Subjective morality

[philosopher]

Morality is subjective but this subjectivity should not limit a true moral society.

Here I will argue in favor of a moral just society with as much personal/individual liberty as practically possible.

Morality in theory:

If life is only about survival - and gaining more and more power is essential to your own survival - overcoming empathy, compassion, faith etc. will give you unlimited power in terms of your own conscience (which is zero) - only your environment and your physical and social capacities will limit your power over other people and yourself.

However, if everyone were like this, that is losing emapthy, compassion, conscience, morality - we would be in eternal war with each other or at the very least have to be suspecious of every other individual in our lives, as anyone are potential enemies. This creates too many stressors and limit our creative and technological capabilities, also it will have devastating effects on our own immune systems and overall well-being and health. This is not good for our survival.

So let's instead agree on not exploiting each other and live in peace and harmony, mind our own business as long as our neighbor do not put us in any kind of danger or annoyance.

Applying morality:

Actually a lot of stuff in our society affects all of us. All our actions will affect someone else. That is why we should be governed by laws. But there is no reason to have those laws intervene mora than is absolutely neccessary. For example, limiting our freedom of speech in favor of illegalizing blasphemy is unneccessary. It is also unneccessary to ban black, white, yellow or red people from having a say in government affairs and society in general - apartheid is unneccessary and so are forced religious rituals - like that of circumcision. Even the parents of a children should not be able to force their own children to be circumcised. The children should have their own choice of their own body, so long as there are no health-related neccessary reasons to circumcise or do any other invasive procedures. Religious faith of parents is not good enough excuse for such practice being forced by the parents on their children.

Some things can be argued of neccessity to have a working society - like that of conscription or work duty. But such duties limit the freedom of individuals and often such duties do not account for the individual limits or capabilities of the individuals being forced into such institutions and so should likewise not happen in a moral just society. Instead we should seek other less intervening methods to make people work/contribute to society.

We need to pay taxes - the society should have a government, and a government requires money. We need to re-distribute the money to those in need. Needs of individuals should be solely decided by experts - like doctors documenting the needs of patients. Those experts should be certified by the state. The state should consist of independent bodies. The judges should not be part of the government/administration or elected by it, nor of the parliament. The parliament should be separated from the administration and the different departments/ministries should be held accountable for the functioning of the government and the decisions made by the government.

The government should be composed of representatives elected by the people. Every citizen with permanent residence above the age of 18 should have the right to vote and nobody should be deprived the right to vote - not even as a result of crime or government subsidies/welfare benefits.

No single person should have power alone as a president. At best, a just society is one that only has a Prime Minister without a monarchy.
Declaring war and making peace should be negotiated by the parliament and voted on in the parliament. All laws - and no decrees should be made solely by the parliament. The head of state should never be able to veto on laws.

Working society:

While everything in this world can ultimately be subject to fraud, we are way better off trusting in the documentation of experts than to suspect anyone recieving government benefits to commit social fraud.

This is why Basic Income is such a good idea. It should of course be combined with Neccessity Benefits for the needy. Nobody should be forced to work against their will, but everyone should be encouraged to contribute positively to society. Only through trust in goodness of man can a positive society emerge and only through this way can we break the evil circle of suspecion, war, exploitation.

So let me suggest a liberal left wing society, to accomplish this dream.

However, if you do believe in torturing innocents and perpetual war, surveillance society and police state - I understand if you disagree. But I do hope your are a clear minority.

[henry quirk]

philo,

Please, square this...

let's...agree on not exploiting each other and liv(ing) in peace and harmony, mind(ing) our own business as long as our neighbor do not put us in any kind of danger or annoyance.

...with this...

Basic Income is such a good idea.

[Belinda]

Philosopher, morality cannot be subjective. Morality is what enables individuals to cooperate within whichever tribe, family, business, profession, or religious faith, and so on applies to the endeavour in question. So it's not subjective but intersubjective.

Of course men need an inherent predisposition to cooperate. We also need an inherent predisposition to compete and to compete violently.

It may be argued that some peaceful Utopia would breed very substandard men who were fat, lazy, and apathetic. Learning cannot take place in the absence of challenges.

[philosopher]

It may be argued that some peaceful Utopia would breed very substandard men who were fat, lazy, and apathetic.

So be it. If fat, lazy and apathetic men are the only side-effects of a peaceful utopian society, then I'm willing to take that side-effect.

The alternatives (all of them) are far worse and have far worse side-effects.

[TimeSeeker]

It may be argued that some peaceful Utopia would breed very substandard men who were fat, lazy, and apathetic.

So be it. If fat, lazy and apathetic men are the only side-effects of a peaceful utopian society, then I'm willing to take that side-effect.

The alternatives (all of them) are far worse and have far worse side-effects.

A peaceful utopian society full of lazy and apathetic men has a whole lot of issues on its hands!

Poor healthcare.
Sanitation problems.
Education system collapse.
Lack of commerce or infrastructure.
Lack of leadership.

The Utopian society cannot run itself!

Sounds like your version of utopia is an island paradise. We already have those - as long as you pay

[philosopher]

It may be argued that some peaceful Utopia would breed very substandard men who were fat, lazy, and apathetic.

So be it. If fat, lazy and apathetic men are the only side-effects of a peaceful utopian society, then I'm willing to take that side-effect.

The alternatives (all of them) are far worse and have far worse side-effects.

A peaceful utopian society full of lazy and apathetic men has a whole lot of issues on its hands!

