The Limits of Morality

Abortion, euthanasia, genetic engineering, Just War theory and other such hot topics.

Moderators: AMod, iMod

Jojen_31
Posts: 2
Joined: Sat Mar 23, 2019 12:59 am

Re: The Limits of Morality

Post by Jojen_31 » Sat Mar 23, 2019 1:02 am

Charm wrote:
Wed Aug 22, 2018 6:58 am
I wouldn't read too much into morality... Yes; it is essential for society, but if people had to figure out how it works to make it work they would remain immoral.. https://www.live-magazine.co.uk/testost ... el-review/
I always liked Strawson's approach to the problem of whether or not people are really in control of their actions (and by extension, morally responsible). He basically said that a world where we didn't hold people responsible would be unlivable, so we should just stop asking the question and pretend like they are morally responsible for their actions.

I think it's kind of similar to your idea here - it's useful so don't rock the boat too much.
Last edited by Jojen_31 on Mon Apr 01, 2019 4:03 pm, edited 1 time in total.

DPMartin
Posts: 101
Joined: Tue Jan 10, 2017 12:11 am

Re: The Limits of Morality

Post by DPMartin » Mon Apr 01, 2019 2:39 pm

Eodnhoj7 wrote:
Fri Aug 17, 2018 7:17 pm
1) All morality is the means to fullying being; hence exists as a limit which forms being as being itself.
morals are the set of rules agreed to by what ever system is in place. In that, there is no limits for the honorable only fulfillment. all others included in the agreement seek something else that isn't included in the fulfillment of the said set of rules.

And there are those not included in the set of rules resulting in either disenfranchised for the excluded, and criminal for the dishonorable that supposedly are included.

User avatar
Eodnhoj7
Posts: 3803
Joined: Mon Mar 13, 2017 3:18 am

Re: The Limits of Morality

Post by Eodnhoj7 » Tue Apr 23, 2019 11:45 pm

DPMartin wrote:
Mon Apr 01, 2019 2:39 pm
Eodnhoj7 wrote:
Fri Aug 17, 2018 7:17 pm
1) All morality is the means to fullying being; hence exists as a limit which forms being as being itself.
morals are the set of rules agreed to by what ever system is in place. In that, there is no limits for the honorable only fulfillment. all others included in the agreement seek something else that isn't included in the fulfillment of the said set of rules.

And there are those not included in the set of rules resulting in either disenfranchised for the excluded, and criminal for the dishonorable that supposedly are included.
Assumption, as the moral laws themselves are subject to countless sub-variations due to space/time.

DPMartin
Posts: 101
Joined: Tue Jan 10, 2017 12:11 am

Re: The Limits of Morality

Post by DPMartin » Wed Apr 24, 2019 7:27 pm

Eodnhoj7 wrote:
Tue Apr 23, 2019 11:45 pm
DPMartin wrote:
Mon Apr 01, 2019 2:39 pm
Eodnhoj7 wrote:
Fri Aug 17, 2018 7:17 pm
1) All morality is the means to fullying being; hence exists as a limit which forms being as being itself.
morals are the set of rules agreed to by what ever system is in place. In that, there is no limits for the honorable only fulfillment. all others included in the agreement seek something else that isn't included in the fulfillment of the said set of rules.

And there are those not included in the set of rules resulting in either disenfranchised for the excluded, and criminal for the dishonorable that supposedly are included.
Assumption, as the moral laws themselves are subject to countless sub-variations due to space/time.
you really got to stop smoken that dope, there's a reason why they call it dope you know.

User avatar
Eodnhoj7
Posts: 3803
Joined: Mon Mar 13, 2017 3:18 am

Re: The Limits of Morality

Post by Eodnhoj7 » Fri Apr 26, 2019 6:41 pm

DPMartin wrote:
Wed Apr 24, 2019 7:27 pm
Eodnhoj7 wrote:
Tue Apr 23, 2019 11:45 pm
DPMartin wrote:
Mon Apr 01, 2019 2:39 pm


morals are the set of rules agreed to by what ever system is in place. In that, there is no limits for the honorable only fulfillment. all others included in the agreement seek something else that isn't included in the fulfillment of the said set of rules.

And there are those not included in the set of rules resulting in either disenfranchised for the excluded, and criminal for the dishonorable that supposedly are included.
Assumption, as the moral laws themselves are subject to countless sub-variations due to space/time.
you really got to stop smoken that dope, there's a reason why they call it dope you know.
False.

"Thou shall not kill", "Murder is wrong", etc. is subject to a countless variation of contexts with these contexts being "subject" to not just physical time/space circumstances but the nature of mind and intuition of the individual/individuals which are grounded in basic spatial properties due to their "up/down" and "cycling" nature which mirrors natural law in the extent that basic "fluxation" is, in itself, spatial in nature.

DPMartin
Posts: 101
Joined: Tue Jan 10, 2017 12:11 am

Re: The Limits of Morality

Post by DPMartin » Mon Apr 29, 2019 2:34 pm

Eodnhoj7 wrote:
Fri Apr 26, 2019 6:41 pm
DPMartin wrote:
Wed Apr 24, 2019 7:27 pm
Eodnhoj7 wrote:
Tue Apr 23, 2019 11:45 pm

Assumption, as the moral laws themselves are subject to countless sub-variations due to space/time.
you really got to stop smoken that dope, there's a reason why they call it dope you know.
False.

"Thou shall not kill", "Murder is wrong", etc. is subject to a countless variation of contexts with these contexts being "subject" to not just physical time/space circumstances but the nature of mind and intuition of the individual/individuals which are grounded in basic spatial properties due to their "up/down" and "cycling" nature which mirrors natural law in the extent that basic "fluxation" is, in itself, spatial in nature.
according to the covenant (agreement) of the ten commandment it is agreed that Thou shall not kill by those in the agreement, then when the agreement was established by the power of the Lord God of Israel and the children of Israel. so to an Israelite of the day he was bond to this law, but no one else was bond to this very same law because not being a child of Israel they were not a participant in the agreement you refer to.


law citizens of the US are not bond to the law in Russia that citizens of Russia are bond to.

and you still talk like a dope smoker.

Logik
Posts: 4048
Joined: Tue Dec 04, 2018 12:48 pm

Re: The Limits of Morality

Post by Logik » Mon Apr 29, 2019 2:58 pm

DPMartin wrote:
Mon Apr 29, 2019 2:34 pm
according to the covenant (agreement) of the ten commandment it is agreed that Thou shall not kill by those in the agreement, then when the agreement was established by the power of the Lord God of Israel and the children of Israel. so to an Israelite of the day he was bond to this law, but no one else was bond to this very same law because not being a child of Israel they were not a participant in the agreement you refer to.
I give to you a choice when interacting with me: persuade me with reason; or violence.

The moral agreement is that we reason with each other, but you don't have to adhere.

P.S I am very skilled at violence. If that's not a good enough reason to convince you to reason with me then I have run out of argument.

I come in peace. I didn’t bring artillery. But I’m pleading with you, with tears in my eyes: If you fuck with me, I’ll kill you all. -- J.Mattis

DPMartin
Posts: 101
Joined: Tue Jan 10, 2017 12:11 am

Re: The Limits of Morality

Post by DPMartin » Mon Apr 29, 2019 5:06 pm

Logik wrote:
Mon Apr 29, 2019 2:58 pm
DPMartin wrote:
Mon Apr 29, 2019 2:34 pm
according to the covenant (agreement) of the ten commandment it is agreed that Thou shall not kill by those in the agreement, then when the agreement was established by the power of the Lord God of Israel and the children of Israel. so to an Israelite of the day he was bond to this law, but no one else was bond to this very same law because not being a child of Israel they were not a participant in the agreement you refer to.
I give to you a choice when interacting with me: persuade me with reason; or violence.

The moral agreement is that we reason with each other, but you don't have to adhere.

P.S I am very skilled at violence. If that's not a good enough reason to convince you to reason with me then I have run out of argument.

I come in peace. I didn’t bring artillery. But I’m pleading with you, with tears in my eyes: If you fuck with me, I’ll kill you all. -- J.Mattis
you don't give choice to those more powerful then you.

other then that what are you talking about?

