Overcoming Choice Paralysis

Author: MonkeyKing
Personal

Posts

Total: 39
#31
Wylted
Wylted's avatar
Debates: 34
Posts: 5,754
3
4
11
Wylted's avatar
Wylted
3
4
11
-->
@Sum1hugme
You're assuming the consequences constitute the morality, but you can't justify that.
It's literally the only thing that matters or can be measured. We don't have telepathy. 

You're just imposing that motive. I never said that she enjoyed doing it, only that she did it because she thought it was the right thing to do. She could be inclined to not give, but feel compelled by her respect for her moral principles. So you're attacking a straw man.
I'm sure it feels good in some way to give into that altruistic compulsion. Even if it is just a relief from the feeling of needing to do what is compelled. Just examine whether you feel good giving or not? Others likely are not too different from yourself.

  I didn't say that any motive is good. Just that the morality, good or bad, lies in the motive. In order for something to be morally praiseworthy, it must be the right thing and done for the right reason. Hitler did the wrong thing for the wrong reason.

The key words here are the ones bolded, basically conceding to the point I made. Right reason is something we all think we have. All politicians want to make the world a better place. All evil dictators do what they do, because their motive is to make the world a better place. The Mongolian killing fields happened because people thought they were making the world a better place. Motives don't matter. Having good motives is why we have so much tragedy. 

If your enemy puts sugar in your coffee by accident intending to poison you...
  Then they have committed a morally wrong act.

...your friend putting poison in your coffee because she tried to help you have sweet coffee. 
  Your friend has not committed a morally wrong action, because they did not intend kill you. This would be an amoral action.


Your are just proselytizing about your philosophy being right at this point. The world is a better place when people do things like, think through the consequences of their actions they feel compelled by altruism to do. I would certainly find an enemy sweetening my coffee, preferable to a reckless friend who wants to feel good about herself, by recklessly just doing whatever she feels is good. 
#32
Sum1hugme
Sum1hugme's avatar
Debates: 37
Posts: 1,014
4
4
9
Sum1hugme's avatar
Sum1hugme
4
4
9
-->
@Wylted
It's literally the only thing that matters or can be measured. We don't have telepathy. 

  Actually the impossibility of accurately measuring or knowing consequences in most situations works against you here. And that's not a justification, You're assuming the truth of consequentialism but you havent justified it. 

I'm sure it feels good in some way to give into that altruistic compulsion. Even if it is just a relief from the feeling of needing to do what is compelled. Just examine whether you feel good giving or not? Others likely are not too different from yourself.
  You're continuing to impose that motive to suit your straw man.

The key words here are the ones bolded, basically conceding to the point I made. Right reason is something we all think we have...
  Thinking you've reasoned correctly is not the same as reasoning correctly. Take the christians as an example. Just because someone thinks they have a good reason doesn't mean they do. An act is only truly morally praiseworthy if it's the right thing and properly motivated.

  All youve done is attack a straw man.
#33
Wylted
Wylted's avatar
Debates: 34
Posts: 5,754
3
4
11
Wylted's avatar
Wylted
3
4
11
-->
@Sum1hugme
  Thinking you've reasoned correctly is not the same as reasoning correctly. Take the christians as an example. Just because someone thinks they have a good reason doesn't mean they do. An act is only truly morally praiseworthy if it's the right thing and properly motivated
You are almost there. How do you determine it is the right thing? 
#34
Sum1hugme
Sum1hugme's avatar
Debates: 37
Posts: 1,014
4
4
9
Sum1hugme's avatar
Sum1hugme
4
4
9
-->
@Wylted
By determining if the maxim for ones action is in line with universal moral principles. Is your maxim one you could, at the same time will that it should be a universal moral law? Will you be using a person as a mere means? Are you respecting their dignity? 

13 days later

#35
drlebronski
drlebronski's avatar
Debates: 14
Posts: 993
3
5
9
drlebronski's avatar
drlebronski
3
5
9
-->
@RationalMadman
seriously dude? 
calling him lazy when hes working three jobs and currently in college wont help at all.
as usual your being a douchebag
#36
RationalMadman
RationalMadman's avatar
Debates: 574
Posts: 19,931
10
11
11
RationalMadman's avatar
RationalMadman
10
11
11
-->
@drlebronski
I didn't call him lazy, I said it makes one crave to be lazy.

Three jobs is virtually impossible to maintain at once, I'm curious how he's even doing this. Instead of calling me a douchebag, give a better reply to the OP, douchebag. Since you think I am usually one, you can get a block, douchebag.
#37
RationalMadman
RationalMadman's avatar
Debates: 574
Posts: 19,931
10
11
11
RationalMadman's avatar
RationalMadman
10
11
11
I was actually being the opposite to a douchebag in this thread. I offered a guy insight and empathy into something I felt he both is suffering from and isn't aware of.

If it's so offensive or wrong, he'd have replied so by now.
#38
RationalMadman
RationalMadman's avatar
Debates: 574
Posts: 19,931
10
11
11
RationalMadman's avatar
RationalMadman
10
11
11
Choice paralysis occurs in this situation because all options seem crap to someone who has no joy or satisfaction as a baseline biochemical thing in their brain. That's why he's paralysed in choices, I offered a way out. The entire thread until that post was actually not giving him a way to cure his choice paralysis, so if tha makes me a douchebag then I guess it's a great thing to be.
#39
ebuc
ebuc's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,920
3
2
4
ebuc's avatar
ebuc
3
2
4
-->
@Sum1hugme
The morality lies in the motivation for action

1} jane gives $1. cause is morally right thing to do, irrespective of whether it is last $1,

.....1a} jane gives $1. cause she is billionaire ---millionaire etc--- ergo morally right thing to do, cause she is so rich it feels immoral to her, to be so much richer than the beggar,

.......1b} jane does not give $1. cause she believes this is a scam by a lazy person, that also has vibes of a scumbag, even if they had higher standard of living,

2} dick gives $1. cause, if a woman can do the right thing, then he, a manly man, can also do the right thing,

....2a} dick gives $1. in hopes he will appear { be seen as }  a compassion caring person ---that he may very well be---, to jane, ergo right thing for him to do,

......2} dick does not give $1. because, --same reasons above jane did not--- because he feels that, if one person --out of two--, that seems like a fair overall balance --right thing to do--  in that the beggar does not expect every human will give $1 and is happy { or satisfied }  to get $50% of all passerbys.

3} police officer, people whose house the beggar is in front of, and the children on the street all come into play of the wholistic set of circumstances of what really is, the right thing to do?

4} maybe they should offer to drive beggar to more suitable spot to beg, or to restaurant, or to their home, to really do, the right thing.