User Tag List

First 678910 Last

Results 71 to 80 of 109

  1. #71
    Priestess Of Syrinx Katsuni's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Enneagram
    3w4?
    Posts
    1,238

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Lex Talionis View Post
    It truly is pointless to fret about the existence and illogicality of pure selflessness.
    Quote Originally Posted by MagnificentMind View Post
    But dear boy, who is fretting about such things? And what exists in this almighty universe that is not pointless and devoid of purpose or meaning?

    That last question may fool you for a minute.
    There isn't anything =3

    In the end, all we know, all we are, all we make, all we do, all we have touched, created, and seen, shall shrivel and fade, falter and break, and be lost to the void.

    Noone we know, no history written, no building created, no civilization shall last.

    And oddly enough, this's comforting in a way.

    While everything's pointless in the end, there's still a point in the moment, and that point is any point yeu want it to have. And the point I have, is it entertains me. So, let it all burn, I shall be busy enjoying the debate in the meantime ^^

  2. #72
    Senior Member Zangetshumody's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Socionics
    ILI
    Posts
    472

    Default

    The premise of my argument is; that an action cannot be selfless, as they selfishly benefit the enactor of the action in some way or form.

    I believe it is more accurate to derive moral characterization by appraising principles which underly an agents' motivations or intentions.

    If one would restrict oneself to your own formulation of selfishness, it is so vague and all encompassing in its application, it would seem to me that the word loses so much of its meaning and force that it can no longer truly exclude actual selflessness, i.e. it would seem an act could be morally selfless (made with no consideration towards the self), and yet be selfish according to your definition (because it happened to ex post facto render some benefit to the actor).

    Your argument does seem to put us in quite a tricky spot when considering the nobility of the moral agent, but it is a false quandary commonly confronted when the vulgar tide of consequentialism seeks to litter the shores moral theory.



    EDIT: some post thoughts expounding on virtue ethics

    notwithstanding the above, I believe this take might foil your little scheme!

    Virtue is its own reward in a manner of speaking; people are virtuous because they identify with that virtue, not because they derive a benefit from being virtuous. One does not need to be incentivized to act according to one's own character.
    Escape powerful genjitsu by averting your gaze from the eyes.

  3. #73
    What is, is. Arthur Schopenhauer's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    5
    Socionics
    INTj
    Posts
    1,158

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Zang View Post
    I believe it is more accurate to derive moral characterization by appraising principles which underly an agents' motivations or intentions.
    I have done precisely this.

    If one would restrict oneself to your own formulation of selfishness, it is so vague and all encompassing in its application, it would seem to me that the word loses so much of its meaning and force that it can no longer truly exclude actual selflessness, i.e. it would seem an act could be morally selfless (made with no consideration towards the self), and yet be selfish according to your definition (because it happened to ex post facto render some benefit to the actor).
    Precisely.

    Your argument does seem to put us in quite a tricky spot when considering the nobility of the moral agent, but it is a false quandary commonly confronted when the vulgar tide of consequentialism seeks to litter the shores moral theory.
    I wish to shit on your beaches. They are not lovely to me.

    EDIT: some post thoughts expounding on virtue ethics

    notwithstanding the above, I believe this take might foil your little scheme!

    Virtue is its own reward in a manner of speaking; people are virtuous because they identify with that virtue, not because they derive a benefit from being virtuous. One does not need to be incentivized to act according to one's own character.
    For a virtuous person, being virtuous is desirable. The incentive is to be the ideal person they wish to be; thus, virtue is truly 'ones' own reward.
    INTJ | 5w4 - Sp/Sx/So | 5-4-(9/1) | RLoEI | Melancholic-Choleric | Johari & Nohari

    This will not end well...
    But it will at least be poetic, I suppose...

    Hmm... But what if it does end well?
    Then I suppose it will be a different sort of poetry, a preferable sort...
    A sort I could become accustomed to...



  4. #74
    Senior Member Zangetshumody's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Socionics
    ILI
    Posts
    472

    Default

    The premise of my argument is; that an action cannot be selfless, as they selfishly benefit the enactor of the action in some way or form.

    I believe it is more accurate to derive moral characterization by appraising principles which underly an agents' motivations or intentions

    Is English not your first language? Your words which are in bold, and my words which are underlined, are incompatible. Your characterization of "selfish" is totally uncorrelated to an agent's motivations, in fact according to your definition an act could of been intended to be selfish but because it failed to materialize any real benefit to the actor it would not have been selfish (according to you).

    Your argument is based on a confusion founded by the fact that it contains no real moral substance yet seeks to advance a moral label.

    reread the my paragraph about virtue ethics: people are virtuous because they identify with that virtue, not because they want to identify with being 'good'.
    Escape powerful genjitsu by averting your gaze from the eyes.

