|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
EvC Forum active members: 65 (9164 total) |
| |
ChatGPT | |
Total: 916,918 Year: 4,175/9,624 Month: 1,046/974 Week: 5/368 Day: 5/11 Hour: 0/2 |
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Spiritual vs. physical | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
John Inactive Member |
quote: Love and friendship are spiritual? This is assumption and I disagree. Besides which, in my experience the more spiritual a person believes themself to be the less loving and friendly they become. I much prefer material and hedonistic-- less pretension. ------------------http://www.hells-handmaiden.com
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
John Inactive Member |
quote: I said nothing about buying anything. Nor did I say anyything about pleasure being more important than love/friendship/relationships. I do believe that there is nothing abstract about love or relationships. Such things are also not driven purely by pleasure--- o' that they were!
quote: I do not believe that true idealized altruism exists at all within humanity. So this distinction just tells me that the 'spiritual' are decieving themselves. Why help others? God's good graces? Karma? Escaping the cycle of rebirth? Avoiding Hell? Hopin' to visit some houri in the afterlife? Doesn't really sound all that selfless to me. ------------------http://www.hells-handmaiden.com
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
John Inactive Member |
quote: No way man!!!!!
quote: I have no quarrel with partially altruistic behavior, or even behavior strongly weighted towards altruism; what I don't believe is that humans ever do things purely for the (perceived) good of others. An example, my mom would do anything in her power to save my life if I were in danger; and be happy about it. The emotion of happiness is an end in itself, even if only partial motivation for her actions.
quote: I know what you mean, but these things just don't strike me as being altruistic ultimately, but merely superficially. Basically, it boils down to survival of progeny. We call self-sacrifice 'altruism' in the 'higher' animals but what about ants? Is the fearless defense of the mound altruistic too, or just hardwired behavior? The survival of the queen is the survival of the worker's DNA, even if ten-thousand die to save her life. In primates the behavior is more complicated, but it still revolves around survival of progeny and hence, of your own DNA-- colloquially called "one's blood" or "family line" or "freakin' leeches" Humans mix in 'love' and 'compassion' but basically, it is the same old thing. With complex social interactions you may get several layers removed from direct defense of one's offspring. In some primates (most even), for example, paternity is often questionable, hence defending the whole group is defending one's offspring. ------------------http://www.hells-handmaiden.com
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
John Inactive Member |
quote: Ah yes, our furry cousins are great fun. ------------------http://www.hells-handmaiden.com
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
John Inactive Member |
quote: Seperate? We cannot even find the one of them. ------------------http://www.hells-handmaiden.com
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
John Inactive Member |
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Chara:
[B][QUOTE]Originally posted by John: Seperate? We cannot even find the one of them.[/B][/QUOTE] What? John, you're still looking for your physical body? [/B][/QUOTE] This is a substanceless reply. Surely you can do better? ------------------http://www.hells-handmaiden.com
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
John Inactive Member |
quote: Well, don't go away, just be sure to periodically post 'all of you are sooooo smart....!' ------------------http://www.hells-handmaiden.com
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
John Inactive Member |
quote: No it doesn't. It implies exactly what I said, that people don't do anything purely -- keyword-- for the good of another.
quote: Lessen the importance of the motive? What does that mean? The motive is the spark that lights the fire. Me thinks you are spkiking the brew with some value judgements.
quote: Ah, and now you've got it!!!! I am saying that this is a definite component of the hypothetical motivation to save my life.
quote: I see a conclusion here but no premises or argument. It just came out of nowhere.
quote: Really? Is altruism an all or nothing affair? Is it impossible to do something partially for the good of another?
quote: And you know this how? ------------------http://www.hells-handmaiden.com
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
John Inactive Member |
[QUOTE]Originally posted by forgiven:
[B] quote: Notice how you changed the focus and thereby distorted what I said. I said 'purely' you said 'ever' See the difference? People do things for the good of others all the time, but not ever solely for that reason, as far as I can tell.
quote: Happy is a value judgement?
quote: Describe to me a situation in which the actor gets no form of reward or in which the actor is not avoiding a negative. I cannot think of such a situation.
quote: Read through the whole thread. You've jumped in at the tail end.
