As have many in the existence of mankind... On Tue, Mar 16, 2010 at 9:39 PM, archytas <[email protected]> wrote:
> As my invite came from Chris, I misread gravity for gravytrain. > > On 16 Mar, 23:01, gabbydott <[email protected]> wrote: > > Hey Slip, did you get an invite for gravity? I couldn't find your name > > on the list but then again I wouldn't know your name there. > > > > On 16 Mrz., 15:20, Slip Disc <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > Yes emotions should play a part in a moral dilemma. Emotions play a > > > part in almost everything we do, not to be construed as a fervent > > > emotion all the time, but any level, from non-emotion to radical and > > > all in between. In a moral dilemma emotions may vacillate while one > > > is trying to assess a situation, however in my 3 examples there is no > > > need for assessment, I would immediately get my weapon and kill. The > > > danger is obvious from the beginning, at the entry into the house. > > > I think emotions have their part in the formation of morals and > > > ethics. People probably establish their own morality based on their > > > own emotions. Therefore, if emotion is an integral part of any > > > morality, it should be there in the endeavor to negotiate the dilemma > > > and bring it to a conclusion. Hope that answers your question. > > > > > On Mar 15, 11:37 am, Lee <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > So despite you asuranes that this is not an emotional response, I > > > > think it is so. > > > > > > I would love to be able to say I would B, but who knows what would > > > > actualy happen. Just so that we are clear though. I hold no ideas > > > > about the sancticty of human life, I certianly do not belive in such > a > > > > thing, and it is purel;y moral reasons I would like to say B and also > > > > has nowt to do with my own spirtuality. > > > > > > The question though was not are their emotions involed in moral > > > > dilemers, it is clear that there are, but should there be? > > > > > > You have not really answered this Slip, wanna have a go at doing so? > > > > > > On 15 Mar, 15:33, Slip Disc <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > We also had other discussions on the death penalty, a much divisive > > > > > topic where we might as well toss Religion in with the Moral and > > > > > Ethical issues. > > > > > > > A man comes home and finds two of his children beheaded and beaten, > > > > > blood everywhere, he goes into the closet and gets his shotgun and > > > > > slowly walks up the stairs, where at the top he finds his wife > > > > > brutally murdered as well. He hears moaning and sobbing coming > from > > > > > the bedroom and as he walks over he finds a strange man raping his > > > > > teenage daughter. The man sees him and jumps off the bed, puts his > > > > > hands up and says he's sorry, that he doesn't know what came over > him > > > > > and says please don't kill me. > > > > > > > What to do Lee; > > > > > > > (A) Tell the stranger that you are going to get help for him to see > if > > > > > he can be rehabilitated. > > > > > > > (B) Explain that because of your moral and ethical values and your > > > > > religious beliefs you can't kill him but you will make sure that > > > > > instead he gets food and shelter and medical care for the rest of > his > > > > > life in an institution. > > > > > > > (C) BLAM BLAM Death Penalty immediately issued while ridding the > > > > > world of a demented piece of garbage who most likely wouldn't be > > > > > rehabilitated anyway and if escaped would go out and kill and rape > > > > > some more victims. Recidivism rates speak for themselves. > > > > > > > I'd go with (C) and with a clear conscience. This nonsense about a > > > > > moral social conscience in regards to murderers is IMO, faulted > > > > > reasoning. We've better things to do with our society than support > > > > > murdering mental defectives. What are we trying to prove? Do we > pat > > > > > ourselves on the back and claim we are a more advanced society > because > > > > > we don't even kill those who kill us? Are we more religiously > > > > > righteous and heavenly bound? Should we pamper Pit Bulls as well > > > > > after they inflict a lethal attack on an innocent child? > > > > > Oh and do you think for one minute that I would let my daughter > have a > > > > > baby if she became pregnant from an incident like that? I'd > perform > > > > > the abortion myself if I had to. > > > > > > > US Prisons house over 2 million inmates, according to outdated > sources > > > > > and out of that population thousands are people I wouldn't spend 2 > > > > > seconds