|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Do feelings count? | |||||||||||||||||||||||
Silent H Member (Idle past 5839 days) Posts: 7405 From: satellite of love Joined: |
my ire when witnessing deliberate cruelty--that it makes me think that there is something intrinsic to the act of cruelty itself that I am recognizing objectively.
You may be recognizing an intrinsic quality of an act, that being its cruelty. The rest is recognizing your place in relation to cruelty. Again I would say you are recognizing the objective fact that, you are opposed to it. That someone is doing it, sort of shows that your feelings are not representative of an objective assessment regarding a quality of cruelty. Some people apparently like it. Thankfully most people do find most forms of cruelty odious, though that usually depends on who its being done to. Most people seem to make exceptions which allow for cruelty to be used against someone. So I am in a way backing Faith's statement regarding a common feeling about it, though one may find many loopholes where it is alright. Can you think of someone you'd enjoy seeing tortured, or not care if they were? holmes "What you need is sustained outrage...there's far too much unthinking respect given to authority." (M.Ivins)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Faith  Suspended Member (Idle past 1464 days) Posts: 35298 From: Nevada, USA Joined: |
Can you think of someone you'd enjoy seeing tortured, or not care if they were? I've hated some people that much, to THINK I'd enjoy seeing them tortured, but in reality if I were to witness it actually happening, I don't think I could stand it. Those who can witness such a thing either with pleasure or just with indifference, are very hard to understand. It is possible that I could tolerate quite well, possibly even enjoy, the torture of someone who had committed torture himself I suppose, but even then I think I'd prefer instantaneous capital punishment. I have nothing against a firing squad myself though. Or hanging. Not into the niceties of avoiding the psychological pain of anticipation. ABE: Perhaps the example of feelings about cruelty suggests that the real topic here is justice, that all morality is about justice ultimately, and that justice is always flawed. This message has been edited by Faith, 03-05-2006 02:39 PM
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
robinrohan Inactive Member |
Thankfully most people do find most forms of cruelty odious That "thankfully" suggests some kind of objective standard.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
rgb Inactive Member |
robinhood...rohan
quote:Our feelings are often untrustworthy. Humans are illogical beings by default and having feelings during an act of decision making, especially in a very limited time frame, is like trying to toss a bucket of liquid into fire not knowing what the liquid is. It could be water or it could be some kind of flammable chemical. quote:Give me an example and we can go from there. quote:I'm not sure I understand your question, if there is one. Yes, feelings affect how people decide on moral issues. But since, as I stated before, decision making based on feelings is like tossing an unknown liquid into fire with the hope of retarding the fire from spreading, it is never objective. Does this mean that moral judgements cannot be objective? My gut instinct tells me to wait on that one.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Silent H Member (Idle past 5839 days) Posts: 7405 From: satellite of love Joined: |
That "thankfully" suggests some kind of objective standard.
Not a standard, but two truths. I do not like cruelty, and I am glad not to be facing a world that supports a practice I do not like. Some may enjoy it and think "unfortunately" most people are not appreciative of cruelty. Certainly the Abu Ghraib affair, the recent Iraqi secret death squads, the unnecessary beating by British soldiers, and the original torture tactics of Saddam's troops (ironically which all the former mentioned troops were supposed to replace and not be cruel), shows somewhat that cruelty can and does get enjoyed. Most particularly where there is a great difference in power. In the face of pressures against regular sex S&M is rising as fashionable. Heck S&M dominatrix can be paid to inflict extreme cruelty completely legally, but if that same woman gave even a bit of overt sexual pleasure she would be arrested within the US. We can even let kids see and buy images of graphic torture. Adults may even be able to do that with kids (spanking isn't illegal to be sure). But pleasure is most definitely out. I said thankfully most people find most forms of cruelty odious. As far as I can tell the world is changing and that might not be the case within 20 years or so. holmes "What you need is sustained outrage...there's far too much unthinking respect given to authority." (M.Ivins)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
robinrohan Inactive Member |
I'm not sure I understand your question, if there is one. If one has a very intense moral feeling, such as an abhorrence of cruelty, is this an indication that cruelty is evil?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
nator Member (Idle past 2190 days) Posts: 12961 From: Ann Arbor Joined: |
quote: Ick. Now, I think THAT'S an example of someone not minding someone else being treated cruelly. Psychological cruelty is still cruelty.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
JavaMan Member (Idle past 2339 days) Posts: 475 From: York, England Joined: |
But my feelings are so strong about certain matters--for example, my ire when witnessing deliberate cruelty--that it makes me think that there is something intrinsic to the act of cruelty itself that I am recognizing objectively. Anyone else feel this way? Of course. Someone who didn't feel that way we would consider a sociopath. The utilitarian position on this is that the feelings associated with morality are so strong because what morality is dealing with is your most fundamental sense of security. We have moral rules to protect us against the actions of others: 'thou shalt not kill' to ensure that we don't have to spend all our time worrying about being murdered; 'thou shalt not steal' so we don't have to protect our property all the time. Your feeling of anger when you see an act of cruelty is a pretty impressive sense of empathy when you think about it. You're seeing the person or animal being mistreated as something like you, something that feels just the same as you would under the same circumstances. So, in a sense, the anger you feel has a very personal root - it's just the same anger you would feel if you were the thing being mistreated. It's just this ability to empathise with another that a sociopath is incapable of. A sociopath, for whatever reason, has never learned that social skill of extending his own self-interest to the interests of others. The true mystery of the world is the visible, not the invisible
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Silent H Member (Idle past 5839 days) Posts: 7405 From: satellite of love Joined: |
Someone who didn't feel that way we would consider a sociopath.
