AFSFSM

Author: secularmerlin

Posts

Total: 323
Topic's author
#121
secularmerlin
secularmerlin's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 7,093
3
3
3
secularmerlin's avatar
secularmerlin
3
3
3
-->
@Sum1hugme
All hypothetical imperatives have the problem, where if their IF principle is rejected, then they can opt out of being moral. 
Can you detail a moral system that cannot be simply opted out of by disagreeing?
#122
Tarik
Tarik's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 2,481
3
3
5
Tarik's avatar
Tarik
3
3
5
-->
@secularmerlin
You’ve asked me this before and I answered

By looking at whether or not the action lacks consideration for others or is concerned chiefly with one's own personal profit or pleasure.

But it isn’t chiefly in one’s own profit or pleasure if it’s at the cost of providing for SOMEONE ELSE.


Topic's author
#123
secularmerlin
secularmerlin's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 7,093
3
3
3
secularmerlin's avatar
secularmerlin
3
3
3
-->
@Tarik
What do you mean "at the cost of?" 
#124
Tarik
Tarik's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 2,481
3
3
5
Tarik's avatar
Tarik
3
3
5
-->
@secularmerlin
Providing for someone else isn’t selfish, and you already conceded to that point so no need to revisit it.
Topic's author
#125
secularmerlin
secularmerlin's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 7,093
3
3
3
secularmerlin's avatar
secularmerlin
3
3
3
-->
@Tarik
I do not recall conceding that providing for someone else's needs can never be selfish. 
Topic's author
#126
secularmerlin
secularmerlin's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 7,093
3
3
3
secularmerlin's avatar
secularmerlin
3
3
3
-->
@Tarik
If I did so it was in error. A mistake or misunderstanding 
#127
Tarik
Tarik's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 2,481
3
3
5
Tarik's avatar
Tarik
3
3
5
-->
@secularmerlin
What do you mean "at the cost of?" 
Why are you so hung up on that? If you omit that line from the quote the meaning is still the same.

But it isn’t chiefly in one’s own profit or pleasure if it’s for SOMEONE ELSE.


Topic's author
#128
secularmerlin
secularmerlin's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 7,093
3
3
3
secularmerlin's avatar
secularmerlin
3
3
3
-->
@Tarik
It is not for someone else if it is motivated by self interest. If I help you pick apples for an apple pie I am doing it for pie not for you. If I give you free soup for the chance to look good on camera serving some poor smoe soup it isnot for you it is for a photo op.

#129
Tarik
Tarik's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 2,481
3
3
5
Tarik's avatar
Tarik
3
3
5
-->
@secularmerlin
It is not for someone else if it is motivated by self interest.
I told you before the motive is a SEPARATE narrative from the action, and the action is in question NOT the motive.
Topic's author
#130
secularmerlin
secularmerlin's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 7,093
3
3
3
secularmerlin's avatar
secularmerlin
3
3
3
-->
@Tarik
And how shall we determine if an action is selfish if we do not examine the motive? 

You keep claiming they are seperate discussions when in reality the selfish/lessness of an action is PREDICATED on the selfish/lessness of the motive.
#131
Tarik
Tarik's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 2,481
3
3
5
Tarik's avatar
Tarik
3
3
5
-->
@secularmerlin
PREDICATED on
Doesn’t matter it’s still separate from the narrative in question.
Topic's author
#132
secularmerlin
secularmerlin's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 7,093
3
3
3
secularmerlin's avatar
secularmerlin
3
3
3
-->
@Tarik
It is interconnected. If I am only being "good" because I expect profits and pleasure and I wouldn't bother being "good" without profit and pleasure to motivate me then I am CHIEFLY concerned with personal profit and pleasure. 

That is the definition of being selfish. It doesn't stop being selfish if you also by coincidence profit or are pleased.
#133
Tarik
Tarik's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 2,481
3
3
5
Tarik's avatar
Tarik
3
3
5
-->
@secularmerlin
It is interconnected.
But they’re not the same making it a DIFFERENT narrative.
Topic's author
#134
secularmerlin
secularmerlin's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 7,093
3
3
3
secularmerlin's avatar
secularmerlin
3
3
3
-->
@Tarik
How do you know if an action is selfish?


#135
Tarik
Tarik's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 2,481
3
3
5
Tarik's avatar
Tarik
3
3
5
-->
@secularmerlin
Don’t ask me that, YOU’RE THE ONE claiming that providing for someone else is selfish so the burden of proof is on YOU.
Topic's author
#136
secularmerlin
secularmerlin's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 7,093
3
3
3
secularmerlin's avatar
secularmerlin
3
3
3
-->
@Tarik
What burden of proof? You agreed to the definition. If something is done chiefly for the purposes of personal profit or pleasure then it definitionally selfish. If I give to charity ONLY because it puts me in a more favorable tax bracket then I am not chiefly concerned with the charity itself but only by how I might profit from the change in taxes I will pay. 

