Eastern philosophy says the self is an illusion

NiftyNiblick said:
What's the point of citing Nuremberg?
Guilt and innocence is nothing more or less than the opinion of the winners.
Click to expand...

The fact that the world community came together on the heels of Nuremberg to adopt the Universal Declaration of Human Rights is extremely powerful evidence there are universal norms and values widely agreed upon, even when governments don't always honor the moral thresholds they agreed to.


The target to shoot for has been set and widely agreed to. That is a powerful moral and philosophical statement
 
Cypress said:
The fact that the world community came together on the heels of Nuremberg to adopt the Universal Declaration of Human Rights is extremely powerful evidence there are universal norms and values widely agreed upon, even when governments don't always honor the moral thresholds they agreed to.


The target to shoot for has been set and widely agreed to
Click to expand...

You mean the same countries that did their own attempted genocides? Or the people who opted to drop a nuclear weapon on civilians? What moral laws were they following?
 
Cypress said:
So the conclusion here is that science does not provide enlightenment or guidance on the types of normative knowledge people seek or use in real life on a daily basis.
Click to expand...
It provides some, but largely no, it does not. Reading a book about raising babies or dogs helps, but the actual reality of raising the babies or dogs can't be downloaded like an app. Maybe one day we'll be able to download knowledge and experience like "The Matrix" or upload ourselves into a new body, but I doubt it.
 
Cypress said:
The fact that the world community came together on the heels of Nuremberg to adopt the Universal Declaration of Human Rights is extremely powerful evidence there are universal norms and values widely agreed upon, even when governments don't always honor the moral thresholds they agreed to.


The target to shoot for has been set and widely agreed to. That is a powerful moral and philosophical statement
Click to expand...
Agreed but with the inclusion that "universal norms" only applies to humans. Not, necessarily, the Vogons, the Tralfamadorians or any other extraterrestrial species.

Had the dinosaurs not become extinct and evolved into an intelligent species, what would their morals look like? What would be similar and what could be different? Laying eggs is different than birthing a child. There'd also be more hatchlings than a single child. Would killing the weakest of the hatchlings allowing the strongest to better grow be normative? Psychologically, they'd grow up with a father and mother which means they might be both literally and figuratively cold-blooded about life and death.
 
Cypress said:
The fact that the world community came together on the heels of Nuremberg to adopt the Universal Declaration of Human Rights is extremely powerful evidence there are universal norms and values widely agreed upon, even when governments don't always honor the moral thresholds they agreed to.


The target to shoot for has been set and widely agreed to. That is a powerful moral and philosophical statement
Click to expand...

I wish that I had been born with a bit of the optimism gene as well!
I hope you're right.
 
Doc Dutch said:
Agreed but with the inclusion that "universal norms" only applies to humans. Not, necessarily, the Vogons, the Tralfamadorians or any other extraterrestrial species.

Had the dinosaurs not become extinct and evolved into an intelligent species, what would their morals look like? What would be similar and what could be different? Laying eggs is different than birthing a child. There'd also be more hatchlings than a single child. Would killing the weakest of the hatchlings allowing the strongest to better grow be normative? Psychologically, they'd grow up with a father and mother which means they might be both literally and figuratively cold-blooded about life and death.
Click to expand...

Yes, one common definition of universal is something widely accepted by humans. Hence terms like universal single payer healthcare, universal suffrage.

I typically think the moral code/instinct of dolphins tends to be more sophisticated and consistent than that of MAGA nationalists.
 
Cypress said:
Yes, one common definition of universal is something widely accepted by humans. Hence terms like universal single payer healthcare, universal suffrage.

I typically think the moral code/instinct of dolphins tends to be more sophisticated and consistent than that of MAGA nationalists.
Click to expand...

So there's nothing inherently "universal" about "natural law", then?
 
Telocollinite said:
Why do we love to hate?

https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/... to hate,to maintain their tribal allegiances.

Science.
Click to expand...
Science can be partially applied to most things, but not everything. That's the point.

Example: point out the haters in the group below. Who will become a Trumper? A racist? A serial killer? A pedophile?
https://bloximages.chicago2.vip.tow...c6f-bad6-0e67443908b2/529ce784230ad.image.jpg
529ce784230ad.image.jpg
Click to expand...
 
Cypress said:
Yes, one common definition of universal is something widely accepted by humans. Hence terms like universal single payer healthcare, universal suffrage.

I typically think the moral code/instinct of dolphins tends to be more sophisticated and consistent than that of MAGA nationalists.
Click to expand...
Which is why I clarified the term since "universal" also means common to the Universe. https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/universal


While I'll agree dolphins, on average, are smarter than trumpers, I'm not so sure they have morals as opposed to instinctual reactions.
 
Doc Dutch said:
I'm not so sure they have morals as opposed to instinctual reactions.
Click to expand...

Sounds like there's a high degree of special pleading here. There's literally no reason to assume a dolphin doesn't have just as much "agency" as a human except we are humans and have a built-in chauvanism toward human superiority.
 
Telocollinite said:
Sounds like there's a high degree of special pleading here. There's literally no reason to assume a dolphin doesn't have just as much "agency" as a human except we are humans and have a built-in chauvanism toward human superiority.
Click to expand...
Are you claiming to have knowledge dolphins are equal to humans, Perry?
 
NiftyNiblick said:
I wish that I had been born with a bit of the optimism gene as well!
I hope you're right.
Click to expand...

It's one thing to set and agree to the target. It's discouraging how often we fall short.

Every student would like to get an A. Most don't cross that threshold.

But setting a threshold and agreeing to it does establish some measure of accountability, and proves most humans recognize in principle we are not creatures of moral relativism.
 
Telocollinite said:
I never said that.

I just said that there is no reason to believe they are significantly different other than the fact that they aren't us.
Click to expand...
I never said you did.

Disagreed. Present evidence they are the same and we can discuss it. I've never read any evidence other than they are intelligent compared to most animals.
 
Cypress said:
But setting a threshold and agreeing to it does establish some measure of accountability, and proves most humans recognize in principle we are not creatures of moral relativism.
Click to expand...

I am curious about this comment. I understand you won't want to address it, but I think the history of human activity is one of 100% pure moral relativism.

Humans tend to do EXACTLY whatever it is they ultimately want to do. Whether it's immense evil (the church-led pogroms, the state-led genocides) or immense good.

America is a great example. We stood strong against the Nazi's and their vile attempted genocide. But our hands were not clean. We didn't even ACCEPT our explicit responsibility for the attempted genocide we made against Native Americans.

Are we the good guys? Sometimes yeah, sometimes no. That's moral relativism. We do whatever evil WE want to do and take great pains to demonize those who do whatever evil we don't want them to do.

America was horribly antisemitic during the 1930's (as were most societies here in the west). We just didn't go so far as to murder. But the same impetus was there. The same impetus rang clear in the Chinese Exclusion Acts in the late 19th early 20th centuries.

Moral relativism is the currency of moral thinking for most humans.
 
Cypress said:
Dolphins are higher sentient life forms, but you are right that humans are unique for sophisticated and abstract thought and belief.
Click to expand...

How do you know humans are unique? What exactly do we know about dolphin thought? I'd venture to say next to nothing really. So how humans can be certain of their self-preference is beyond me.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top