Finally an honest comment! Thanks psk.

Few do know and therein is the rub. Knowing subjectivity *and*
objectivity is seldom the case. Only when how they differ and how they
are the same is known can the other questions be accurately addressed.

On Mar 22, 7:53 am, "pol.science kid" <[email protected]> wrote:
> youre right darkwater.. we can engage in great complex discussions
> about morals and ethics.. but wat i gather from my infantile brain is
> that these things are really subjective and context specific.. not
> really universal....wat is morally right for you aint morally right
> for me.. its about conditioning i guess.. and culture specific...or
> people specific... i dnt knw..
>
> On Mar 22, 4:34 am, DarkwaterBlight <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
>
> > Fair assesment! However, suppose the motive was merely the pursuit of
> > happiness which she is not finding with her husband. Likewise, she
> > makes the employee feel happy,to each other important and they can
> > identify each others qualities and accept each others shortcomings.
> > The question is of the moral and/or ethical ramifications.
>
> > On Mar 20, 7:55 am, "pol.science kid" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > youre right rigsy....shell ruin his life;-)
>
> > > On Sat, Mar 20, 2010 at 4:45 AM, rigsy03 <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > > The wife sounds like a predator and a saboteur. Run for your life!
>
> > > > On Mar 19, 12:58 pm, DarkwaterBlight <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > > > I apologize for the rhetoric, I am attempting to illustrate a point
> > > > > with this. Perhaps you see where I am going with this but
> > > > > participation from a few different avenues is valid to my point.
>
> > > > > On Mar 19, 12:30 pm, DarkwaterBlight <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > > > > Ok I'll make this less implicet by saying that she is ready to take
> > > > > > your "relationship" to another level and your are "emotionally"
> > > > > > attached to this woman. As it may be hypothetical please try to 
> > > > > > "wear
> > > > > > the shoe's" of the man in question.
>
> > > > > > On Mar 19, 12:17 pm, Lee <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > Is there a moral dilema in spending time with a woman whom I find
> > > > > > > attractive, and who is married to another?
>
> > > > > > > No sir there is not.  I find many people attractive, yet my 
> > > > > > > morality
> > > > > > > says that even if I were not married(I am) I would not hit upon a
> > > > > > > woman who is.  However I can clearly spend time with whomever I 
> > > > > > > wish
> > > > > > > to.
>
> > > > > > > To take your question in a differant direction, and to place 
> > > > > > > myself
> > > > in
> > > > > > > the 'shoes' of another, well I cannot do that.  As I have no idea 
> > > > > > > of
> > > > > > > the experiances that have caused their morality to develop and 
> > > > > > > thus
> > > > > > > have no clear idea of what that morality would be.
>
> > > > > > > On 19 Mar, 17:10, DarkwaterBlight <[email protected]> 
> > > > > > > wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > OK! So let's say Molly is correct in saying;
>
> > > > > > > > "technically speaking, in terms of language, morals and ethics 
> > > > > > > > are
> > > > > > > > synonymous, although they have been applied differently to
> > > > > > > > philosophies and theologies."> and since they can be applied
> > > > > > > > differently we shall apply them to a work place where they frown
> > > > upon
> > > > > > > > nepatism and relationships with clients. Your bosses wife is 
> > > > > > > > not a
> > > > > > > > client, nor is she an employee and you work closley with you 
> > > > > > > > boss.
> > > > > > > > Over the course of time you become close with his wife as well, 
> > > > > > > > who
> > > > > > > > happens to be very attractive and thinks the same of you. I 
> > > > > > > > light
> > > > of
> > > > > > > > this you reflect on your experiences concerning relationships 
> > > > > > > > and
> > > > > > > > decide that you enjoy the company of your bosses wife above
> > > > anything
> > > > > > > > you have expereienced. You also note that as far as the set of
> > > > ethical
> > > > > > > > values established at work, there is not an issue except for the
> > > > fact
> > > > > > > > that it's your bosses wife. Also noted is the fact that you are 
> > > > > > > > an
> > > > > > > > excellent employee and an asset to your organization. Let's say 
> > > > > > > > you
> > > > > > > > are both athiest. Is there a moral dillema? Or let's say you 
> > > > > > > > are a
> > > > > > > > theist that has been divorced. Have your morals changed?
>
> > > > > > > > On Mar 19, 9:36 am, Lee <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > > Heh Rigsy,
>
> > > > > > > > > Well that for sure is one persons version of possible future
> > > > events.
> > > > > > > > > Not mine, but there we go.
>
> > > > > > > > > Did I really say that morality is a personal decision?  You 
> > > > > > > > > know
> > > > I
> > > > > > > > > might have done so at that, that is not though what I really
