Total posts: 7,093
Posted in:
-->
@Tarik
Motive- a REASON for doing something.
The motive behind the action not the action itself.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Tarik
What’s selfish about that?
Selfish = being chiefly interested in one's own profit or pleasure.
If you are caring for and about others chiefly because you stand to profit by or to be pleased by them caring for and about you in return then that = selfish.
I'd say that it is possible.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Tarik
Whatever, in that case what’s selfish about proving for the needs of others?
Everything is context. You can provide for the needs of others selfishly. You can also provide for them selflessly.
Caring about others is the same. If you only care about those whom you are certain are providing for your needs ... well you could call that a little selfish.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Tarik
Okay, then why do you believe that?
I'm not sure what you mean. I'm not believing here I am communicating.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Tarik
That is what I mean when I say those words. What is the problem here?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Tarik
Caring for others = providing for their needs
IF you understand English THEN this will be clear to you.
People need social interaction in order to maintain mental health and by necessity are providing for the need for social interactions of others.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Tarik
the definitions of words isn’t predicated on whether or not you and I agree on them
For the purposes of this conversation that is literally THE ONLY THING that matters.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Tarik
I cannot prove care if we cannot agree on a definition.That’s not how semantics works, the definitions of words isn’t predicated on whether or not you and I agree on them their meanings are beyond us, nonetheless you conceded that you can’t prove your first premise so as far as this discussion is concerned the whole syllogism collapses miserably.
It is true that if you dogmatically reject any definition provided and you refuse to offer any that I agree with then neither of us could prove anything whatever. This is a breakdown in communication however which is quite different to conceding my point. At some point your failure to be able to understand my point is more of a you problem than a me problem.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Tarik
the definitions of words isn’t predicated on whether or not you and I agree on them
For the purposes of this conversation that is literally THE ONLY THING that matters.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Tarik
I cannot prove care if we cannot agree on a definition. If you do not like my definition of caring for others (providing for their needs) then please offer an alternative definition and see if we can agree to it.
Created:
Posted in:
I didn’t say to prove they need social contact, I asked to prove they need to care for others there’s a difference.Please explain the difference.Ever heard of something called hatred? Well you can have that for someone you’ve made SOCIAL CONTACT with, are you seriously going to equate caring to hatred?Please explain what "caring for others" means to you if not providing for the needs of others such as the need for social contact.
As you can see the goal post of caring for others has not changed.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Tarik
Please explain what "caring for others" means to you if not providing for the needs of others such as the need for social contact.
Created:
Posted in:
Humans require social contact. Over time, the stress of being isolated can cause a range of mental health problems. According to Dr. Sharon Shalev, who authored A Sourcebook on Solitary Confinement in 2008, these problems may include:
- anxiety and stress
- depression and hopelessness
- anger, irritability, and hostility
- panic attacks
- worsened preexisting mental health issues
- hypersensitivity to sounds and smells
- problems with attention, concentration, and memory
- hallucinations that affect all of the senses
- paranoia
- poor impulse control
- social withdrawal
- outbursts of violence
- psychosis
- fear of death
- self-harm or suicide
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Tarik
P1 you cannot survive without others to care for and about you.
P2 others are more likely to care for and about you if you care for and about them.
C caring for and about others increases your chances for survival.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Tarik
I'm not sure what you mean. The survival of the species is predicated on cooperation.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Tarik
Just that, it doesn’t tell us that every living breathing human is caring for other living breathing humans.
No two humans are alike. You show me some human belief or voluntary behavior and I'll show you a belief or voluntary behavior that not every living breathing human shares.
The point isn't that we all do the point is that it is counterproductive not too.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Tarik
No, I’m suggesting that one can survive WITHOUT caring for others.
This is not sustainable on a large scale. The species would die out. The species has not died out. What does that tell us?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Tarik
Are you seriously suggesting that humans do not need one another in order for the species to survive?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Tarik
Humans need each other to survive. We MUST care for each other or survival would be impossible.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Tarik
Humans cannot survive without other humans. We benefit by making our own survival possible.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Tarik
In typical paradoxical human fashion it can be viewed as either selfless or selfish to care for and about others. If you are ONLY doing it for your own benefit (self care through the care of others) that is by definition selfish.
The point is that whether you are selfish or selfless there is still a plausible logical reason to observe secular morality. Simply being alive and not wanting to die is reason enough all by itself.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Tarik
Caring for and about each other = the behaviors humans agree to in order to facilitate the cooperation necessary for mutual survival.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Tarik
You misunderstand. Survival is not secular morality. The desire to survive is reason enough to observe secular morality.
Created:
Posted in:
-->Polytheist-Witch
I still think to call something a religion a god or figurehead is necessary.
