interest can motivate "good" behavior. 
#276
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 14,582
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@secularmerlin
Ants are following these dictates implicitly even if they cannot or will not explicitly state their goals. I rather regard that as a strength of the argument since it is an argument that only self interest is necessary to motivate "good" behavior.
I agree.
#277
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 14,582
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@fauxlaw
Also,

P1: Birds fly
P2: Camels walk
C:   Butterflies swim
Is functionally indistinguishable from,

(IFF) Birds fly (AND) Camels walk (THEN) Butterflies swim
#278
Polytheist-Witch
Polytheist-Witch's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 4,188
3
3
6
Polytheist-Witch's avatar
Polytheist-Witch
3
3
6
This doesn't seem to be any different then the golden rule other than you seem to think care is important. The care part also seems to give it a selfish aspect. Like I might need you one day so I'll be nice, not I will be nice to you cause I want people to be nice to me. It's not kosher in some way. Can't put my finger on it. I guess because caring doesn't imply taking care of someone.  Plenty of wife beaters take care for their spouse when not beating them. 
Topic's author
#279
secularmerlin
secularmerlin's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 7,093
3
3
3
secularmerlin's avatar
secularmerlin
3
3
3
-->@Polytheist-Witch,
This doesn't seem to be any different then the golden rule other than you seem to think care is important. The care part also seems to give it a selfish aspect. Like I might need you one day so I'll be nice, not I will be nice to you cause I want people to be nice to me. It's not kosher in some way. Can't put my finger on it. I guess because caring doesn't imply taking care of someone.  Plenty of wife beaters take care for their spouse when not beating them. 
This is true. It would be better if they did not however and if I could convince them not too even if only for their own self interest then I would like to. It would be better not to beat your wife even if only because she is then less able to provide mutual care to you.
#280
Tarik
Tarik's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 2,481
3
3
5
Tarik's avatar
Tarik
3
3
5
-->
@secularmerlin
The actual conversation is about what might motivate people. 
Well based off of WHAT YOU SAID and WHAT I ASKED it’s about other things as well.

Topic's author
#281
secularmerlin
secularmerlin's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 7,093
3
3
3
secularmerlin's avatar
secularmerlin
3
3
3
-->
@Tarik
Well based off of WHAT YOU SAID and WHAT I ASKED it’s about other things as well.
If you have gotten that impression the one of us said something incorrect or in error. I'm sorry you got the wrong idea. It was not my intention. The conversation is about what might motivate people. Now please join that conversation or start your own thread.
#282
Tarik
Tarik's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 2,481
3
3
5
Tarik's avatar
Tarik
3
3
5
-->
@secularmerlin
you got the wrong idea
Not based off of YOUR WORDS I did.
Topic's author
#283
secularmerlin
secularmerlin's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 7,093
3
3
3
secularmerlin's avatar
secularmerlin
3
3
3
-->
@Tarik
Well now I am informing you of the error. Now that I have told you, repeatedly, what the conversation is actually about you may proceed accordingly. 
#284
Tarik
Tarik's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 2,481
3
3
5
Tarik's avatar
Tarik
3
3
5
-->
@secularmerlin
And I’m informing you that based off of YOUR WORDS there is no error (at least on my part).
Topic's author
#285
secularmerlin
secularmerlin's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 7,093
3
3
3
secularmerlin's avatar
secularmerlin
3
3
3
-->
@Tarik
And I’m informing you that based off of YOUR WORDS there is no error (at least on my part).
If you have the idea, for whatever reason, that a discussion of actions without any consideration given to motive is not entirely besides the point then you have that idea in error. 
#286
Tarik
Tarik's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 2,481
3
3
5
Tarik's avatar
Tarik
3
3
5
-->
@secularmerlin
I refuted that argument already✌🏾.

Topic's author
#287
secularmerlin
secularmerlin's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 7,093
3
3
3
secularmerlin's avatar
secularmerlin
3
3
3
-->
@Tarik
What are you talking about? I am telling you right now the A.F.S.F.S.M. is a discussion about a motive (From Selfishness) if we therefore ignore motives in our conversation we are not discussing the A.F.S.F.S.M. any more.

If you want to discuss the A.F.S.F.S.M. then the discussion is about motives.