> > > > mean.  A
> > > > > > > > > persons moral compass must originate from somewhere.  Like the
> > > > ethcial
> > > > > > > > > system of the sociaty they have been brought up in, like
> > > > overwhelming
> > > > > > > > > morality of the times they find them selves in, and any other
> > > > ideas
> > > > > > > > > they may formulate dependant upon thier own lifes experiances.
>
> > > > > > > > > So not really a choice as such, perhaps better described as a
> > > > personal
> > > > > > > > > outlook?
>
> > > > > > > > > On 19 Mar, 13:07, rigsy03 <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > > > If Morality is a personal decision rather than imposed by a
> > > > religion,
> > > > > > > > > > society/government or family/tribe, then it all boils down 
> > > > > > > > > > to
> > > > what you
> > > > > > > > > > can get away with, it seems to me. I have been thinking 
> > > > > > > > > > about
> > > > this and
> > > > > > > > > > trying to trace a line through four generations and here's
> > > > where I am
> > > > > > > > > > at: the Vatican/religion has lost its moral authority but so
> > > > have
> > > > > > > > > > governments and families. The public/mass media have 
> > > > > > > > > > emerged as
> > > > the
> > > > > > > > > > judge and jury of people, places and things leading to a 
> > > > > > > > > > herd
> > > > > > > > > > acceptance of what is acceptable. You can trace the steady
> > > > influence
> > > > > > > > > > through late night comic hosts, Oprah, Phil, the reality 
> > > > > > > > > > shows,
> > > > > > > > > > program content, print media, tech hysteria and so on.It's
> > > > pretty much
> > > > > > > > > > complete in the West and will struggle in the Muslim world 
> > > > > > > > > > and
> > > > China
> > > > > > > > > > plus geographical relatives but there too, central authority
> > > > will
> > > > > > > > > > collapse. The basic concepts of the Good, human happiness, 
> > > > > > > > > > etc-
> > > > all
> > > > > > > > > > categories- will adapt and change as well. Money, power, 
> > > > > > > > > > youth,
> > > > > > > > > > popularity and dozens of other attributes will replace the
> > > > dusty
> > > > > > > > > > virtues and duties of the past. And yes, I also expect to 
> > > > > > > > > > see
> > > > the
> > > > > > > > > > infamous "death panels". :-)
>
> > > > > > > > > > On Mar 18, 4:34 am, Lee <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > > > > I'll say it agian Slip so we are all clear of what I mean
> > > > when I use
> > > > > > > > > > > the word Moral.  Morlaity is your personal definition of 
> > > > > > > > > > > what
> > > > is right
> > > > > > > > > > > or wrong.  So you and I can share the same ethical system 
> > > > > > > > > > > but
> > > > still
> > > > > > > > > > > have a differing morality.
>
> > > > > > > > > > > So yes ALL morality is subjective.
>
> > > > > > > > > > > On 16 Mar, 22:52, Slip Disc <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > > > > > Ah! But isn't that the key and part of your own
> > > > acknowledgment, that
> > > > > > > > > > > > establishing a moral decision as right or wrong is the
> > > > problem.  By
> > > > > > > > > > > > what standard do we decide what is morally incorrect.
> > > > Again as I
> > > > > > > > > > > > stated in my first post; morality has a broad scope
> > > > considering much
> > > > > > > > > > > > of it is defined by society/culture/religion.   
> > > > > > > > > > > > Emotional
> > > > attachment
> > > > > > > > > > > > to a moral dilemma would have to be based on the defined
> > > > moral
> > > > > > > > > > > > incident specific to a circumstance.  Perhaps there are
> > > > moral
> > > > > > > > > > > > decisions that do not evoke emotional interplay while
> > > > others create
> > > > > > > > > > > > emotional hysteria that is divisive and counter 
> > > > > > > > > > > > productive.
> > > >   We can
> > > > > > > > > > > > only find answers by pointing to specific instances of
> > > > moral dilemma
> > > > > > > > > > > > and even then it is highly subjective, individually and
> > > > culturally.
> > > > > > > > > > > > Is marriage to one's cousin immoral?  We can see that
> > > > emotions, ie;
> > > > > > > > > > > > love, would play a strong part in making that decision 
> > > > > > > > > > > > but
> > > > then who
> > > > > > > > > > > > decides if it is immoral, the parents, the church, the
> > > > neighbors, the
> > > > > > > > > > > > culture etc?
>
> > > > > > > > > > > > On Mar 16, 12:11 pm, Lee <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > Yes that does and my thanks for it Slip.
>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > I disagree though.  With emotions attached to moral
> > > > deciscions do you
> > > > > > > > > > > > > not think the chances of makeing a moraly incorrect
> > > > desicion are
> > > > > > > > > > > > > hightend?
>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > On 16 Mar, 14:20, 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,
>
> ...
>
> read more »- 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].
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/minds-eye?hl=en.

Reply via email to