Taoism, confucianism, shintoism.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Tarik
Ok. So basically it is super obvious that ae should all observe secular morality. Good talk. If you have no further insights then...
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Tarik
But it’s not really a subject you can discuss at length though, because it’s so obvious.
50th post.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Tarik
In a word because. I don't know if you are aware of this but I usually enjoy these discussions this is at least in 0art recreational for me.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Tarik
A.F.S.F.S.M. doesn’t tell them anything that they don’t already know.
Great. Glad we agree.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Tarik
literally any organisms that strive to survive wouldn’t reasonably ask "why be moral if the universe doesn't care?"
Not explicitly no but if they could and if they did then the A.F.S.F.S.M. applies and indeed it applies implicitly even if the question is not asked.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Tarik
So what other place can it come from
From the place of literally any organisms that strive to survive.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Tarik
Actually my argument is unresponsive to the question "why be moral if the universe doesn't care?" ONLY if it’s coming from a place of planning to commit suicide or of already being dead.
IF you are planning any self harm THEN please seek professional help.
IF you are not planning any self harm THEN the A.F.S.F.S.M. applies to you.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Tarik
By definition it doesn't matter to my argument at all.Then why’d you say “The dead do not concern themselves with morality or anything else as far as I know.”
This IS the reason it doesn't matter to my argument. Morality only concerns the living as far as I know. The moment you die it stops being a concern for you.
Are you seriously suggesting that all or even most organisms commit suicide as opposed to literally any other cause of death?No but for arguments sake how can you ignore them?
IF you don't wish to stay alive THEN as soon as you facilitate not being alive morality stops being a concern for you. Those who successfully commit suicide become dead and as previously discussed the dead are uninvolved in this equation.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Tarik
The dead do not concern themselves with morality or anything else as far as I know.Why does that matter?
By definition it doesn't matter to my argument at all.
The dead were once alive and clearly your A.F.S.F.S.M. argument wasn’t enough to convince them from offing themselves
Are you seriously suggesting that all or even most organisms commit suicide as opposed to literally any other cause of death?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Tarik
I don’t know if that suffices as an answer though since it doesn’t apply to those that are dead.
The dead do not concern themselves with morality or anything else as far as I know. Until it is demonstrated otherwise NO argument for ANY kind of morality applies to those that are dead.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Tarik
I'm not sure what hidden layers you are looking for but this is the entirety of my argument. It is reason enough to try to be a "good" person whatever your personal conception of morality is.
If the question is "why be moral if the universe doesn't care?" then the answer is the A.F.S.F.S.M.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Tarik
Did you not see my immortality point because I would say that’s a flaw, if “secular morality” is simply just surviving then its an argument that can’t last forever because we’re not immortal.
Why would we need to be immortal in order to wish to survive as long as possible and therefore observe secular morality? That something is neither perpetual nor perennial does not strip it of all utility. Your car will not last forever that doesn't render it without usefulness while you own it.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Tarik
So what your saying is that you do not see any structural flaws in my argument?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Tarik
Long story short it’s basically just this? Okay my question to you is what group of people are you trying to convince with this? Because everybody that can see it clearly has survived to that point, unless your trying to convince a dead person.
I don't know what you mean by "convince". I am not trying to convince any one of any thing. I am just making an observation which explains human behavior and their preoccupation with morality whatever they consider it to be. This said it is a reasonable argument for observing secular morality.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@zedvictor4
The necessary structure of a syllogism.A. B. therefore C.....Not if A. then B.And a syllogism is it's own necessity, which isn't necessarily necessary.....If necessary at all.
Fair enough but let's not complicate thing unnecessarily for Tarik shall we?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Tarik
Secular morality (as it is being used in this conversation) is just the behaviors humans agree to in order to facilitate the cooperation necessary for mutual survival.
Since humans must cooperate in order to survive and since they agree to these behaviors the concept I am referring to does observably exist.
This is a descriptive definition not a prescriptive one. I am not creating a definition and then looking for something that fits said definition I am defining something I already observe.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Tarik
This is an entirely new conversation. If you do not treat ot like one then we will be done before we start.
Now can you point out a specific structural flaw in the argument itself?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Sum1hugme
Who keeps setting up trolley tracks in this fashion? Surely whatever happens the trolley owner is liable for all damages not I and not Jim.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Tarik
Why do you concern yourself so much with this syllogism? Considering it’s predicated on what ifs rather than what is.
That is the NECESSARY structure of a syllogism.
IF a THEN b.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@zedvictor4
It doesn't make sense that if you are alive and want to stay that way you should care for those who may one day care for you?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Theweakeredge
Why should that be a concern? You can't take care of yourself by yourself can you?
Created: