Our server costs ~$56 per month to run. Please consider donating or becoming a Patron to help keep the site running. Help us gain new members by following us on Twitter and liking our page on Facebook!
Current time: March 29, 2024, 11:28 am

Thread Rating:
  • 1 Vote(s) - 5 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Being vs. Believing
#11
RE: Being vs. Believing
(April 26, 2015 at 1:51 pm)Jörmungandr Wrote: Why can't both be goals, and the order of priority dependent on the person.

I see a problem with this if morality is subjective.  We evaluate whether we are good on rules we make ourselves, so both the bar and whether we've met it are set internally.  It's circular.
"We" are unlikely to have made those rules ourselves, of course.  So - "we" are still appealing to an external standard.  Not that, to my mind, this makes it any more or less rational or useful (over an internal standard, for example).  I'd say that we -accept- this or that standard, either actively or passively.....and we might have many different justifications for doing so - some of which may be circular. Nevertheless, whether morality is subjective or objective is meaningless in this context without a specific example to consider. It's pointless to say "if morality is subjective" and follow it up with what you did. It may be true, in some instances, in some, it may not, but neither are likely to have much to do with morality being subjective. Circular justifications for moral dictates are

A. perhaps not circular as an arguer would present
B. possible and present regardless of the objective or subjective status of morality
C. -and this is my favorite- we might be discussing a non-operative variable. Is the purpose of morality to be reasonable, is logic the proper foundation for morality...if morality and logic find themselves at odds (save the baby or the parents?) do we side with logic/do we want to side with logic..(is it even possible to "side with logic" in morality...I bet if I asked two people about that baby or parents question I'd get three logical conclusions) - or would we simply be asserting morality from the outset? IOW, assuming without a specific example (and ignoring that your summary quoted above may not be accurate) that some moral commands are circular, irrational, does that make them less desirable, useful, or justifiable....is that -actually- a problem at all? We are, imo, not rational creatures, we do not have entirely rational needs, and systems of morality must accommodate this. I think that logic and reason has a much better foothold in a place like law, than it does in morality, personally. Laws -must- be applied reasonably and rationally or the purpose of law itself (as we have conceived of it) is subverted. Morality......not so much........

For my own part, I'm content that morality is, as we see it to be, subjective, and that some things contained within our moral systems are not, strictly speaking, rational, but based in or founded upon our desires, or our emotional responses (happiness comes to mind). That we often, though not always, -apply- reason to these commands or dictates...after the fact. I don't see -any- problems with this approach to morality.
I am the Infantry. I am my country’s strength in war, her deterrent in peace. I am the heart of the fight… wherever, whenever. I carry America’s faith and honor against her enemies. I am the Queen of Battle. I am what my country expects me to be, the best trained Soldier in the world. In the race for victory, I am swift, determined, and courageous, armed with a fierce will to win. Never will I fail my country’s trust. Always I fight on…through the foe, to the objective, to triumph overall. If necessary, I will fight to my death. By my steadfast courage, I have won more than 200 years of freedom. I yield not to weakness, to hunger, to cowardice, to fatigue, to superior odds, For I am mentally tough, physically strong, and morally straight. I forsake not, my country, my mission, my comrades, my sacred duty. I am relentless. I am always there, now and forever. I AM THE INFANTRY! FOLLOW ME!
Reply
#12
RE: Being vs. Believing
Hi wallym,

(April 26, 2015 at 8:52 am)wallym Wrote: The general rule of thumb is that people inherently want(know) to be good.  What if instead what society/evolution has ingrained in us, is that we want to believe we are good.

Can you define 'good'? Also, can you project that definition to the individualistic level required to make sense of your premise? It seems to me that you need to identify how people know what 'good' is and then why they want to demonstrate behaviours aligned with that definition.

Quote:It seems to me like human behavior makes a ton more sense based on the 2nd idea?

I'm not so sure. That people provide self-justifications for their actions is a given. The reasons why a justification is 'justified' needs exploration. As a social species, we've evolved to experience 'discomfort' when in isolation consequently an individual belief in justification also needs to stand up to external scrutiny else we suffer. From that perspective, 'belief that we're good' might not be 'good' thus you have the possibility of a self-refuting premise. It really depends on how 'good' is defined.
Sum ergo sum
Reply
#13
RE: Being vs. Believing
(May 21, 2015 at 8:03 am)Rhythm Wrote:
(April 26, 2015 at 1:51 pm)Jörmungandr Wrote: Why can't both be goals, and the order of priority dependent on the person.

I see a problem with this if morality is subjective.  We evaluate whether we are good on rules we make ourselves, so both the bar and whether we've met it are set internally.  It's circular.

C. -and this is my favorite- we might be discussing a non-operative variable.  Is the purpose of morality to be reasonable, is logic the proper foundation for morality...

I was speaking of the circularity which results from morality being about aiming for "believing we are good" rather than "being good" in particular.  Sorry I wasn't clear.  If morality is about believing that we are good, and whether we believe we are good depends on a 'good' which is set internally, then we have a situation in which any way of being could come to be seen as good (ala Charles Manson or David Koresh).  If their goal is simply believing that they are good, and good is an internal variable, then they can meet that goal by adjusting the internal variable.  My question then is, how do we arrange things so that people are 'truly' good, instead of just believing themselves to be good?
[Image: extraordinarywoo-sig.jpg]
Reply
#14
RE: Being vs. Believing
Quote:If morality is about believing that we are good, and whether we believe we are good depends on a 'good' which is set internally, then we have a situation in which any way of being could come to be seen as good (ala Charles Manson or David Koresh).
Agreed....but I don't see the problem here..?


Quote:If their goal is simply believing that they are good, and good is an internal variable, then they can meet that goal by adjusting the internal variable. 
Well, without going over the same ground as my last post about how those variables may be set....does it seem to you, like we are proficient at adjusting those variables?  I don't think that we are, and as such I doubt that a person could feel good, or believe they are good (or know that they are good)...simply by adjusting the internal variable - if that can actually be accomplished in the first place.  Here again...I don't see the problem?  

Is there some requirement or reason to impose a category of "truly good" on the universe at large? I'm satisfied with "better than", myself.
I am the Infantry. I am my country’s strength in war, her deterrent in peace. I am the heart of the fight… wherever, whenever. I carry America’s faith and honor against her enemies. I am the Queen of Battle. I am what my country expects me to be, the best trained Soldier in the world. In the race for victory, I am swift, determined, and courageous, armed with a fierce will to win. Never will I fail my country’s trust. Always I fight on…through the foe, to the objective, to triumph overall. If necessary, I will fight to my death. By my steadfast courage, I have won more than 200 years of freedom. I yield not to weakness, to hunger, to cowardice, to fatigue, to superior odds, For I am mentally tough, physically strong, and morally straight. I forsake not, my country, my mission, my comrades, my sacred duty. I am relentless. I am always there, now and forever. I AM THE INFANTRY! FOLLOW ME!
Reply
#15
RE: Being vs. Believing
(May 21, 2015 at 9:23 am)Rhythm Wrote:
Quote:If their goal is simply believing that they are good, and good is an internal variable, then they can meet that goal by adjusting the internal variable. 
Well, without going over the same ground as my last post about how those variables may be set....does it seem to you, like we are proficient at adjusting those variables?  I don't think that we are, and as such I doubt that a person could feel good, or believe they are good (or know that they are good)...simply by adjusting the internal variable - if that can actually be accomplished in the first place.  Here again...I don't see the problem?  
(emphasis mine)

I don't believe the internal variable can be that independently controlled either, but I was addressing a potential problem if it can. That is that the behaviors which are justified lack a rigid standard such that people don't just 'rationalize their behavior as being good' regardless of the content of that behavior. I guess the question is, "How do we achieve virtue?" if the standard and whether we meet the standard are internally set.

(May 21, 2015 at 9:23 am)Rhythm Wrote: Is there some requirement or reason to impose a category of "truly good" on the universe at large?  I'm satisfied with "better than", myself.

Agreed. But how do we know what "better than" is if we are only listening to our own voice?
[Image: extraordinarywoo-sig.jpg]
Reply
#16
RE: Being vs. Believing
Quote:That is that the behaviors which are justified lack a rigid standard such that people don't just 'rationalize their behavior as being good' regardless of the content of that behavior.
Firstly, I don't see why an internally set standard should be more or less rigid than an externally set standard?  Is this assumption required?
Quote: I guess the question is, "How do we achieve virtue?" if the standard and whether we meet the standard are internally set.
If they are...which I don't think they are - the answer seems pretty simple.  You hit that standard.  Isn't that how we achieve any standard..regardless of how it is set, or where it originates from?

Quote:But how do we know what "better than" is if we are only listening to our own voice?
-Do we- only listen to our own voices...regardless of whether we're invoking internal standards or external/imposed standards?  This, like adjusting variables...does not seem to be an issue.