  5. #75
    Senior Member Lex Talionis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Posts
    382

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Katsuni View Post
    There isn't anything =3

    In the end, all we know, all we are, all we make, all we do, all we have touched, created, and seen, shall shrivel and fade, falter and break, and be lost to the void.

    Noone we know, no history written, no building created, no civilization shall last.

    And oddly enough, this's comforting in a way.

    While everything's pointless in the end, there's still a point in the moment, and that point is any point yeu want it to have. And the point I have, is it entertains me. So, let it all burn, I shall be busy enjoying the debate in the meantime ^^
    I am definitely an existentialist, with nihilism forming the core of my world philosophy, and transcendental idealism elevating it.

    No, there is no inherent meaning in existence or the universe, but there is also no inherent meaninglessness; everything simply is. The answer to why we exist is forever constrained by human conception and is therefore beyond it. Since most people will not simply kill themselves due to the fact that no ultimate meaning exists, it is conducive to develop world philosophies that will at least help elevate society to a level from which it can strive for greater ideals and improve it as a result, because at the very least, this will bring happiness in its sheer practical output, and purpose at least in its own context.
    "Death is nothing, but to live defeated and inglorious is to die daily."
    —Bonaparte

  6. #76
    Senior Member Lex Talionis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Posts
    382

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by MagnificentMind View Post
    If one believes in selflessness, he is decieved - beguiled. Not all lies are maliciously created; you see this happening when we one lies/(decieves) to oneself; There are many other examples where lies are not crafted with ill-intent.
    The word "lie," according to my dictionary, is defined as: a false statement made with deliberate intent to deceive; an intentional untruth; a falsehood; something intended or serving to convey a false impression; imposture.

    For all intents and purposes, I would have omitted this word in favor of "delusion" or "self-deception." Understanding that "lie" is often used with a liberal definition, I was careful about how you intended the meaning, and is why I specifically included "maliciously developed" in the sentence.

    I have already addressed pure selflessness in opposition to what is generally referred to as "selfless" behaviour. Selflessness in the form of the latter is certainly not a deception, but is in fact a crucial component of human society and is an evolutionary trait.

    Pure selflessness, in the sense that you intend it, is also not an impossibility, but an improbability, and certainly has no significant impact on human relations. This extreme selflessness is illogical and would be a trait that evolution does not favor, which is why it is never observed in healthy individuals, but is not inconceivable in individuals who do not possess adequate reasoning ability and may suffer from psychosis, i.e. those who are clinically insane.
    "Death is nothing, but to live defeated and inglorious is to die daily."
    —Bonaparte

  7. #77
    What is, is. Arthur Schopenhauer's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    5
    Socionics
    INTj
    Posts
    1,158

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Zang View Post
    Is English not your first language?
    Que?

    Your words which are in bold, and my words which are underlined, are incompatible. Your characterization of "selfish" is totally uncorrelated to an agent's motivations
    I believe it is more accurate to derive moral characterization by appraising principles which underly an agents' motivations or intentions.
    I appraised and revalued selflessness, its underlying principles, and also the motivation and intent of the thing itself. The underlying principles? - that a desire to be 'selfless', and 'selfless' actions, reward the self - benefit the self -, and that these rewards give motivation to the acts.

    I fail to see how I am incorrect.

    in fact according to your definition an act could of been intended to be selfish but because it failed to materialize any real benefit to the actor it would not have been selfish (according to you).
    I never said that, but, okay. I'll state my opinion without stooping to insults about your intelligence. - I'm selfless like that.

    The act of being selfish, is selfish, simply because its purpose and intent is to reward the self. So, even if the act itself recieves no reward, the purpose and intent remain. The desire to be selfish/rewarded is selfish.

    Having said that, I have only and was only talking about selfless acts; never have I ever said that a selfish act can be selfless. My point about the benifit obtained from an act was designed solely for selflessness; selfish acts gone awry were never mentioned.

    Nice leap, and miss, in logic though.

    Your argument is based on a confusion by containing no real moral substance.
    I don't even know what this means. [Feel free to translate the previous sentence into Spanish. This is for entertainment purposes.]

    reread the my paragraph about virtue ethics: people are virtuous because they identify with that virtue
    It is a lovely paragraph. Really, it is. I see nothing new in it though.
    INTJ | 5w4 - Sp/Sx/So | 5-4-(9/1) | RLoEI | Melancholic-Choleric | Johari & Nohari

    This will not end well...
    But it will at least be poetic, I suppose...

    Hmm... But what if it does end well?
    Then I suppose it will be a different sort of poetry, a preferable sort...
    A sort I could become accustomed to...



