Re: [Talk] The Purpose of Morality

看板EngTalk (全英文聊天)作者celestial09 (celestial)時間16年前 (2009/10/29 09:30)推噓1(1推 0噓 1→)

留言2則, 1人參與討論串8/14 (看更多)

: Also, I don't think all believers are blind but as I've stated before, : these believers disagree with one another because they have different : personal standards and personal values/beliefs. If so, why even bother to : follow an archaic "universal morality" or try to interpret a historic : scripture to fit their current values if what they follow is actually : their personal belief? Do we really need to define our personal belief : through ancient scripture and force others to completely agree with us : or understand us? ^^^^^^^^^^^^ hey, this is interesting! :D Studying Brain science is to understand WHY, or HOW other people think this way. I think this is bound to our inner nature. We human are social beings, that's why I am interested in what you think. That's why we created Languages. The main purpose is not only for survival, but also to exchange ideas and feelings. I did learn a lot from your thoughts. As for me, I respect others who do not believe in God. I never feel they are inferior or anything. However, I dislike those who harm others, and I have the right to avoid those peole and dislike those acts. When I want to pursuade someone and argue agaisnt their belief, is only when they are having a tendency to harm others, which is unacceptable in my belief system and also harmful to the whole society. Too much selfishness is not only bad for the society but also for oneself. : moral concepts are there for "reference" but not as an absolute truth. I think maybe the Truths we are talking about are different. My definition of "truth" is a state of mind, not necessarily something we can describe or doctrins that are preached in the religious institutions or whoever called themselves "God-ness". However, the "truth" in my mind happen to coincide with some of the so-called "God's Gospels". Their values do touch me deeply, but I am not blindly following it. I am exploring this world and trying to learn different ideas too. : I agree with this, I think that human values should evolve and are : evolving. Barbarians aren't necessarily backwards but their : basic problem is the same with blind believers--they don't think much : about their personal values. : I also believe that it is precisely because humans have the ability : to override their DNA survival instincts, it is time that we can : follow our personal standards now. The concept of morality is no longer : needed, what we humans should do is follow our inner values and don't ^^^^^^^^^^^^ I totally agree with this. Inner values are most important. A lot of creative ideas and originality thrives from our inner values or instict, sometimes even from INTUITION. It is the independent thinking and skepticism that pushes us forward, instead of brain-washed enthusiatic followers. I personally respect and appreciates this. That's why I think your posts are very interesting and worth learning. However, on the general I still don't agree with Nihilism. About 99% of people who insists Nihilism are those morally corrupted. I never see any decent people or saints who believe in Nihilism. So, why Nihilism? Coz it's easier.. to be corrupted according to our human nature. Then why promote those? I don't get it, and I don't think Nihilism necessarily lead us to a better society because it only creat chaos. When Hitler's ideas are justified it's just dangerous. Imagine if he killed Einstein, then what a great loss we have in the discoveries of sciences?? I have an intuition that Nihilists are merely trying to protect themselves by their selfish nature. Most of them were judged so they created this idea to escape judgements. I believe some aspects they should not be judged, (for example, homosexuality) but I cannot accept a murderer should have no guilt or no need to be sentenced. If you really put a Nihilist into the murderer's jail, I bet they will twist their belief system and yell that "Gosh please save me, don't let the murderer kill me for no reason! I oppose to Nihilism now..." ha , coz these people often change their mind when there's a threat to their survival and turn to benefits." Only those 1% who have high morality can insist and live out their belief, like 文天祥 (most people with normal morality still can't make it though) Sorry again here as I am not categorizing you as very selfish Nihilist. As for that I don't know, and cannot tell from the computer. : try forcing them onto others or arguing with others that oneself is : correct. People don't change. You can't change people--they can only ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ Well with this I have to put a Smile. :P I did changed. My values weren't the same as when I was a teenager. Sometimes serious strike of illness or natural disaster will push people through enlightment. : change themselves. So why bother preaching absolutism? We judge based on our : personal moral beliefs and not a set moral belief, I can like or dislike, but I cannot judge. I agree. I am not smart enough to prove it's wrong. I am not God or whatever. I am only an ordinary human being. :P : so in essence there should not be a set moral belief to mislead people : into thinking those are absolute and inflexible. Most people end up : agreeing along the same line anyway, but they don't agree on everything : to the exact same extent. However, it is always nice to see different : views or express our own thoughts if we like sharing them. : Of course, I don't think that all religious moral values are wrong or : mistaken or bad or whatever. I agree with some Buddhism views even : though at the same time I don't REALLY agree because my personal : values contradict with Buddhism values. : I find many values reasonable. I just deny the origin and the absolute : truth those religions claim their values to have. : Since I am 1% agnostic, I don't deny the existence of a god. : I also think that people are free to believe and feel spiritually : connected to their god, I think that religion has a certain amount of : positive impact on the society, that some values makes the world a more : tolerant place to live in. However, I think that an individual him/herself : is the ultimate key, and so should we encourage finding one's own : personal values instead of insisting that one value is absolute? : If we insist an absolute value, and absolute right and wrong, : that is the system of morality. : I thus question if we need to continue enforcing the concept of morality : or strive to develop a way to help people discover their inner values. : People already by default have their own inner values, which is why they : are now able to choose what they want to believe in, and if their : beliefs resonate with a group of people they often join that group. : If so, then the concept of absolute morality is now obsolete and actually : a step backwards in the development of human society. Times are changing, : and continual obstinance on archaic values will only create : meaningless conflicts out of intolerance. There will be people who suffer : because they are taught something they don't agree with and they are : confused eternally unless they overcome the system. : As for Hitler, Mao, and all those people...well, I'll talk about them : some other day. They are more difficult to discuss about and : today I'm not in the mood to talk about them. They're intolerant and since : humans are programmed to recognize what is best for their survival, the : legacy of those mass murderers are not passed down. What is passed down : is always something that would improve the general survival, and if a : general survival chance is increased, that means that the personal survival : chance is increased. : On the matter of guilt, I think guilt is the partial result of a : forced morality teaching. Is it really wrong? Sometimes it isn't : in a different system of moral teachings. : Let's say Person A is brough up under moral system A, and person B is : brought up under Moral System B. Moral System B does not consider action X : to be wrong, but Moral System A views action X as immoral. : Therefore, Person A will feel guilt when A does X, but Person B will not : feel guilt if B does the exact same thing. : However, the guilt A feels is real, even though B might feel nothing. Let's : just say A wants to do X but feels guilty doing X. Maybe action X really : isn't harmful but Moral System A views it so. An interesting example. Putting math and logic into sociology can be more reasonable. -- 莫聽穿林打葉聲，何妨吟嘯且徐行。竹杖芒鞋輕勝馬，誰怕?一簑煙雨任平生。料峭春寒吹酒醒，微冷，山頭斜照卻相迎。回首向來蕭瑟處，歸去，也無風雨也無晴。 -- ※ 發信站: 批踢踢實業坊(ptt.cc) ◆ From: 76.204.36.189 ※ 編輯: celestial09 來自: 76.204.36.189 (10/29 13:02) ※ 編輯: celestial09 來自: 76.204.36.189 (10/29 17:03) ※ 編輯: celestial09 來自: 76.204.36.189 (10/29 17:10) ※ 編輯: celestial09 來自: 76.204.36.189 (10/29 17:13)