Poor healthcare.
Sanitation problems.
Education system collapse.
Lack of commerce or infrastructure.
Lack of leadership.

The Utopian society cannot run itself!

Sounds like your version of utopia is an island paradise. We already have those - as long as you pay

But a dystopian hell - like our current world - has poor healthcare, sanitation problems, education system collapses as well - combined with destruction of commerce and infrastructure and corrupt, sadistic narccissistic leaderships.

I definitely prefer the peaceful utopian society above this world!

I prefer lack of leadership above a sadistic narccissistic leadership.

I prefer even poorer healthcare and sanitation problems above dictatorship and perpetual warfare.

[TimeSeeker]

But a dystopian hell - like our current world - has poor healthcare, sanitation problems, education system collapses as well - combined with destruction of commerce and infrastructure and corrupt, sadistic narccissistic leaderships.

I definitely prefer the peaceful utopian society above this world!

I prefer lack of leadership above a sadistic narccissistic leadership.

I prefer even poorer healthcare and sanitation problems above dictatorship and perpetual warfare.

That is a very black-and-white world-view. If you don't like what 2018 has to offer in which year/country in human history would you prefer to have lived in?

[philosopher]

But a dystopian hell - like our current world - has poor healthcare, sanitation problems, education system collapses as well - combined with destruction of commerce and infrastructure and corrupt, sadistic narccissistic leaderships.

I definitely prefer the peaceful utopian society above this world!

I prefer lack of leadership above a sadistic narccissistic leadership.

I prefer even poorer healthcare and sanitation problems above dictatorship and perpetual warfare.

That is a very black-and-white world-view. If you don't like what 2018 has to offer in which year/country in human history would you prefer to have lived in?

I live the best possible life in the best possible country in the least-despicable situation of the world.

However, I am fully aware that things change all the time. And what is good today can become a nightmare tomorrow.

This is why I want a stable and permanent situation with every nation in the world enjoying all the benefits of my country (peace & welfare)- while at the same time my country will enjoy all the good stuff from other countries (like no conscription or other forced labor).

A liberal, peaceful and safe (in all aspects of life, including welfare) society should become the standard of the world. Instead, most of the world is either in war, under authoritarian rule, over-populated/crowded or under pressure from other sources of infectious authoritarian pro-war anti-peace anti-welfare pro-nationalist trumpish shit.

[TimeSeeker]

A liberal, peaceful and safe (in all aspects of life, including welfare) society should become the standard of the world. Instead, most of the world is either in war, under authoritarian rule, over-populated/crowded or under pressure from other sources of infectious authoritarian pro-war anti-peace anti-welfare pro-nationalist trumpish shit.

So a utopian world is NOT over-populated. I would like to hear how you solve THAT problem in a world where everybody is dumb and lazy

[philosopher]

A liberal, peaceful and safe (in all aspects of life, including welfare) society should become the standard of the world. Instead, most of the world is either in war, under authoritarian rule, over-populated/crowded or under pressure from other sources of infectious authoritarian pro-war anti-peace anti-welfare pro-nationalist trumpish shit.

So a utopian world is NOT over-populated. I would like to hear how you solve THAT problem in a world where everybody is dumb and lazy

Stop making any more humans!

For ever 1 death (death comes to all, even in utopia) human population is allowed to increase by 1.

Get equal to or below this rate, and the over-population will be solved.

The thing is, in most of the westernized cultures, birthrate is declining. In third-world countries, birth rates are skyrocketing.

Its the third world countries which has a problem and they should simply STOP acting like retards and start westernization!

[Impenitent]

the human population is allowed...

so much for subjectivity...

you will obey

-Imp

[TimeSeeker]

Stop making any more humans!

For ever 1 death (death comes to all, even in utopia) human population is allowed to increase by 1.

Get equal to or below this rate, and the over-population will be solved.

The thing is, in most of the westernized cultures, birthrate is declining. In third-world countries, birth rates are skyrocketing.

Its the third world countries which has a problem and they should simply STOP acting like retards and start westernization!

Naturally. That is the theory. How do you propose it be put into practice? This "westernization of the 3rd world".

[philosopher]

Stop making any more humans!

For ever 1 death (death comes to all, even in utopia) human population is allowed to increase by 1.

Get equal to or below this rate, and the over-population will be solved.

The thing is, in most of the westernized cultures, birthrate is declining. In third-world countries, birth rates are skyrocketing.

Its the third world countries which has a problem and they should simply STOP acting like retards and start westernization!

Naturally. That is the theory. How do you propose it be put into practice? This "westernization of the 3rd world".

Currently, development aid is given by westernized countries to third world countries - regardless of their political and economic systems.

This means that countries and cultures with no intention what-so-ever of becoming westernized, can get money and other aid from us, without obeying the western way of doing things.

I say: It is our money. We, in the westernized world are paying taxes and give them to the the third world countries, like many african nations.

The least we should expect of them is to require these african or other non-western countries to adopt western liberal democracy, human rights (as we know them in the westernized world) and freedom of speech (as we know it in the westernized world). It also means we should require of them to abolish censorship on youtube and google.

If they refuse, cut their development aid by 100 %.

The most idiotic thing is that the WEST gave development aid to china, without pressure for reforms on human rights and westernization.

Now, China is threatening us, because we gave them aid to develop their economy. The wise thing is to only give development aid with special requirements, that is de-facto colonization. This is what China does, although they are demanding chinese rights and standards in through their development aid.

I hate our politicians. They refuse to take care of the WESTERN cultures and our rights and priorities!