3 of 4
3
Developing a moral code
Posted: 06 January 2017 08:37 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 31 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  4248
Joined  2014-06-20
DougC - 06 January 2017 02:09 AM

I’m guessing that society collapses when there are enough people who have lost the ability to detect homicidal psychopaths in their midst.

http://www.centerforinquiry.net/forums/viewthread/18689/

The recurring proposal of culling a great amount of the human population for the survival of the planet and our species, or even wiping ourselves out to save it. In short I would like to know, why not?

This “person” was advocating mass murder on a scale that would make the final solution look like a Saturday night drive by shooting and the thread went on for 12 pages and was never closed. And continues to argue that human life is meaningless.

What the hell do you have to do get banned here?

Mass murder—and I’m not so sure about that.

[ Edited: 06 January 2017 08:40 PM by LoisL ]
 Signature 

[color=red“Nothing is so good as it seems beforehand.”
― George Eliot, Silas Marner[/color]

Profile
 
 
Posted: 07 January 2017 06:28 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 32 ]
Administrator
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  15726
Joined  2006-02-14
LoisL - 06 January 2017 08:37 PM
DougC - 06 January 2017 02:09 AM

What the hell do you have to do get banned here?

Mass murder—and I’m not so sure about that.

Break the rules.

 Signature 

Doug

-:- -:—:- -:—:- -:—:- -:—:- -:—:-

El sueño de la razón produce monstruos

Profile
 
 
Posted: 07 January 2017 10:23 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 33 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  924
Joined  2016-01-24
dougsmith - 07 January 2017 06:28 AM
LoisL - 06 January 2017 08:37 PM
DougC - 06 January 2017 02:09 AM

What the hell do you have to do get banned here?

Mass murder—and I’m not so sure about that.

Break the rules.

So you don’t have a rule against advocating genocide here?

That’s exactly what Titanomachina - the username says it all, a relentless machine plowing through people who are at least attempting to discuss the human condition - did. And is now discussing how human life is a “curse” i.e. meaningless. Which is one of the first steps you take if you intend to get rid of any group of people. Dehumanize them, vilify them then eliminate them. We’ve seen this time and again in history and you’re allowing a person pretending to be a machine to do that here.

http://www.centerforinquiry.net/forums/viewthread/18689/

The recurring proposal of culling a great amount of the human population for the survival of the planet and our species, or even wiping ourselves out to save it. In short I would like to know, why not?

If the answer to why not is moral, then it’s not an answer.

I’m just wondering why not, because the counters to that are more convincing than the moral objection. 

I don’t think myself superior, but I just hate to accept that I have no good reason as to why not cull.

I have already established that morality isn’t a good reason to not consider a culling because morality is arbitrary.

There is no such thing as a “right to exist”. No one has a right to live. That just opinion.

Is called culling

1. No such thing as free will.

2. You still fail to give a reason as to why a culling wouldn’t work. I keep telling morality isn’t a reason to not do it. You keep using should and ought. Morality is a weak stance to argue from. I need an objective fact as to why not to do it (implying that doing so wouldn’t change anything). If you’re going to keep pushing frail morality then I’m going to have to believe that there is no reason to explore that option. You fear psychopaths because they show just how frail our established systems really are (like morality).

3. The proper term is culling. Genocide is the illogical emotional term people use out of fear.

And it just goes on from there for 12 pages.

Do something about this “person” pretending to be a machine posting here NOW if you want actual humans to participate in this forum.

[ Edited: 07 January 2017 10:38 AM by DougC ]
Profile
 
 
Posted: 07 January 2017 01:18 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 34 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  4248
Joined  2014-06-20
DarronS - 21 December 2016 07:20 PM

Read this thread that CC started in the Humanism forum. The talk and the linked article give some good information on how and why humans developed morals codes. Having widely agreed upon morals and values helps us survive. Whining about life having no meaning does not help us survive. Fortunately, nihilists rarely find girlfriends so don’t reproduce often. (That’s a joke.)

That’s a joke, son

I’m not so sure they’re not reproducing.

 Signature 

[color=red“Nothing is so good as it seems beforehand.”
― George Eliot, Silas Marner[/color]

Profile
 
 
Posted: 07 January 2017 01:36 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 35 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  924
Joined  2016-01-24
dougsmith - 07 January 2017 06:28 AM
LoisL - 06 January 2017 08:37 PM
DougC - 06 January 2017 02:09 AM

What the hell do you have to do get banned here?

Mass murder—and I’m not so sure about that.

Break the rules.

How about the point of CFI in the first place.

The mission of the Center for Inquiry is to foster a secular society based on science, reason, freedom of inquiry, and humanist values.

Explain to me how wanting to murder most or all other people - if this person truly believed people shouldn’t be here or that life was meaningless they’d commit suicide, what they’re saying is that none of the rest of us have any meaning to them or right to be here - or declaring life to be a curse and meaningless has any place here… at all.