quote: altruism: willingness to do things which benefit other people. Cambridge International Dictionary. Let me rephrase so that you don't misunderstand. Why do you insist that altruism is an all or nothing affair? Please, no more sophomoric dodges. And just for clarity, what I maintain is that no one does anythign for purely altruistic reasons. And for even more clarity, people often have multiple motives for an action. Some of those motives may well be truly altruistic. Most of that collection of motives may be altruistic, but not all of them, but cause we humans have this peculiar ability to predict the outcome of events and from that prediction expect to be happy, sad, or some mix of the two. It is called being self aware. The predictions do not have to be accurate, nor the expectations correct, but they are a factor. What you seem to be doing is choosing the altruistic reason(s) and rejecting the others.
quote: If I said that you put the key in the ignition because you wanted the car to start, am I confusing the end result with the motive? We know with reasonable certainty how we are going to feel should certain events come to pass. How can this not be a factor?
quote: Why? Serious question. Why? What are your motivations for such action?
quote: Now that you have happily beat up that straw man... You know what you'd do if your wife/sister/mother/girlfriend were in danger, yes? Why? You have already thought about it. The analysis happens over weeks, years and decades, not the microseconds available in an emergency. ------------------http://www.hells-handmaiden.com
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
John Inactive Member |
quote: Geez... you are dense.
quote: This is not what I said. This is your inference, not mine. And I have explained this several times.
[quote][b]now john, you didn't give the context of my statement... you accused me of making a value judgement when discussing a motive for altruistic behavior... you had previously stated as a possible motive the happiness of your mother... if my motive was a value judgement, so was yours... hence the above...
[quote][b] From your post #29:quote: The value judgement comment was directed at the phrase 'lessen the improtance of the motive' This is much different from saying my mom will be happy.
quote: Did the person act altruistically? What reason was the actual motivation? None of them taken alone. The motive is the gestalt. The whole irritatingly complex web of reasons.
quote: And you do not consider the consequences of your actions? These considerations do not play a role in you decision making process? You seem to be claiming that they do not.
quote: I did not say it followed from the effects of the action. I said that the expectations of the effects are factors in the equation.
quote: It IS THE DISCUSSION, not merely a factor.
quote: You didn't answer the question.
quote: Well, if you don't care please leave me to someone who DOES care.
quote: There you go beating up that straw man again. The introduction of the specifics is misleading. Would you help a stranger? Yes or no? And you know this without knowing the specifics of the case don't you? ------------------http://www.hells-handmaiden.com
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
John Inactive Member |
quote: I think you are largely correct. There a big element of semantics in the debate.
quote: Is there any other way to determine altruism?
quote: Here is the clincher. Altruism is reflexive. It is tied to a conscious doer, otherwise any lucky break would be an altruistic act on the part of the universe. I suppose stranger things have been proposed but I don't think Forgiven is going that direction. In other words, how do you determine if it was done 'for the good of others' if you cannot consider motive? could tru to kill the pope and accidentally kill a five year old kid who would have grown up to nuke NYC. This, if motive is not considered, would be an altruistic act. ------------------http://www.hells-handmaiden.com
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
John Inactive Member |
quote: You consistently and stubbornly neglect the part about 'attitude'
quote: You are correct. The discussion is about whethe there is a such thing as altruism. If you consider the discussion to be useless, drop it.
quote: You gloss over the analysis of selfless. By DEFINITION, it concerns motivation.
quote: See.... easy when you define all the terms to suit your ends and gloss over the messy bits.
quote: The discussion is largely ABOUT the definition of terms, specifically the term 'altruism' It is about the definition of terms, mind you, in a deeper sense than that of colloquial English. What you've done is defined the words and claimed victory. That is ridiculous.
quote: That's funny coming from someone who thinks a definition is an argument. ------------------http://www.hells-handmaiden.com
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
John Inactive Member |
quote: Yes, and a huge source of confusion as well. That is why I can be so irritatingly picky.
quote: Agreed. Again, this is precisely why I am so picky about it.
quote: These words you speak are true, but does that justify the slop? I don't think so. Communication is more like poetry than anything else. Language isn't precise. There is a lot of metaphor, innuendo, analogy, whatever. I don't know of any way around this. Even mathematical logic, which eliminates the problem in the abstract, does not eliminate the problem-- need to define terms-- when making a practical argument. The trick is to not think in terms of the method of communication. In other words, the trick is to not confuse yourself with language. If you think about it, much of the field of informal logic is devoted to identifing when this is happening. Take the falacy of equivocation as an example. This, I think, is precisely what forgiven has been doing.
quote: I don't. So watch it buck-o! ------------------
No webpage found at provided URL: www.hells-handmaiden.com
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024