That's not true at all. Someone who did not feel that way towards those most believe should not be treated that way would be considered sociopaths. Cruelty is most certainly allowed against some group, anywhere you go. Indeed sympathy or empathy for the out group could itself be considered a form of mental disorder. holmes "What you need is sustained outrage...there's far too much unthinking respect given to authority." (M.Ivins)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
JavaMan Member (Idle past 2339 days) Posts: 475 From: York, England Joined: |
Some may enjoy it and think "unfortunately" most people are not appreciative of cruelty. Certainly the Abu Ghraib affair, the recent Iraqi secret death squads, the unnecessary beating by British soldiers, and the original torture tactics of Saddam's troops (ironically which all the former mentioned troops were supposed to replace and not be cruel), shows somewhat that cruelty can and does get enjoyed. Most particularly where there is a great difference in power. I think there's a part of all of us that enjoys exercising power over others. What stops us from being cruel generally is the ability to empathise with others, the ability to put ourselves in their position. In some people this ability seems to be lacking; in others, the ability to empathise doesn't extend outside a certain group, which is how you get the apparent paradox of apparently decent and law-abiding people acting in such dreadful ways. The true mystery of the world is the visible, not the invisible
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
JavaMan Member (Idle past 2339 days) Posts: 475 From: York, England Joined: |
That's not true at all. Someone who did not feel that way towards those most believe should not be treated that way would be considered sociopaths. Cruelty is most certainly allowed against some group, anywhere you go. Indeed sympathy or empathy for the out group could itself be considered a form of mental disorder. I agree. In my post to robinrohan, I was making the assumption that all of us were part of the in group. The true mystery of the world is the visible, not the invisible
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Hangdawg13 Member (Idle past 771 days) Posts: 1189 From: Texas Joined: |
Hi Robin,
But my feelings are so strong about certain matters--for example, my ire when witnessing deliberate cruelty--that it makes me think that there is something intrinsic to the act of cruelty itself that I am recognizing objectively. Anyone else feel this way? Yep. Feelings are all we have to go on. I feel certain things are wrong just as strongly as I can feel the bark on a tree. Since I can keep feeling the trees just as well as the right and wrong, I believe both exist objectively. Like it has been said before, we can't have a worldview based on pure logic since logic has to have founding assumptions. This has led some to be existentialists rejecting all logic and merely living for the moment, since that is all that can be known. However, my thinking goes something like this. My subjective experience is not pure freedom. There are limitations to what I can do and consequences (feelings) for what I do. Therefore, these limitations and consequences must exist in some form as a truth beyond me since I cannot change them. Since I keep experiencing the same patterns over and over, I might as well accept them as truth. This is a leap of faith, but I must take it otherwise I'm stuck inside myself with no ability to reason, project my mind, or be anything beyond an animal. So yeah... feelings count.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Silent H Member (Idle past 5839 days) Posts: 7405 From: satellite of love Joined: |
Since I can keep feeling the trees just as well as the right and wrong, I believe both exist objectively. But the tree is external and others can feel as well, while the moral feelings are internal and not accessible by others. How do you explain that others cannot feel the same moral "bark" that you do, and indeed you cannot feel the same that they do? holmes "What you need is sustained outrage...there's far too much unthinking respect given to authority." (M.Ivins)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
robinrohan Inactive Member |
But the tree is external and others can feel as well, while the moral feelings are internal and not accessible by others. One might argue that most people have some similar feelings--such as ire when witnessing cruelty--which would suggest that their feelings are responding to something objective. A few who do not have such feelings might be explained as morally coarse. That wouldn't hurt the argument.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Silent H Member (Idle past 5839 days) Posts: 7405 From: satellite of love Joined: |
most people have some similar feelings--such as ire when witnessing cruelty--which would suggest that their feelings are responding to something objective.
Two problematic exceptions. First, as I have pointed out most people allow for cruelty to some class of individuals (which usually vary between cultures). Second, there have been some cultures where cruelty was not considered odious. Thus there is no such thing as a common focus of disgust with regard to cruelty, neither the action nor the target of the action. Where then is the objective entity? holmes "What you need is sustained outrage...there's far too much unthinking respect given to authority." (M.Ivins)
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024