If you don't want to discuss the A.F.S.F.S.M. then you are in the wrong place as you will see from the title of the thread.
#288
Tarik
Tarik's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 2,481
3
3
5
Tarik's avatar
Tarik
3
3
5
-->
@secularmerlin
I am telling you right now the A.F.S.F.S.M. is a discussion about a motive
Doesn’t change the fact that you claimed (in this forum BTW) an action selfish that isn’t.
Topic's author
#289
secularmerlin
secularmerlin's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 7,093
3
3
3
secularmerlin's avatar
secularmerlin
3
3
3
-->
@Tarik
Doesn’t change the fact that you claimed (in this discussion BTW) an action selfish that isn’t.
Well in that case either I was wrong or you were misunderstood what I was saying. Either way the fact of the matter is that the A.F.S.F.S.M. is a discussion about a motive (From Selfishness) if we therefore ignore motives in our conversation we are not discussing the A.F.S.F.S.M. any more.

If you want to discuss the A.F.S.F.S.M. then the discussion is about motives.

If you don't want to discuss the A.F.S.F.S.M. then you are in the wrong place as you will see from the title of the thread.

#290
Tarik
Tarik's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 2,481
3
3
5
Tarik's avatar
Tarik
3
3
5
-->
@secularmerlin
I was wrong
Yes you were.
Topic's author
#291
secularmerlin
secularmerlin's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 7,093
3
3
3
secularmerlin's avatar
secularmerlin
3
3
3
-->
@Tarik

the A.F.S.F.S.M. is a discussion about a motive (From Selfishness) if we therefore ignore motives in our conversation we are not discussing the A.F.S.F.S.M. any more.

If you want to discuss the A.F.S.F.S.M. then the discussion is about motives.

If you don't want to discuss the A.F.S.F.S.M. then you are in the wrong place as you will see from the title of the thread.

#292
Tarik
Tarik's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 2,481
3
3
5
Tarik's avatar
Tarik
3
3
5
-->
@secularmerlin
And an action you falsely labelled as selfish, and until you right that wrong A.F.S.F.S.M. will always be flawed.
Topic's author
#293
secularmerlin
secularmerlin's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 7,093
3
3
3
secularmerlin's avatar
secularmerlin
3
3
3
-->
@Tarik
No action is selfish or selfless or good or bad or positive or negative without context. 

My biggest mistake was allowing us to get off topic.
#294
zedvictor4
zedvictor4's avatar
Debates: 22
Posts: 12,074
3
3
6
zedvictor4's avatar
zedvictor4
3
3
6
-->
@Tarik
Not post bake....Everything becomes cake.


#295
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 14,582
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@Tarik
And an action you falsely labelled as selfish, and until you right that wrong A.F.S.F.S.M. will always be flawed.
What do you personally believe is a "good" example of an action that is NOT selfish?
#296
Theweakeredge
Theweakeredge's avatar
Debates: 33
Posts: 3,457
4
7
10
Theweakeredge's avatar
Theweakeredge
4
7
10
@TARIK 

Go check out my back and forth with Lunatic in the "Why are we banning Wylted" forum to see what i actually think of Nihilism 
#297
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 14,582
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@secularmerlin
P1: IF you value your own life, THEN you ought to [convince at least one other person that you] value [at least one other life]: Now I must defend both premises: P1 is necessarily true [because humans cannot live as hermits their entire lives] - if you value your own life [and general wellbeing], then any harm [and or discomfort] done against you is not preferable, and if you don't [convince at least one other person that you] value [at least one other life] they have no reason [other than self-interest and hope of reciprocation] to value yours. Therefore the only way that [at least one other person] will have moral obligation to value your life [and general wellbeing] is if you value theirs; ergo - IF you value your own life [and general wellbeing], THEN you ought to value [at least one other life].

ESSENTIAL TRIBALISM.
#298
Tarik
Tarik's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 2,481
3
3
5
Tarik's avatar
Tarik
3
3
5
-->
@secularmerlin
Well you didn’t provide much context in your opening statement.
#299
Tarik
Tarik's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 2,481
3
3
5
Tarik's avatar
Tarik
3
3
5
-->
@zedvictor4
Not post bake....Everything becomes cake.
Difference is cakes logical existence isn’t in question.
#300
Tarik
Tarik's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 2,481
3
3
5
Tarik's avatar
Tarik
3
3
5
-->
@3RU7AL
What do you personally believe is a "good" example of an action that is NOT selfish?
Me answering that doesn’t resolve seculars A.F.S.F.S.M. problem.