Atla wrote: ↑Sat Feb 24, 2024 3:07 am
People have different personality types, let's say there are thousands of personality types that can be categorized in many ways. They come with different preferences for different values. (I for example can think of roughly 1000-100000 personality type combinations before even considering the zeitgeist, the social and philosophical environment, the personal upbringing, life events and world events etc. so the "external" factors.) My assumption is that you don't see this part very well as you've lived your entire life as an unaware and undiagnosed autistic, or something similar, or you're just roleplaying one, so you kinda see people as blank slates basically just shaped by the environment. Which would be a major factor on how you personally form your values, a factor that's non-existent for most people.
So overall we have to consider like say 20-50 different factors at the same time when it comes to understanding how people end up with their values. We can try to investigate them one by one but they also tend to be interrelated. The topic is too complex to investigate it with too much success, and it's mostly pointless to focus on things like free will/determinism.
Personalities, however, are often no less intertwined in that enormously complex intermingling of genes and memes, nature and nurture. And in a world no less revolving around our childhood indoctrination and the particular world we were adventitiously "thrown" into at birth.
...I examine the manner in which I construe my own value judgments as the embodiment of dasein. The second pertaining specifically to abortion.
Okay, how are your own set of assumptions different?
If there are "20-50 different factors" that are relevant here, let's examine a few in terms of both "biological imperatives" and "deontology". Make an attempt to note how they are pertinent to your own life, your own personal experiences of note.
Also, to what extent are these personality factors far more embedded in genes instead of memes, in nature instead of nurture. After all, the more deeply embedded in genes the more "beyond your control" it becomes.
No offense but as a non-autistic, this is mostly gibberish to me. I can't analyze my values with such crude 1-dimensional verbal/thinking tools, or I don't even know how to express this. It's too vague and too restrictive at the same time. Don't really want to talk about myself anyway as I'm way outside the ordinary.
Dasein doesn't mean anything, unless it just means the personal sense of being. The topic of abortion doesn't interest me.
Maybe if you were to ask something more specific, I would know how to reply.
No problem. We can just move on to others.
Or, again, you can try to encompass your own values pertaining to a particular issue and particular set of circumstances. There, of course, we can be less vague regarding both 1] how we came to acquire our value judgments and 2] the extent to which we believe that our moral and political convictions are or are not the optimal frame of mind.
"Way outside the ordinary" doesn't bother me. I'm way, way, way outside of it myself. Instead, what tends to aggravate me more are those who simply will not bring their own theoretical assumptions down out of the philosophical clouds and at least make an effort given a particular context to compare and contrast their philosophy with mine.
Personalities, however, are often no less intertwined in that enormously complex intermingling of genes and memes, nature and nurture. And in a world no less revolving around our childhood indoctrination and the particular world we were adventitiously "thrown" into at birth.
...I examine the manner in which I construe my own value judgments as the embodiment of dasein. The second pertaining specifically to abortion.
Okay, how are your own set of assumptions different?
If there are "20-50 different factors" that are relevant here, let's examine a few in terms of both "biological imperatives" and "deontology". Make an attempt to note how they are pertinent to your own life, your own personal experiences of note.
Also, to what extent are these personality factors far more embedded in genes instead of memes, in nature instead of nurture. After all, the more deeply embedded in genes the more "beyond your control" it becomes.
No offense but as a non-autistic, this is mostly gibberish to me. I can't analyze my values with such crude 1-dimensional verbal/thinking tools, or I don't even know how to express this. It's too vague and too restrictive at the same time. Don't really want to talk about myself anyway as I'm way outside the ordinary.
Dasein doesn't mean anything, unless it just means the personal sense of being. The topic of abortion doesn't interest me.
Maybe if you were to ask something more specific, I would know how to reply.
No problem. We can just move on to others.
Or, again, you can try to encompass your own values pertaining to a particular issue and particular set of circumstances. There, of course, we can be less vague regarding both 1] how we came to acquire our value judgments and 2] the extent to which we believe that our moral and political convictions are or are not the optimal frame of mind.
"Way outside the ordinary" doesn't bother me. I'm way, way, way outside of it myself. Instead, what tends to aggravate me more are those who simply will not bring their own theoretical assumptions down out of the philosophical clouds and at least make an effort given a particular context to compare and contrast their philosophy with mine.