IF you disagree with how I am making the determination you will have to explain what you think a selfish act looks like and why.
#137
Tarik
Tarik's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 2,481
3
3
5
Tarik's avatar
Tarik
3
3
5
-->
@secularmerlin
ONLY because
That’s your problem, you keep conflating the why’s with the action itself and those are two different things.
Topic's author
#138
secularmerlin
secularmerlin's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 7,093
3
3
3
secularmerlin's avatar
secularmerlin
3
3
3
-->
@Tarik
Roy goes for  a walk.

Was that a selfish or a selfless action?

Jim stole a loaf of bread.

Was that a selfish or a selfless action?

Danny gave an old woman help across the street. 

Was this a selfish or a selfless action?
#139
Tarik
Tarik's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 2,481
3
3
5
Tarik's avatar
Tarik
3
3
5
-->
@secularmerlin
Quit yanking my chain, clearly you can’t prove your selfish claim, so as far as this discussion is concerned I guess for now you can refer to your little acronym as A.F.S.M.
Topic's author
#140
secularmerlin
secularmerlin's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 7,093
3
3
3
secularmerlin's avatar
secularmerlin
3
3
3
-->
@Tarik
It is not a claim. It is an observation. 
#141
Tarik
Tarik's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 2,481
3
3
5
Tarik's avatar
Tarik
3
3
5
-->
@secularmerlin
Not if you can’t prove it.
Topic's author
#142
secularmerlin
secularmerlin's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 7,093
3
3
3
secularmerlin's avatar
secularmerlin
3
3
3
-->
@Tarik
Look if the definition of selfish is being CHEIFLY concerned with personal profit or pleasure how do we determine what an action is CHEIFLY concerned with?

My proposal is that UNLESS you have a better way of evaluating actions we make this determination based on the MOTIVATIONS behind the action. 
#143
Tarik
Tarik's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 2,481
3
3
5
Tarik's avatar
Tarik
3
3
5
-->
@secularmerlin
CHEIFLY concerned with?
Providing for someone else is concerned with just that SOMEONE ELSE.
Topic's author
#144
secularmerlin
secularmerlin's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 7,093
3
3
3
secularmerlin's avatar
secularmerlin
3
3
3
-->
@Tarik
Prove it. 
#145
Tarik
Tarik's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 2,481
3
3
5
Tarik's avatar
Tarik
3
3
5
-->
@secularmerlin
...Hold the damn phone, are you suggesting that providing for someone else isn’t for someone else?
Topic's author
#146
secularmerlin
secularmerlin's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 7,093
3
3
3
secularmerlin's avatar
secularmerlin
3
3
3
-->
@Tarik
I am suggesting that the MOTIVATION determines whether or not an action even IS for someone. 

Someone can profit by an action that was not performed FOR them.

If I serve soup to the poor the act is serving soup. I don't however have to do it FOR the poor. I could be serving that soup for any number of reasons including doing it under duress. 

IF a sullen teenager is forced to volunteer for a soup kitchen under threat of being grounded are they really being selfless? Or are they still self absorbed and merely doing what they calculate will lead to the best possible outcome for THEMSELVES?
#147
Tarik
Tarik's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 2,481
3
3
5
Tarik's avatar
Tarik
3
3
5
-->
@secularmerlin
I am suggesting that the MOTIVATION determines whether or not an action even IS for someone. 
If SOMEONE ELSE is benefiting from the action then regardless of the motivation behind it it doesn’t change the fact that SOMEONE ELSE benefited period.
Topic's author
#148
secularmerlin
secularmerlin's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 7,093
3
3
3
secularmerlin's avatar
secularmerlin
3
3
3
-->
@Tarik
Yes you can benefit from someone else's selfish actions. 
#149
Tarik
Tarik's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 2,481
3
3
5
Tarik's avatar
Tarik
3
3
5
-->
@secularmerlin
Prove it.
Topic's author
#150
secularmerlin
secularmerlin's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 7,093
3
3
3
secularmerlin's avatar
secularmerlin
3
3
3
-->
@Tarik
P1 Criminal organizations are predicated upon mutually beneficial selfish action between a cadre of people.

P2 Criminal organizations exist.

C It is possible to benefit from the selfish actions of others.