thinking about other than their riddance. What is > > > > > rehabilitation for a "lifer", rehabilitation for "what?". > > > > > > > As of August 2009 the total prison population of the UK stood at > > > > > 93,574. That is a lot considering the size of the UK. > > > > > > > We need to stop raising and nurturing criminals. China might have > had > > > > > it right, chop their heads off in the public square, let the people > > > > > see that crime really doesn't pay. I'd be the first to buy a > ticket > > > > > to the show, let the heads roll. > > > > > > > BTW, I'm not emotion about this, I'm laughing while typing. lol > > > > > > > On Mar 15, 7:13 am, Lee <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > > Heheh very strange what we all take as common knowldge isn't it. > > > > > > > > I had always understood the diffrance between morality and ethics > to > > > > > > be this. Morality is one personal definition on what is good or > bad. > > > > > > Ethics is concerened with doing that which is right. So one > > > > > > descriptive and the other more concerned with the doing, or > actions. > > > > > > > > I had always had this in mind when talking about morality here. > > > > > > However a little while back, and by that I mean less than a year. > We > > > > > > had another debate about morality, some questions where asked > abotu > > > > > > what I mean when I say 'Moral' and when I say 'Ethical', it > seemed > > > > > > that my ideas where just a little out and due to the helpfull > people > > > > > > here I re thought teh definitions that i had always belived where > > > > > > correct. That is: > > > > > > > > Morality is still ones personal opinion on what is good and what > is > > > > > > bad, but Ethics deals with a more social morality. That is you > and I > > > > > > could have differing ideas due to our morality, but our ethics > come > > > > > > fro the society or other groupings we find ourselves in. > > > > > > > > Now you say that this is also wrong? Hhahah gees, a little help > > > > > > anybody? > > > > > > > > On 15 Mar, 11:54, rigsy03 <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > I disagree. Morality is not a personal decision but a communal > one and > > > > > > > is not innate but taught by the family and society. Morals are > loose > > > > > > > enough to change according to current trends and therefore not > fixed- > > > > > > > they are a cousin to "situation ethics". > > > > > > > > > On Mar 15, 6:31 am, Lee <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > I think that is wrong mate. Morality is no more than ones > personal > > > > > > > > definition of what is right and what is wrong. > > > > > > > > > > On 14 Mar, 06:27, fiddler <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > And no: morals are not based on reason, ethics are based on > reason. > > > > > > > > > Morals are the "spiritual " measure of right and wrong and > ethics are > > > > > > > > > the intellectual/societal force that makes living in > groups possible. > > > > > > > > > > > Ethics are what we get when we apply logic and concern for > others to > > > > > > > > > ourselves. Morals come from illiterate bronze and iron age > paedophiles > > > > > > > > > and misogynists in silly little collections of quaint > tribal > > > > > > > > > stories. > > > > > > > > > > > On Mar 13, 4:32 pm, Staples <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Fiddler: > > > > > > > > > > > > "Morals are far too fluid...to be a guide in any dilemma; > > > > > > > > > > reason...provides the ability to make decisions." > > > > > > > > > > > > Assuming you actually meant this, you implied that: > > > > > > > > > > > > 1. Morals are not a constant. > > > > > > > > > > 2. Morals are not based on reason. > > > > > > > > > > > > How could anyone live with a system of morality like that > - one > > > > > > > > > > divorced from rationality and is "fluid", e.g., changes > from day to > > > > > > > > > > day - on what basis? Irrationality? I suppose so.- Hide > quoted text - > > > > > > > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > > > > > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > > > > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > > > > > > - Show quoted text - > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > ""Minds Eye"" group. > To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > [email protected]<minds-eye%[email protected]> > . > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/minds-eye?hl=en. > > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups ""Minds Eye"" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/minds-eye?hl=en.