Logik
Posts: 4048
Joined: Tue Dec 04, 2018 12:48 pm

Re: The Limits of Morality

Post by Logik » Mon Apr 29, 2019 5:09 pm

DPMartin wrote:
Mon Apr 29, 2019 5:06 pm
you don't give choice to those more powerful then you.
And who might be so powerful as to be able to come back from the dead?

Violence is the supreme authority from which all other authority is derived.

DPMartin
Posts: 101
Joined: Tue Jan 10, 2017 12:11 am

Re: The Limits of Morality

Post by DPMartin » Tue Apr 30, 2019 2:58 pm

Logik wrote:
Mon Apr 29, 2019 5:09 pm
DPMartin wrote:
Mon Apr 29, 2019 5:06 pm
you don't give choice to those more powerful then you.
And who might be so powerful as to be able to come back from the dead?

Violence is the supreme authority from which all other authority is derived.
well it could said that theologically or philosophically speaking, man's power is to destroy, or the result of man's judgements, is death. but the ultimate power, na, not when one can see plainly that all man does returns to the ground. some religious theorize who the destroyer is, and the evidence says its man.

but who is so powerful as to raise Himself from the dead, and offer the same to others surly has the power to give life, and His judgments would have to be life. but that would be a discussion for the religion section wouldn't it?

Logik
Posts: 4048
Joined: Tue Dec 04, 2018 12:48 pm

Re: The Limits of Morality

Post by Logik » Tue Apr 30, 2019 3:10 pm

DPMartin wrote:
Tue Apr 30, 2019 2:58 pm
well it could said that theologically or philosophically speaking, man's power is to destroy, or the result of man's judgements, is death. but the ultimate power, na, not when one can see plainly that all man does returns to the ground. some religious theorize who the destroyer is, and the evidence says its man.

but who is so powerful as to raise Himself from the dead, and offer the same to others surly has the power to give life, and His judgments would have to be life. but that would be a discussion for the religion section wouldn't it?
I was speaking strictly in the context of "Thou shall not kill" (which is more correct as 'thou shall not murder').

When two powerful individuals (both capable of murdering each other) interact they have a choice on how to persuade each other: violence or reason.

I am simply suggesting that you choose reason, because I am skilled at violence. But the choice is still yours.

The motivating factor to NOT murder is your own self-preservation. It you try to murder me, you risk death yourself.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mutual_as ... estruction

DPMartin
Posts: 101
Joined: Tue Jan 10, 2017 12:11 am

Re: The Limits of Morality

Post by DPMartin » Wed May 01, 2019 4:14 pm

Logik wrote:
Tue Apr 30, 2019 3:10 pm
DPMartin wrote:
Tue Apr 30, 2019 2:58 pm
well it could said that theologically or philosophically speaking, man's power is to destroy, or the result of man's judgements, is death. but the ultimate power, na, not when one can see plainly that all man does returns to the ground. some religious theorize who the destroyer is, and the evidence says its man.

but who is so powerful as to raise Himself from the dead, and offer the same to others surly has the power to give life, and His judgments would have to be life. but that would be a discussion for the religion section wouldn't it?
I was speaking strictly in the context of "Thou shall not kill" (which is more correct as 'thou shall not murder').

When two powerful individuals (both capable of murdering each other) interact they have a choice on how to persuade each other: violence or reason.

I am simply suggesting that you choose reason, because I am skilled at violence. But the choice is still yours.

The motivating factor to NOT murder is your own self-preservation. It you try to murder me, you risk death yourself.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mutual_as ... estruction
not if I am convinced beforehand that I am more powerful then you, or even that I am willing to die for what ever reason I see is worthy. also if it be true that I be more powerful then you and was anticipating this situation I may have made that decision a long time ago.

you're not taking all circumstances into play here. threats are threats animals threaten to harm one another, (a form of mutual assured destruction) to gain something or prevent conflict. thou shall not kill is not instinctive in nature or the nature of the flesh in anyway. its a matter of motivation to act, and in humans who can live by the agreement can refrain from acting instinctively should they desire to honor the agreement. "thou shall not kill" is a part of a covenant which by definition is a agreement. of which can be superseded by those in the agreement, if they agree.

even in the mob (those who have no compunctions about killing or "murder") when they formed a commission and agreed not to kill a made man unless it be agreed by the commission or some one authorized by the commission to make that decision. but yet these same people have a sense of duty and justification for their own actions despite the laws of the land that prevail.