  8. #78
    What is, is. Arthur Schopenhauer's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    5
    Socionics
    INTj
    Posts
    1,158

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Lex Talionis View Post
    but is not inconceivable in individuals who do not possess adequate reasoning ability and may suffer from psychosis, i.e. those who are clinically insane.
    Good point. I believe Lark mentioned this a few pages ago.
    INTJ | 5w4 - Sp/Sx/So | 5-4-(9/1) | RLoEI | Melancholic-Choleric | Johari & Nohari

    This will not end well...
    But it will at least be poetic, I suppose...

    Hmm... But what if it does end well?
    Then I suppose it will be a different sort of poetry, a preferable sort...
    A sort I could become accustomed to...



  9. #79
    Senior Member Zangetshumody's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Socionics
    ILI
    Posts
    472

    Default

    The act of being selfish, is selfish, simply because its purpose and intent is to reward the self. So, even if the act itself recieves no reward, the purpose and intent remain. The desire to be selfish/rewarded is selfish.

    If you believe this to be true, then you have to amend the premise of your argument. You have in a few instances now, idiotically nodded over thinking that brutally dismantles your entire agenda, which it seems you think is aptly combated with hostile poetry... notice my illustrious metaphors do not come in place of arguments, but after them, if you would be so selfless as to follow a similar format you might find my tone less scathing.


    I appraised and revalued selflessness, its underlying principles, and also the motivation and intent of the thing itself. The underlying principles? - that a desire to be 'selfless', and 'selfless' actions, reward the self - benefit the self -, and that these rewards give motivation to the acts.

    You are finding your way into more and more confusions;- in a manner of speaking it can be said that selflessness is desired, but it is really only indirectly desired (as the means to some other ends), therefore it is not truly an operative principle which will brand the agent who invoked it with hypocrisy merely for following through with his desired plans.

    Also:
    It does not follow that the rewards you speak of account for the motivation for an act.
    Escape powerful genjitsu by averting your gaze from the eyes.

  10. #80
    What is, is. Arthur Schopenhauer's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    5
    Socionics
    INTj
    Posts
    1,158

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Zang View Post
    The act of being selfish, is selfish, simply because its purpose and intent is to reward the self. So, even if the act itself recieves no reward, the purpose and intent remain. The desire to be selfish/rewarded is selfish.

    If you believe this to be true, then you have to amend the premise of your argument. You have in a few instances now, idiotically nodded over thinking that brutally dismantles your entire agenda,
    Explain how it was dismantled, please.

    which it seems you think is aptly combated with hostile poetry... notice my illustrious metaphors do not come in place of arguments, but after them, if you would be so selfless as to follow a similar format you might find my tone less scathing.
    I will do as I like, good sir. If you cannot maintain yourself in the face of simple metaphors, then perhaps you should be doing something else with your time, such as: not reading the Bible, Shakespeare, or listening to music.

    Also, I can't recall any place where I've substituted logic with poetry.

    I appraised and revalued selflessness, its underlying principles, and also the motivation and intent of the thing itself. The underlying principles? - that a desire to be 'selfless', and 'selfless' actions, reward the self - benefit the self -, and that these rewards give motivation to the acts.

    You are finding your way into more and more confusions;- in a manner of speaking it can be said that selflessness is desired, but it is really only indirectly desired (as the means to some other ends), therefore it is not truly an operative principle which will brand the agent who invoked it with hypocrisy merely for following through with his desired plans.
    You cannot simply subtract everything you dislike from the equation in order to get the desired outcome. This is precisely what you're doing. You are viewing the outcome by itself - you are saying, it seems to me, that the outcome negates the reasoning I've used, simply because the outcome is considered good or just.

    I thought you considered 'the ends justify the means' as trash on your beach of purity. It seems like you are the one who is confused.

    Also:
    It does not follow that the rewards you speak of account for the motivation for an act.
    Details, please. It is easy to disagree, but hard for me to reason why, without proper explanation.
    INTJ | 5w4 - Sp/Sx/So | 5-4-(9/1) | RLoEI | Melancholic-Choleric | Johari & Nohari

    This will not end well...
    But it will at least be poetic, I suppose...

    Hmm... But what if it does end well?
    Then I suppose it will be a different sort of poetry, a preferable sort...
    A sort I could become accustomed to...



Similar Threads

  1. The Media Coverage on Syria is the Biggest Lie of our Time
    By Xann in forum Politics, History, and Current Events
    Replies: 25
    Last Post: 02-17-2017, 10:44 AM
  2. Who is responsible for the lies of our leaders?
    By Octarine in forum Politics, History, and Current Events
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 09-19-2011, 10:07 AM
  3. When is a lie not a lie?
    By coberst in forum Philosophy and Spirituality
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 09-11-2009, 06:30 AM
  4. [NF] NFs Is it easier to be a selfless individual, when you have low self esteem?
    By ReadingRainbows in forum The NF Idyllic (ENFP, INFP, ENFJ, INFJ)
    Replies: 41
    Last Post: 02-23-2009, 09:37 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO