User Tag List

First 2345 Last

Results 31 to 40 of 41

  1. #31
    Analytical Dreamer Coriolis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    5w6 sp/sx
    Posts
    17,585

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Magic Poriferan View Post
    First of all, good and evil are too Boolean for me to generally use the word evil. Secondly, humans are too wide a variety and long a series of consequential events for me to just call a human being as a whole bad, except as some kind of average. What I can do assess the moral philosophies proposed by both individuals and determine which of the two is more conducive toward that which my moral philosophy considers wrong.

    To that end I would say Rand is worse, though I rather dislike Kantian deontological ethics. Both philosophies often encourage a human being to do things that would run against the most happiness for the most people for the most time, but while Kant's prescriptions only even incidentally do this, Rand's philosophy sometimes explicitly encourages people to do things that are mutually exclusive with that outcome, thus leaving me to presume that a person acting on Kantian ethics in a way that is acceptable to my philosophy is more plausible than one doing so by acting on Randian ethics.
    Good and evil may be too boolean, but the idea of happiness is too amorphous. It is hard enough for one individual to determine with any accuracy what will truly make him/her happy. Determining this in the aggregate for a collection of individuals is an impossibility. We need a different yardstick against which to measure our actions.

    Quote Originally Posted by Polaris View Post
    Ayn Rand felt that a person should, within certain confines, pursue their own happiness, which makes her morality, in that sense, a morality of feeling. Kant believed that a person had to avoid making what he considered to be logical errors, and as far as he was concerned, feelings or instincts had little do with it; good action was "purely a matter of reason," whatever pure reason is (I think efforts toward "pure reason" are a form denial and self-punishment).
    An interesting perspective. Just what do you mean by the highlighted? What does it deny, and how is it a punishment?
    I've been called a criminal, a terrorist, and a threat to the known universe. But everything you were told is a lie. The truth is, they've taken our freedom, our home, and our future. The time has come for all humanity to take a stand...

  2. #32
    ^He pronks, too! Magic Poriferan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    MBTI
    Yin
    Enneagram
    One sx/sp
    Posts
    13,911

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Coriolis View Post
    Good and evil may be too boolean, but the idea of happiness is too amorphous. It is hard enough for one individual to determine with any accuracy what will truly make him/her happy. Determining this in the aggregate for a collection of individuals is an impossibility. We need a different yardstick against which to measure our actions.
    Utilitarianism is solid enough for a moral philosophy. It is a merit of utilitarianism that it mostly leaves that yardstick in the hands of something more dependable, something like rationalism or empiricism.
    Go to sleep, iguana.


    _________________________________
    INTP. Type 1>6>5. sx/sp.
    Live and let live will just amount to might makes right

  3. #33
    Senior Member Mal12345's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    MBTI
    IxTP
    Enneagram
    5w4 sx/sp
    Socionics
    LII Ti
    Posts
    14,010

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Lark View Post
    Please, are you the random Randian who keeps turning up from time to time to troll the forums with posts about your hero, I get Rand because Rand is easy, selfishness is a virtue, no sacrifice no way never, certainly not self-sacrifice, capitalism is the bomb and has not casualties or collateral damage. Its all balls though. Kant was seriously intellectually superior to a bad novelists from Russia.
    Nope, not a Randroid. I think Kant has far more good things to say.
    "Everyone has a plan till they get punched in the mouth." Mike Tyson
    “Culture?” says Paul McCartney. “This isn't culture. It's just a good laugh.”

  4. #34
    Senior Member Mal12345's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    MBTI
    IxTP
    Enneagram
    5w4 sx/sp
    Socionics
    LII Ti
    Posts
    14,010

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Lark View Post
    Zero degrees of empathy?
    You mean she was a typical INTJ, or let's say, an average type 1.

    I can't speak to how much empathy Rand herself had, only that it is lacking in her philosophy.
    "Everyone has a plan till they get punched in the mouth." Mike Tyson
    “Culture?” says Paul McCartney. “This isn't culture. It's just a good laugh.”

