On 8/30/2012 11:01 AM, Alberto G. Corona wrote:
I think that there are many tries to separate moral from ethics: indiividual versus social, innate versus cultural, emotional versus rational etc. The whole point is to obviate the m*** world as much as we can, under the impression that moral is subjective and not objetive, or more precisely that there is no moral that can be objective. An there is such crap as the separation of facts and values (as if values (and in particular universal values) where not social facts).

That some societies value the education of women and some value their ignorance are both certainly facts.


Well, this is a more effect of positivism which is deeply flawed in theoretical and practical terms. It is a consequence also of modern gnosticism, called progressivism of which positivism is one of the phases, that believes possible in a certain future a society with a perfect harmony of individual desires and social needs, making moral unnecessary. They also believe that the current social reality is a demiurgic creation of repressive social forces that hinder an era of Wisdom and Peace....

But this is impossible. Not only it is against judeochristian traditions, but against the theorical basis of the progressive ideology: the theory of evolution (natural selection). Men are social individuals and therefore moral is deep in his hardwired (instintive) nature, as multilevel selection theory can demonstrate.

All the above is an example of using 'moral' where 'ethics' would be more accurate. Morals (standards of self-evaluations) are subjective even though some of them are hardwired by evolution, ethics are intersubjective (standards of public, social evaluation) even though some of them are selected by cultural evolution.

I would ask Alberto how he defines "morals" and "ethics". Are they rules? feelings? opinions? what?

The point is not to separate them, in the sense of eliminating overlap, but to recognize that ethics and morals are not coextensive and it is often useful to distinguish them. Many people believe it is immoral not to worship God in church on Sunday - and as an evaluation of their own behavoir that's fine. But that doesn't mean it is unethical to think differently or that public policy should force or encourage church attendance (as it did in earlier times).

Brent


So let´s call moral what is: moral.

2012/8/30 Bruno Marchal <marc...@ulb.ac.be <mailto:marc...@ulb.ac.be>>


    On 29 Aug 2012, at 22:30, meekerdb wrote:

    From experience I know people tend not to adopt it, but let me recommend a
    distinction.  Moral is what I expect of myself.  Ethics is what I do and 
what I
    hope other people will do in their interactions with other people.  They of 
course
    tend to overlap since I will be ashamed of myself if I cheat someone, so 
it's both
    immoral and unethical.  But they are not the same.  If I spent my time 
smoking pot
    and not working I'd be disappointed in myself, but it wouldn't be unethical.

    I'm not sure I understand. "not working" wouldn't be immoral either. 
Disappointing,
    yes, but immoral?

    BTW:
    I would not relate pot with not working. Some people don't work and smoke 
pot, and
    then blame pot for their non working, but some people smokes pot and work 
very well.
    The only researcher I knew smoking pot from early morning to evening, 
everyday,
    since hies early childhood, was the one who published the most, and get the 
most
    prestigious post in the US.

    As a math teacher, since I told students that blaming pot will not been 
allowed for
    justifying exam problems, some students realize that they were using pot to 
lie to
    themselves on their motivation for study. It is so easy.

    Likewise, if we were allowed to drive while being drunk, after a while the 
number of
    car accidents due to alcohol would probably diminish a lot, because the 
real culprit
    is not this product or that behavior, but irresponsibility, which is 
encouraged by
    treating adults like children. I think.

    Bruno



    On 8/29/2012 8:54 AM, Alberto G. Corona wrote:
    Not only to lie. In order  to commerce and in general to interact, we need 
to know
    what to expect from whom. and the other need to know what the others expect 
form
    me. So I have to reflect on myself in order to act in the enviromnent of 
the moral
    and material expectations that others have about me. This is the origin of
    reflective individuality, that is moral from the beginning..

    2012/8/29 meekerdb <meeke...@verizon.net <mailto:meeke...@verizon.net>>

        But Craig makes a point when he says computers only deal in words.  
That's why
        something having human like intelligence and consciousness must be a 
robot,
        something that can act wordlessly in it's environment.  Evolutionarily
        speaking, conscious narrative is an add-on on top of subconscious 
thought
        which is responsible for almost everything we do.  Julian Jaynes 
theorized
        that humans did not become conscious in the modern sense until they 
engaged in
        inter-tribal commerce and it became important to learn to lie.

        Brent



-- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
    "Everything List" group.
    To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com
    <mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com>.
    To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
    everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
    <mailto:everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com>.
    For more options, visit this group at
    http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.

    http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/ <http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/%7Emarchal/>



-- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
    "Everything List" group.
    To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com
    <mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com>.
    To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
    everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
    <mailto:everything-list%2bunsubscr...@googlegroups.com>.
    For more options, visit this group at
    http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.


--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.

Reply via email to