I think that you between us, we could probably agree to some metrics on a given thing and agree: A -is better than- B. Further, failing that, I think we can reach an amicable disagreement..lol.
I am the Infantry. I am my country’s strength in war, her deterrent in peace. I am the heart of the fight… wherever, whenever. I carry America’s faith and honor against her enemies. I am the Queen of Battle. I am what my country expects me to be, the best trained Soldier in the world. In the race for victory, I am swift, determined, and courageous, armed with a fierce will to win. Never will I fail my country’s trust. Always I fight on…through the foe, to the objective, to triumph overall. If necessary, I will fight to my death. By my steadfast courage, I have won more than 200 years of freedom. I yield not to weakness, to hunger, to cowardice, to fatigue, to superior odds, For I am mentally tough, physically strong, and morally straight. I forsake not, my country, my mission, my comrades, my sacred duty. I am relentless. I am always there, now and forever. I AM THE INFANTRY! FOLLOW ME!
Reply
#17
RE: Being vs. Believing
(May 21, 2015 at 9:55 am)Rhythm Wrote:
Quote:That is that the behaviors which are justified lack a rigid standard such that people don't just 'rationalize their behavior as being good' regardless of the content of that behavior.
Firstly, I don't see why an internally set standard should be more or less rigid than an externally set standard?  Is this assumption required?

Point taken. I'm assuming the internal standard is loose rather than rigid. But that leaves us with an empirical question. Are our internal standards loose enough to prevent us from ever actualizing virtue, if morality is in fact consisting only of believing oneself to be good?
[Image: extraordinarywoo-sig.jpg]
Reply
#18
RE: Being vs. Believing
Anecdotal - so not rising to the level that we would require..but, mine aren't (regardless of what morality -is-).  Are yours? I suppose it would be easier to move the bar - and it might be useful to keep raising it, for example (and it certainly sounds nice..I'd like to be able to claim that..lol, "Rhythm...meets the standards then raises them!".....).....but I don't know how I would do that, or, if it were simply my own inability standing in the way here...how it could be done by others.
I am the Infantry. I am my country’s strength in war, her deterrent in peace. I am the heart of the fight… wherever, whenever. I carry America’s faith and honor against her enemies. I am the Queen of Battle. I am what my country expects me to be, the best trained Soldier in the world. In the race for victory, I am swift, determined, and courageous, armed with a fierce will to win. Never will I fail my country’s trust. Always I fight on…through the foe, to the objective, to triumph overall. If necessary, I will fight to my death. By my steadfast courage, I have won more than 200 years of freedom. I yield not to weakness, to hunger, to cowardice, to fatigue, to superior odds, For I am mentally tough, physically strong, and morally straight. I forsake not, my country, my mission, my comrades, my sacred duty. I am relentless. I am always there, now and forever. I AM THE INFANTRY! FOLLOW ME!
Reply
#19
RE: Being vs. Believing
(May 21, 2015 at 9:55 am)Rhythm Wrote:
Quote:But how do we know what "better than" is if we are only listening to our own voice?
-Do we- only listen to our own voices...regardless of whether we're invoking internal standards or external/imposed standards?  This, like adjusting variables...does not seem to be an issue.

That is the hypothetical. a) Being moral involves believing that we are good rather than being good; b) our standard for when we believe we are being good is internal; c) that standard is loose enough that we can in practice adjust the standard rather than adjusting our behavior. If that all is true, is that not a problem for practical morality?
[Image: extraordinarywoo-sig.jpg]
Reply
#20
RE: Being vs. Believing
No, even if all of that were true..I don't think that it would be, for practical morality.  Which, admittedly, is all I can muster up two shits for.

Disagreements might arise (and they do) - but if morality were "else" people would still have disagreements about what that "else" was, eh? Seems that we would (and currently do) have ways to approach that situation regardless of what morality -is-.

OTOH, if we can adjust those standards..that would be a great diplomatic trick, wouldn't it?  I will stress, again, that many of our conflicts seem to arise precisely because we do -not- seem to have this ability...but if we did........then I wouldn't immediately default to a uniformly negative summary.  
I am the Infantry. I am my country’s strength in war, her deterrent in peace. I am the heart of the fight… wherever, whenever. I carry America’s faith and honor against her enemies. I am the Queen of Battle. I am what my country expects me to be, the best trained Soldier in the world. In the race for victory, I am swift, determined, and courageous, armed with a fierce will to win. Never will I fail my country’s trust. Always I fight on…through the foe, to the objective, to triumph overall. If necessary, I will fight to my death. By my steadfast courage, I have won more than 200 years of freedom. I yield not to weakness, to hunger, to cowardice, to fatigue, to superior odds, For I am mentally tough, physically strong, and morally straight. I forsake not, my country, my mission, my comrades, my sacred duty. I am relentless. I am always there, now and forever. I AM THE INFANTRY! FOLLOW ME!
Reply



Possibly Related Threads...
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  What philosophical evidence is there against believing in non-physical entities? joseph_ 150 12080 September 3, 2016 at 11:26 am
Last Post: downbeatplumb
  Thoughts on "Believing in Yourself" clemdog14 13 4483 January 11, 2013 at 9:01 am
Last Post: jonb
  Are Theists Illogical for Believing in God? The_Flying_Skeptic 119 66103 June 29, 2010 at 2:38 pm
Last Post: Purple Rabbit



Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)