If the rules here aren’t able to filter out the psychopaths and sociopaths who are in diametric opposition to the stated purpose of CFI then what’s the point in having it anyway. Any real discussion is going to implode as “people” like this obviously have no concept of reason, freedom and certainly human values.

If the person driving these discussions had their way there would be little or no human life on the planet. Just someone so fucked up they think they’re a machine.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 07 January 2017 04:17 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 36 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  951
Joined  2015-12-29

Seems you missed the most key point, freedom of INQUIRY.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 07 January 2017 04:43 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 37 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  924
Joined  2016-01-24
Titanomachina - 07 January 2017 04:17 PM

Seems you missed the most key point, freedom of INQUIRY.

In a humanist context you psychopath, not inquiring whether people would like to be executed by zyclon B or herded into a stadium en mass and napalmed.

If you’re unable to differentiate then you have no business at all posting here. If the moderators can’t tell the difference then they have no place running a website like this.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 07 January 2017 04:52 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 38 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  924
Joined  2016-01-24

“The mission of the Center for Inquiry is to foster a secular society based on science, reason, freedom of inquiry, and Humanist Values.”

It says no where there that, “if you’re a lunatic who thinks he’s a giant machine go ahead and post how human life is meaningless and all other HUMANS should be murdered in the largest genocide ever.”

If you’re so convinced that life is meaningless and not worth living then go ahead and act on that personally, stop advocating it for the rest of us…

Profile
 
 
Posted: 07 January 2017 05:22 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 39 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  924
Joined  2016-01-24

And to make it clear, this “person” wasn’t inquiring whether or not the genocide of most or all humans was acceptable in human terms - this is a humanist website, not a homicidal mechanist website - they was stating in their opinion that there was no reason to not engage in genocide on a global scale.

http://www.centerforinquiry.net/forums/viewthread/18689/

I don’t think myself superior, but I just hate to accept that I have no good reason as to why not cull.

You’d have to think you were a god to make that kind of assessment…

[ Edited: 07 January 2017 05:31 PM by DougC ]
Profile
 
 
Posted: 07 January 2017 05:30 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 40 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  924
Joined  2016-01-24

1. No such thing as free will.

How can you have free inquiry with no free will, this is just more denial of other’s humanity.

2. You still fail to give a reason as to why a culling wouldn’t work. I keep telling morality isn’t a reason to not do it. You keep using should and ought. Morality is a weak stance to argue from. I need an objective fact as to why not to do it (implying that doing so wouldn’t change anything). If you’re going to keep pushing frail morality then I’m going to have to believe that there is no reason to explore that option. You fear psychopaths because they show just how frail our established systems really are (like morality).

I’m a human, I live under moral codes evolved over millenia to allow us to live in complex and advanced societies. I don’t fear psychopaths, I’m damned determined to not let them destroy what value I have in my life and the value I see in others. How is this not an admission by this poster that they are in fact a psychopath and would as a consequence willingly engage in genocide with no feeling at all. Once again, the username Titanomachina is entirely appropriate.

3. The proper term is culling. Genocide is the illogical emotional term people use out of fear.

The proper term applied by humans for the mass murder of other humans is genocide not culling. We use it because the thought of being murdered by an unfeeling machine is terrifying to those of us who actually are human. It’s not a weakness.

I’m not saying I want to do it, you you aren’t providing any good evidence against it.

I’m pretty sure that anyone who states as adamantly they see no reason to not engage in mass murder and continues to post that human life is meaningless to them wouldn’t hesitate to engage in genocide if the opportunity presented itself.

As a human I’m not sharing a website that is supposed to be dedicated to exploring the human condition with a thing that if given a chance would end it permanently…

Profile
 
 
Posted: 07 January 2017 07:51 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 41 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  951
Joined  2015-12-29
DougC - 07 January 2017 05:30 PM

1. No such thing as free will.

How can you have free inquiry with no free will, this is just more denial of other’s humanity.

2. You still fail to give a reason as to why a culling wouldn’t work. I keep telling morality isn’t a reason to not do it. You keep using should and ought. Morality is a weak stance to argue from. I need an objective fact as to why not to do it (implying that doing so wouldn’t change anything). If you’re going to keep pushing frail morality then I’m going to have to believe that there is no reason to explore that option. You fear psychopaths because they show just how frail our established systems really are (like morality).

I’m a human, I live under moral codes evolved over millenia to allow us to live in complex and advanced societies. I don’t fear psychopaths, I’m damned determined to not let them destroy what value I have in my life and the value I see in others. How is this not an admission by this poster that they are in fact a psychopath and would as a consequence willingly engage in genocide with no feeling at all. Once again, the username Titanomachina is entirely appropriate.

3. The proper term is culling. Genocide is the illogical emotional term people use out of fear.

The proper term applied by humans for the mass murder of other humans is genocide not culling. We use it because the thought of being murdered by an unfeeling machine is terrifying to those of us who actually are human. It’s not a weakness.

