What do we know about Ethics?

[FlashDangerpants]

... you simply brand me the thought police...

Why do you assume I was talking about you?

Are you taking the piss?
You wrote....

As I was about to submit this post I heard from the Thought Police who accused me of being "evasive," "unable to recognize limits," and accused me of putting forth an argument to the effect of :

... and then you quoted me. Don't be obtuse. You really do get pathetically fatuous when stuff isn't working for you.

Your definition of Ethics is self serving and incomplete, also as expected.

And are you implying that what you write is not 'self-serving'? Or is this a case of "the pot calling the kettle black"?

Of course it's 'incomplete.' I'd rather be congruent (coherent) than complete; one cannot be both at once, as Kurt Godel demonstrates.

Again... you demanded an exact definition from me.
You owe me an exact definition, not a half of a starting point for further discussion.

What, pray tell, is your exact definition of the concept "ethics"? Many, if not most, philosophical disputes turn on miscommunication due to the use of vague and ambigous words.

You insisted on removing vagueness and ambiguity, but now you are pretending you didn't.

[prof]

In keeing with the topic of this thread, here are some more points to consider:
To have enlightened self-interest is to know that what helps you, if it really helps you, helps me. We go up or down together. It also is wise to realize that we can create value or destroy it, when we encounter another individual.

Creating value is better since we thereby gain more value in life. Doing this brings us closer to a Quality Life, a life of well-being, a life in which we thrive ...a life which Aristotle spoke of as having eudemonia and arête;h appiness and high standards of excellence.

The moral values held by an individual give us information about that person. This formation is a fact about that individual. Moral values are facts about conscious human beings. Facts are
objective. Thus moral values are objective. They are also subjective at the same time.

[FlashDangerpants]

So presumably you have now recovered from another of your little tantrum meltdowns by pretending none of it happened have you?

The moral values held by an individual give us information about that person. This formation is a fact about that individual. Moral values are facts about conscious human beings. Facts are
objective. Thus moral values are objective. They are also subjective at the same time.

What are you hoping to show with that?
Obviously you aren't planning with this argument to show that moral values are objectively verifiable in the same way that scientifically verifiable facts about the universe are.

I was never planning to deny you the right to hold that "Jerry believes that stealing is wrong" is a fact.
But "stealing is wrong" remains a proposition that cannot be held scientifically.
and if that silly argument you present here is supposed to change that, you need some lessons in elementary logic.

[prof]

As I see it, Ethics is the same as good human relations.

And if you regard the people you encounter (ordinarily) as "a treasure", with a story to tell - from which one can learn something - you will perform a service just by listening to them. If you then ask, "Can I be of service in some way?" this often has a multiplier effect, like ripples in a stream. The individuals involved may want to do each other favors. If they possess a sensitive conscience, they may want to match the blessing bestowed on them. Soon it becomes evident that, in a sense, giving and receiving are the same.

Your goodness, your kind act, may initiate a chain reaction of "paying it forward."

Have you seen this video:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l7AWnfFRc7g - "The Empathic Civilization."

If so, it is worth seeing it again.

And this one, on how to spread the word about an aspect of ethics, (and who especially to spread it to - namely, little kids -) "putting materialism in its place:


B. J. Thomas – “Using Things and Loving People”
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J_K9NtiLi_E


Your views, everyone?

Let's hear your comments on the subject.....

[FlashDangerpants]

As I see it, Ethics is the same as good human relations.

And if you regard the people you encounter (ordinarily) as "a treasure", with a story to tell - from which one can learn something - you will perform a service just by listening to them. If you then ask, "Can I be of service in some way?" this often has a multiplier effect, like ripples in a stream. The individuals involved may want to do each other favors. If they possess a sensitive conscience, they may want to match the blessing bestowed on them. Soon it becomes evident that, in a sense, giving and receiving are the same.

That is not any sort of attempt to define a field of inquiry. It's really just the foreword of a lacklustre self help book.