Atla wrote: ↑Sun Feb 25, 2024 9:10 pm
No offense but as a non-autistic, this is mostly gibberish to me. I can't analyze my values with such crude 1-dimensional verbal/thinking tools, or I don't even know how to express this. It's too vague and too restrictive at the same time. Don't really want to talk about myself anyway as I'm way outside the ordinary.
Dasein doesn't mean anything, unless it just means the personal sense of being. The topic of abortion doesn't interest me.
Maybe if you were to ask something more specific, I would know how to reply.
No problem. We can just move on to others.
Or, again, you can try to encompass your own values pertaining to a particular issue and particular set of circumstances. There, of course, we can be less vague regarding both 1] how we came to acquire our value judgments and 2] the extent to which we believe that our moral and political convictions are or are not the optimal frame of mind.
"Way outside the ordinary" doesn't bother me. I'm way, way, way outside of it myself. Instead, what tends to aggravate me more are those who simply will not bring their own theoretical assumptions down out of the philosophical clouds and at least make an effort given a particular context to compare and contrast their philosophy with mine.
Or, again, you can try to encompass your own values pertaining to a particular issue and particular set of circumstances. There, of course, we can be less vague regarding both 1] how we came to acquire our value judgments and 2] the extent to which we believe that our moral and political convictions are or are not the optimal frame of mind.
"Way outside the ordinary" doesn't bother me. I'm way, way, way outside of it myself. Instead, what tends to aggravate me more are those who simply will not bring their own theoretical assumptions down out of the philosophical clouds and at least make an effort given a particular context to compare and contrast their philosophy with mine.
I asked specifically if you [and others here] would be willing to come down out of the intellectual clouds with those like VA, and go over to the Applied Ethics board in order to discuss human ethics more along the lines of "for all practical purposes".
To wit:
Or, again, you can try to encompass your own values pertaining to a particular issue and particular set of circumstances. There, of course, we can be less vague regarding both 1] how we came to acquire our value judgments and 2] the extent to which we believe that our moral and political convictions are or are not the optimal frame of mind.
"Way outside the ordinary" doesn't bother me. I'm way, way, way outside of it myself. Instead, what tends to aggravate me more are those who simply will not bring their own theoretical assumptions down out of the philosophical clouds and at least make an effort given a particular context to compare and contrast their philosophy with mine.
Last chance or I am definitely moving on to others.
I asked specifically if you [and others here] would be willing to come down out of the intellectual clouds with those like VA, and go over to the Applied Ethics board in order to discuss human ethics more along the lines of "for all practical purposes".
To wit:
Or, again, you can try to encompass your own values pertaining to a particular issue and particular set of circumstances. There, of course, we can be less vague regarding both 1] how we came to acquire our value judgments and 2] the extent to which we believe that our moral and political convictions are or are not the optimal frame of mind.
"Way outside the ordinary" doesn't bother me. I'm way, way, way outside of it myself. Instead, what tends to aggravate me more are those who simply will not bring their own theoretical assumptions down out of the philosophical clouds and at least make an effort given a particular context to compare and contrast their philosophy with mine.
Last chance or I am definitely moving on to others.
Ask something specific, your format doesn't work for me.
Mr. Wiggle wrote: ↑Mon Feb 26, 2024 6:09 am
Again, ask something specific, wiggle.
I asked specifically if you [and others here] would be willing to come down out of the intellectual clouds with those like VA, and go over to the Applied Ethics board in order to discuss human ethics more along the lines of "for all practical purposes".
To wit:
Or, again, you can try to encompass your own values pertaining to a particular issue and particular set of circumstances. There, of course, we can be less vague regarding both 1] how we came to acquire our value judgments and 2] the extent to which we believe that our moral and political convictions are or are not the optimal frame of mind.
"Way outside the ordinary" doesn't bother me. I'm way, way, way outside of it myself. Instead, what tends to aggravate me more are those who simply will not bring their own theoretical assumptions down out of the philosophical clouds and at least make an effort given a particular context to compare and contrast their philosophy with mine.
Last chance or I am definitely moving on to others.
Ask something specific, your format doesn't work for me.