  5. #35
    Senior Member Mal12345's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    MBTI
    IxTP
    Enneagram
    5w4 sx/sp
    Socionics
    LII Ti
    Posts
    14,010

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by onemoretime View Post
    Good point. Moral rules, on the other hand, are not only mishandled based on such a dichotomy. An otherwise moral person may perform an immoral act, particularly if under pressure from another source, if there is no specific prohibition on that act. That person may also immorally fail to perform a moral duty to another, if the act constituting the performance of that duty is proscribed by moral rules. Furthermore, both the permissibility of the first act and the impermissibility of the second act may constitute a coherent moral reasoning, and may be justified outside specific contexts.

    Kant is appealing in that he makes a sound argument for the immorality of acts that interfere with another's capability to engage their own moral reasoning.
    More importantly, it stifles the will of a moral agent. If someone is holding a gun to your head, or appealing to consequentialism, or saying that God exists and will send you to Hell, it all amounts to a weakening of the will.
    "Everyone has a plan till they get punched in the mouth." Mike Tyson
    “Culture?” says Paul McCartney. “This isn't culture. It's just a good laugh.”

  6. #36
    Mojibake sprinkles's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    MBTI
    INFJ
    Posts
    2,968

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Magic Poriferan View Post
    Utilitarianism is solid enough for a moral philosophy. It is a merit of utilitarianism that it mostly leaves that yardstick in the hands of something more dependable, something like rationalism or empiricism.
    Rationality and empiricism are quite fine and dependable, for those who are rational and empirical.

    However we might often find that those who are rational and empirical aren't necessarily the ones in need of moral fiber.

    It's like putting warning labels on products but the people who would actually read it already know better and don't have to read it.

  7. #37
    & Badger, Ratty and Toad Mole's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    18,540
    Quote Originally Posted by Magic Poriferan View Post
    Utilitarianism is solid enough for a moral philosophy. It is a merit of utilitarianism that it mostly leaves that yardstick in the hands of something more dependable, something like rationalism or empiricism.
    Yes, Oz is an experiment in Utilitarianism and so we can see the results in front of us.

    Utilitarianism gives the end as the greatest good for the greatest number, and the means as reason and evidence.
    Last edited by Mole; 08-10-2012 at 08:15 PM.

  8. #38
    Ginkgo
    Guest

    Default

    LOL@ Morality thread about morality.

  9. #39
    Analytical Dreamer Coriolis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    5w6 sp/sx
    Posts
    17,585

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by sprinkles View Post
    Rationality and empiricism are quite fine and dependable, for those who are rational and empirical.

    However we might often find that those who are rational and empirical aren't necessarily the ones in need of moral fiber.


    It's like putting warning labels on products but the people who would actually read it already know better and don't have to read it.
    I see a bit of this in Rand. If you pursue your own will, while not coercing anyone else, what results is very close to what all those morals and ethics aim to achieve, with far less drama and wasted energy.
    I've been called a criminal, a terrorist, and a threat to the known universe. But everything you were told is a lie. The truth is, they've taken our freedom, our home, and our future. The time has come for all humanity to take a stand...

  10. #40
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    1,392

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Ginkgo View Post
    LOL@ Morality thread about morality.
    I heard that you like morality...

Similar Threads

  1. Who is the person you admire most and what is his MBTI type
    By yenom in forum Popular Culture and Type
    Replies: 77
    Last Post: 08-28-2012, 05:36 AM
  2. Who is the sanest person on TypC?
    By wolfy in forum The Bonfire
    Replies: 122
    Last Post: 06-13-2009, 03:36 AM
  3. Is the glass half full or half empty?
    By pippi in forum The Bonfire
    Replies: 36
    Last Post: 01-26-2009, 11:04 PM
  4. Who is the most protective type?
    By kathara in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 24
    Last Post: 10-22-2007, 11:59 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