I’m not saying I want to do it, you you aren’t providing any good evidence against it.

I’m pretty sure that anyone who states as adamantly they see no reason to not engage in mass murder and continues to post that human life is meaningless to them wouldn’t hesitate to engage in genocide if the opportunity presented itself.

As a human I’m not sharing a website that is supposed to be dedicated to exploring the human condition with a thing that if given a chance would end it permanently…

You are far too emotional to have a proper conversation with.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 09 April 2017 02:43 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 42 ]
Jr. Member
Rank
Total Posts:  10
Joined  2017-04-09

To be honest, I think that morality is mainly a concept that ‘we’ (the general public=most people) like to use on others and that we measure others with. It’s a kind of a weapon. Let me try to explain with an example. While we don’t want others to take advantage of certain situations, we ourselves would. If we got the chance to avoid paying taxes and 100% getting away with it, (almost) everyone would use it. At the same time, if others do that, we react with anger and call them ‘immoral’. The same is true with many other issues. That’s the reason why we have laws (prevent others from cheating), and at the same time try to get around them ourselves.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 09 April 2017 03:10 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 43 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  416
Joined  2016-10-10
Rutner - 09 April 2017 02:43 PM

To be honest, I think that morality is mainly a concept that ‘we’ (the general public=most people) like to use on others and that we measure others with. It’s a kind of a weapon. Let me try to explain with an example. While we don’t want others to take advantage of certain situations, we ourselves would. If we got the chance to avoid paying taxes and 100% getting away with it, (almost) everyone would use it. At the same time, if others do that, we react with anger and call them ‘immoral’. The same is true with many other issues. That’s the reason why we have laws (prevent others from cheating), and at the same time try to get around them ourselves.

Great post.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 10 April 2017 07:00 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 44 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  1307
Joined  2005-01-14
Rutner - 09 April 2017 02:43 PM

To be honest, I think that morality is mainly a concept that ‘we’ (the general public=most people) like to use on others and that we measure others with. It’s a kind of a weapon. Let me try to explain with an example. While we don’t want others to take advantage of certain situations, we ourselves would. If we got the chance to avoid paying taxes and 100% getting away with it, (almost) everyone would use it. At the same time, if others do that, we react with anger and call them ‘immoral’. The same is true with many other issues. That’s the reason why we have laws (prevent others from cheating), and at the same time try to get around them ourselves.

I strongly disagree.  In the first case, once again you’re confusing Law with Morality.  They are not quite the same thing.

But even so, Laws are a set of rules that we were forced to adopt in order to live together in large groups.  We all agree to abide by them Equally, or they are no use to us.  You example with income taxes is a perfect example.  Tax evasion is wrong; it is illegal.  It’s what got Al Capone sent to prison.  I personally would no consider avoiding taxes, unless it were legal to do so (for example, if I was living below the poverty line and was thus exempt).  It’s unclear to me what you’re talking about as “immoral” with connection to income tax.  I personally think it’s wrong for a billionaire (like Donald Trump) to get away without paying any taxes, but if it’s legal, it’s legal.  That’s why we need to change the tax codes, but the billionaires who fund the Republican party won’t let us.

Morality is the way you behave even when no one is looking.  If I found a wallet full of money lying on the sidewalk, I would never dream of just keeping it without trying to find out who it belonged to.  That’s the way I was brought up.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 10 April 2017 10:49 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 45 ]
Jr. Member
Rank
Total Posts:  10
Joined  2017-04-09
Advocatus - 10 April 2017 07:00 AM

I strongly disagree.  In the first case, once again you’re confusing Law with Morality.  They are not quite the same thing.

But even so, Laws are a set of rules that we were forced to adopt in order to live together in large groups.  We all agree to abide by them Equally, or they are no use to us.  You example with income taxes is a perfect example.  Tax evasion is wrong; it is illegal.  It’s what got Al Capone sent to prison.  I personally would no consider avoiding taxes, unless it were legal to do so (for example, if I was living below the poverty line and was thus exempt).  It’s unclear to me what you’re talking about as “immoral” with connection to income tax.  I personally think it’s wrong for a billionaire (like Donald Trump) to get away without paying any taxes, but if it’s legal, it’s legal.  That’s why we need to change the tax codes, but the billionaires who fund the Republican party won’t let us.

Morality is the way you behave even when no one is looking.  If I found a wallet full of money lying on the sidewalk, I would never dream of just keeping it without trying to find out who it belonged to.  That’s the way I was brought up.

In short, we need laws, because morality doesn’t really exist. “When no one is looking” almost everyone is behaving wrong. This might be not the case with you, and I applaud you for your strong values, but in general that’s how it is. That’s the unfortunate biological heritage that’s within our evolutionary backpack, and opportunistic behavior is universal within the animal kingdom. It’s all about gaining an advantage, and getting others to subjugate to ones morals (that are giving the person an advantage) is just another tool to do that.

Profile
 
 
   
3 of 4
3