User avatar
Eodnhoj7
Posts: 3803
Joined: Mon Mar 13, 2017 3:18 am

Re: The Limits of Morality

Post by Eodnhoj7 » Mon May 06, 2019 5:56 pm

DPMartin wrote:
Mon Apr 29, 2019 2:34 pm
Eodnhoj7 wrote:
Fri Apr 26, 2019 6:41 pm
DPMartin wrote:
Wed Apr 24, 2019 7:27 pm


you really got to stop smoken that dope, there's a reason why they call it dope you know.
False.

"Thou shall not kill", "Murder is wrong", etc. is subject to a countless variation of contexts with these contexts being "subject" to not just physical time/space circumstances but the nature of mind and intuition of the individual/individuals which are grounded in basic spatial properties due to their "up/down" and "cycling" nature which mirrors natural law in the extent that basic "fluxation" is, in itself, spatial in nature.
according to the covenant (agreement) of the ten commandment it is agreed that Thou shall not kill by those in the agreement, then when the agreement was established by the power of the Lord God of Israel and the children of Israel. so to an Israelite of the day he was bond to this law, but no one else was bond to this very same law because not being a child of Israel they were not a participant in the agreement you refer to.


law citizens of the US are not bond to the law in Russia that citizens of Russia are bond to.

and you still talk like a dope smoker.
False if you are using "scripture" as the context for this law, the scriptures state the gentiles are bound by this laws as evidenced by:

The destruction of sodom and the verse: https://biblehub.com/romans/2-14.htm

Of course you don't understand me, I mean look at you...you can't even capitalize half of your spelling...much like a dope smoker.

DPMartin
Posts: 101
Joined: Tue Jan 10, 2017 12:11 am

Re: The Limits of Morality

Post by DPMartin » Mon May 06, 2019 11:10 pm

Eodnhoj7 wrote:
Mon May 06, 2019 5:56 pm
DPMartin wrote:
Mon Apr 29, 2019 2:34 pm
Eodnhoj7 wrote:
Fri Apr 26, 2019 6:41 pm


False.

"Thou shall not kill", "Murder is wrong", etc. is subject to a countless variation of contexts with these contexts being "subject" to not just physical time/space circumstances but the nature of mind and intuition of the individual/individuals which are grounded in basic spatial properties due to their "up/down" and "cycling" nature which mirrors natural law in the extent that basic "fluxation" is, in itself, spatial in nature.
according to the covenant (agreement) of the ten commandment it is agreed that Thou shall not kill by those in the agreement, then when the agreement was established by the power of the Lord God of Israel and the children of Israel. so to an Israelite of the day he was bond to this law, but no one else was bond to this very same law because not being a child of Israel they were not a participant in the agreement you refer to.


law citizens of the US are not bond to the law in Russia that citizens of Russia are bond to.

and you still talk like a dope smoker.
False if you are using "scripture" as the context for this law, the scriptures state the gentiles are bound by this laws as evidenced by:

The destruction of sodom and the verse: https://biblehub.com/romans/2-14.htm

Of course you don't understand me, I mean look at you...you can't even capitalize half of your spelling...much like a dope smoker.
ok then let look at this scripture you reefer to:


Rom 2:12  For as many as have sinned without law shall also perish without law: and as many as have sinned in the law shall be judged by the law; 
Rom 2:13  (For not the hearers of the law are just before God, but the doers of the law shall be justified. 
Rom 2:14  For when the Gentiles, which have not the law, do by nature the things contained in the law, these, having not the law, are a law unto themselves: 
Rom 2:15  Which shew the work of the law written in their hearts, their conscience also bearing witness, and their thoughts the mean while accusing or else excusing one another;) 
Rom 2:16  In the day when God shall judge the secrets of men by Jesus Christ according to my gospel. 


as Paul goes into this subject he starts with "For as many as have sinned without law shall also perish without law" so according to Paul there are those who do not and are not bound to the law given by the hand of Moses.

so just because there are gentiles that may do as the law doesn't mean all gentiles have the law in their hearts by virtue of being born into the world as a human being. he even mentions in the same chapter that there are those who are Jews that do not have the law in their hearts. so no your interpretation is definitely out of context of the text written.


and to add to that of what Paul means:

Rom 8:6 For to be carnally minded is death; but to be spiritually minded is life and peace.
Rom 8:7 Because the carnal mind is enmity against God: for it is not subject to the law of God, neither indeed can be.
Rom 8:8 So then they that are in the flesh cannot please God.