[prof]

Ethics, according the new paradigm - the Hartman/Katz Unified Theory of Ethics - is the field of inquiry defined as follows: when an individual (or a group of them) is Intrinsically-valued those who experience this and/or who analyze the results of such valuations are in the field of Ethics.

To I-value [Intrinsically-value] another individual is to see that individual as uncountably valuable.

For more details, see this 8-page (safe to open) paper; print it out on both sides. http://myqol.com/wadeharvey/PDFs/The%20 ... ncepts.pdf

Comments? Questions?

[Dalek Prime]

It's a noun with six letters and two syllables.

[prof]

Yes, that is true.

To learn even more about Ethics go to the 4th post down from the top on Page 1 of this thread.


If you like what you learned there, and would like to comprehend it more, and in greater depth of detail, and deeper meaning, see: THE BREAKTHROUGH which goes into the topic more fully.
Here is a link to that enjoyable pamphlet:
http://myqol.com/wadeharvey/PDFs/BREAKT ... %20all.pdf

When I spoke of it as "enjoyable" that was my humble opinion.

With regard to that essay, all reviews and suggestions for improvement and/or any upgrades are welcome!



...So you see, something important is known about Ethics after all.

[Dalek Prime]

I don't accept intrinsic value in general, but I do for that which can value itself for it's own sake. All other value is extrinsic.

[prof]

Is the definition of a "circle" Extrinsic? No, it is Systemic Value.

To understand the distinction between the various value dimensions see this article by a philosopher who is both clear and profound:
https://www.hartmaninstitute.org/axiologyasascience/

Katz - Basic Ethics also explains in detail employing set theory:
http://www.myqol.com/wadeharvey/PDFs/BASIC%20ETHICS.pdf

[prof]

Before you make any ethical decision, Necromancer, in your interactions with other people, how does one measure...?

Well, for a starter, being lawful under democratic laws and regulations is surely one way ....

I totally agree -- with the proviso that those laws comply with the principles of Ethics. Some of those principles (those life guidelines, those suggestions) are to be found on pp. 63-64 of How to Live Successfully. See: http://myqol.com/wadeharvey/PDFs/HOW%20 ... SFULLY.pdf

If it's a good law, by these measures, I'll comply with it. In Nazi Germany there were some bad laws. They may have seemed to be 'democratic' but they were not. Conscription laws for bad wars are not good laws.

What say you?

What say you.

[henry quirk]

http://www.thecouchforum.com/comments.php?id=1313

http://www.thecouchforum.com/comments.php?id=1545

[Necromancer]

http://www.thecouchforum.com/comments.php?id=1313

http://www.thecouchforum.com/comments.php?id=1545

Why not the plausibility of description, ie., Human Rights (UDHR), The International Bill of Rights, the Kantian Ethics and Morality, etc.?

You're avoiding the issue, henry quirk? Do not like ethics and morality...?

[henry quirk]

Very clearly I say: values, valuing and therefore morality and ethics (two exercises in value-making) are utterly dependent on the individual in the world. That is: value (morals, ethics) don't exist except as the individual crafts them and imposes them on the world.

These, Human Rights (UDHR), The International Bill of Rights, the Kantian Ethics and Morality, and countless other constructs, don't exist except as notions, notions (like all notions) that cease to be once the individual tosses them aside or rejects them.

I can 'describe' a unicorn (a right, a moral, an ethic) and that unicorn is still fiction. I can live as though unicorns (rights, morals, ethics) exist and unicorns are still fiction.

No, I haven't avoided anything: I've taken an open and firm position.

[prof]

FYI


A new edition of "The Beautiful Simplicty>>>" has just been issued. For those who care to learn a new, fresh perspective on ethics, here is a link to it:

http://myqol.com/wadeharvey/PDFs/The%20 ... ncepts.pdf

Happy reading!

Enjoy!