I read posts here that call different things, "harmful to humanity." Others call something, "good" or "bad" or "evil."
A very simple question, who gets to decide the definition of "harmful to humanity" and what is there critieria? The same for "good," "bad," and "evil?" These are not material terms. If everything is material isn't there just "is" and not these moral declarations if one is being thoroughly atheist?
Help me understand your position so I am fair and honest about the views. Thanks.
I would bet more people have committed suicide over financial ruin than a perceived injustice. What do you think?
If in any doubt about this - read this news item.
Yes, it's clearly an emotional reaction.
Ethics is tied to a culture in a certain time in a certain place and based on a human's personal and social experience. Thus, conscious is different things for different people. One person may feel bad about accidentally stepping on a worm. Another person may feel bad about not finishing off a wounded enemy soldier.
@Unseen (One can only wish --) - I assume you're referring to situational ethics - personally, I would never step on a worm, and I would administer first aid to a wounded enemy soldier, and have.
You want a pat on the head? Good boy!
No, I was referring to the fact that whenever people say ethics is based on empathy they forget that empathy isn't a cosmic constant. One person will have pangs of conscience over something (whether they should or not) and someone else won't give it a thought.
Situational ethics is a joke, isn't it? You either conform your behavior to a standard of some sort or you're just doing what you want to do, which isn't ethical behavior in any sense of the word.
Don't touch my head, you don't know me that well!
RE: "Situational ethics is a joke, isn't it? You either conform your behavior to a standard of some sort or you're just doing what you want to do, which isn't ethical behavior in any sense of the word."
No, it isn't. I will not, as mentioned above, step on a worm, but - depending on the situation (i.e., "situational ethics") - I will kill a man before I will allow him to kill me.
Much like Chewbacca, the word, "wrong," really isn't in your vocabulary, is it?
If you didn't want to kill the man for some overriding reason, you wouldn't kill him.
What do you mean "wrong" isn't in my vocabulary? I just used it in a sentence! And not just for the first time.
If you mean that I don't think anything is ever wrong, no I don't believe that. What I do believe is that nothing is ever really wrong in any kind of cosmic sense. Things are wrong in a way contingent on a time, a place, and person with a unique personal history.
I think we both know I mean that YOU could be wrong, and yes, I know that that concept is not in your vocabulary.
Unseen, do you mean "conscious"? Aware? Or did you mean "conscience", that basket in which we file our chosen ethics and principles?
I meant "conscience." thanks for pointing that out. I suspect, given the context, most people probably figured that out. I know that when I read another poster making a similar mistake, I end up understanding what they intended to say.
@Lonely - RE: "how we can easily deceive it?"
I don't believe this is what you meant to say - re-read your post and re-phrase, if necessary.