Paul makes clear that the carnal mind is not subject to the law of God. therefore not subject to "thou shall not kill" or any variant of the same that is of the same meaning. psychopaths (for example) are not subject to "thou shall not kill" other than being found a murderer and prosecuted for the offence against the law.



and typos are on thing, and comments consistent with space cadets that should wear aluminum foil so that we know who they are, is another.

User avatar
Eodnhoj7
Posts: 3803
Joined: Mon Mar 13, 2017 3:18 am

Re: The Limits of Morality

Post by Eodnhoj7 » Sat May 11, 2019 7:21 pm

DPMartin wrote:
Mon May 06, 2019 11:10 pm
Eodnhoj7 wrote:
Mon May 06, 2019 5:56 pm
DPMartin wrote:
Mon Apr 29, 2019 2:34 pm


according to the covenant (agreement) of the ten commandment it is agreed that Thou shall not kill by those in the agreement, then when the agreement was established by the power of the Lord God of Israel and the children of Israel. so to an Israelite of the day he was bond to this law, but no one else was bond to this very same law because not being a child of Israel they were not a participant in the agreement you refer to.


law citizens of the US are not bond to the law in Russia that citizens of Russia are bond to.

and you still talk like a dope smoker.
False if you are using "scripture" as the context for this law, the scriptures state the gentiles are bound by this laws as evidenced by:

The destruction of sodom and the verse: https://biblehub.com/romans/2-14.htm

Of course you don't understand me, I mean look at you...you can't even capitalize half of your spelling...much like a dope smoker.
ok then let look at this scripture you reefer to:


Rom 2:12  For as many as have sinned without law shall also perish without law: and as many as have sinned in the law shall be judged by the law; 
Rom 2:13  (For not the hearers of the law are just before God, but the doers of the law shall be justified. 
Rom 2:14  For when the Gentiles, which have not the law, do by nature the things contained in the law, these, having not the law, are a law unto themselves: 
Rom 2:15  Which shew the work of the law written in their hearts, their conscience also bearing witness, and their thoughts the mean while accusing or else excusing one another;) 
Rom 2:16  In the day when God shall judge the secrets of men by Jesus Christ according to my gospel. 

Yeah it just said the law is written in their conscience and is universal.


as Paul goes into this subject he starts with "For as many as have sinned without law shall also perish without law" so according to Paul there are those who do not and are not bound to the law given by the hand of Moses.

Yes...those without law in there conscious and conscious is universal as a an observation of "loyalty". If one conscious "pains them" it is due to an absence of loyalty (ie "my conscious is bothering me over "x"....is a question of loyalty, or rather connection, to percieved values.)

so just because there are gentiles that may do as the law doesn't mean all gentiles have the law in their hearts by virtue of being born into the world as a human being. he even mentions in the same chapter that there are those who are Jews that do not have the law in their hearts. so no your interpretation is definitely out of context of the text written.

False...there is neither Jew nor Gentile through Christ.


and to add to that of what Paul means:

Rom 8:6 For to be carnally minded is death; but to be spiritually minded is life and peace.
Rom 8:7 Because the carnal mind is enmity against God: for it is not subject to the law of God, neither indeed can be.
Rom 8:8 So then they that are in the flesh cannot please God.


Paul makes clear that the carnal mind is not subject to the law of God. therefore not subject to "thou shall not kill" or any variant of the same that is of the same meaning. psychopaths (for example) are not subject to "thou shall not kill" other than being found a murderer and prosecuted for the offence against the law.

The law represents an inherent order of being, those outside the law are outside of order and as such embody "sin". Sin is seperation and seperation is grounded in chaos as an absence of unity (ie order). Those not subject to God are subject to Chaos. The law is Divine Will and sin is an casting away from God...ie a separation from God.



and typos are on thing, and comments consistent with space cadets that should wear aluminum foil so that we know who they are, is another.


Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest