XTG
New Member
Posts: 19
Likes: 11
|
Post by XTG on Apr 18, 2018 3:58:53 GMT
Here's my definition of it.
Actions that are designed to not interfere or run counter to the highest "agreed upon" common interest of the "perceived majority" of sentient beings "by the perceived majority of sentient beings".
Forgive the syntax, but it makes sense if I read it carefully.
|
|
Clovis Merovingian
Prestige/VIP 
Elder
Posts: 2,698 
Likes: 1,758
Meta-Ethnicity: Anglo-American
Ethnicity: Deep Southerner
Country: My State and my Region are my country
Region: The Deep South
Location: South Carolina
Ancestry: Gaelic (patrilineal), English, Ulster Scots/Scots Irish, Scottish, German, Swiss German, Swedish, Manx, Finnish, Norman French/Quebecois (distantly), Dutch (distantly)
Taxonomy: Borreby/Alpine/ Nordid mix
Y-DNA: R-S660/R-DF109
mtDNA: T1a1
Politics: Conservative
Religion: Christian
Hero: Andrew Jackson, Thomas Jefferson, James K. Polk
Age: 30
Philosophy: I try to find out what is true as best I can.
|
Post by Clovis Merovingian on Apr 18, 2018 4:28:37 GMT
Here's my definition of it. Actions that are designed to not interfere or run counter to the highest "agreed upon" common interest of the "perceived majority" of sentient beings "by the perceived majority of sentient beings". Forgive the syntax, but it makes sense if I read it carefully. If this was about morality I would measure that to the will of God. But ethics is different than morality so I think that your definition is as good as any. I certainly couldn't come up with a better one. |
|
|
|
Post by Elizabeth on Apr 18, 2018 4:45:59 GMT
I define ethics as taking right action in terms of the majority of the people.
|
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 18, 2018 12:14:45 GMT
I define ethics as taking right action in terms of the majority of the people. I almost agree with you, except that ethics is a discipline which studies morality; and that individual's and society's morality is not the same. G. Moore's on ethics: 1) What is morality? ('what is good'); 2) What should I do? ('to obtain good'). (Compare it to Luke 18:18: ...“Good Teacher, what shall I do to inherit eternal life?”) So, yesterday people agreed on one moral, than after they would claim something else. The question is - which similarities between their visions, wishes, etc - things that characterized morality. Besides, I thing that few things always present in any society, and in a human: 1) Willen zu Leben; 2) Wunsch zu multiplizieren. |
|
Festtt
New Member
Posts: 15
Likes: 11
|
Post by Festtt on Apr 18, 2018 12:55:30 GMT
I find the ethics/moral discussion to seem more difficult than it has to be, also quite uninteresting. Look at life evolving from stars and use your pattern recognition to see in what direction it's evolving and try to align your actions with its' direction using logic. This requires you to first identify that you're part of life, something bigger than yourself. If we adopt this I think we don't have to keep going on debating so much about morals and ethics. The discussion would have more a tone of what makes sense and what doesn't in relation to reality, which I believe to be more useful.
|
|
|
|
Post by just10sp on Apr 18, 2018 17:37:15 GMT
I find the ethics/moral discussion to seem more difficult than it has to be, also quite uninteresting. Look at life evolving from stars and use your pattern recognition to see in what direction it's evolving and try to align your actions with its' direction using logic. This requires you to first identify that you're part of life, something bigger than yourself. If we adopt this I think we don't have to keep going on debating so much about morals and ethics. The discussion would have more a tone of what makes sense and what doesn't in relation to reality, which I believe to be more useful. ”A human being is part of the whole, called by us 'Universe'; a part limited in time and space. He experiences himself, his thoughts and feelings as something separated from the rest -- a kind of optical delusion of his consciousness. This delusion is a kind of prison for us, restricting us to our personal desires and affection for a few persons nearest us. Our task must be to free ourselves from this prison by widening our circle of compassion to embrace all living creatures and the whole of nature in its beauty. Nobody is able to achieve this completely but striving for such achievement is, in itself, a part of the liberation and a foundation for inner security.” -Albert Einstein ”What if you could hire the world’s best life coach with millions of years of experience and a proven track record... Well, you can! The life coach is Nature.” - Bruce Lipton Some of nature’s elements. Collaboration Interconnectedness Diversity Adaptation Reliliency Sustainability Balance Harmony Did you guys know competition used to mean cooperation? It now means to win at any cost, instead of to strive for a common goal. |
|
|
|
Post by just10sp on Apr 18, 2018 17:58:37 GMT
I personally think ethics are just man's emotional response to situations and circumstances, and their ability to read other peoples emotional response based on the mirror neurons in the brain and stress indicators of bad outcomes and straying away from them, which is evolutionary. Move towards good feelings. Don't touch fire it hurts, fall in love it feels good. This is the theory of being an animal that we learn from our stimuli, whether on the outer world in ourr body or the inner world in our soul. Hence babies learning overtime it is not appropriate to smash you in the face randomly with their favourite toy from you becoming upset with them. I think society holds the median level of morality per group of people, town, country, state. But this level of morality is below the level that we should have as it is sectional and only the median. Hence your definition is perfect, I just think people should not compare themselves to others to see how good they are doing, but to the best living figure or historic feature, whether it be Jesus or Buddha, the most Just would be Jesus and the most forgiving as well in my opinion. This is pretty much the concept Jesus taught that we are all sinners. Following other sinners or a blind man following a blind man is not a good thing. Seeing how to this day no one has achieved these set standards I find it very hard to argue The Bible has NOT been an influence of man's morality as people often say. It really takes a backbone to read scripture properly I found  |
|
|
|
Post by joustos on Apr 18, 2018 19:37:29 GMT
Here's my definition of it. Actions that are designed to not interfere or run counter to the highest "agreed upon" common interest of the "perceived majority" of sentient beings "by the perceived majority of sentient beings". Forgive the syntax, but it makes sense if I read it carefully. In the original sense of the word [Aristotle's sense], "ethics" is a philosophical inquiry into what is customarily considered moral (right) or immoral (wrong). What you are calling "ethics" is a pragmatic ethics or body of norms which are agreed upon by a Company or a Society as to what is in the interest of a majority -- or what is intended to become customary. So, what you define as Ethics is neither the Greek philosophical inquiry nor what the Romans called Jurisprudence, namely the knowledge or "science" of what is to be done or not to be done in human society {Justinian's Scientia agendi aut nec agendi, which is not based on any consensus or on the interests of the many. Jurisprudence is enacted by citizens in a republic, namely free or freed men , who know that the domination, in any form, of another person is wrong (not to be done), a crime. |
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 19, 2018 7:23:54 GMT
I personally think ethics are just man's emotional response to situations and circumstances, and their ability to read other peoples emotional response based on the mirror neurons in the brain and stress indicators of bad outcomes and straying away from them, which is evolutionary. Move towards good feelings. Don't touch fire it hurts, fall in love it feels good. This is the theory of being an animal that we learn from our stimuli, whether on the outer world in our body or the inner world in our soul. Hence babies learning overtime it is not appropriate to smash you in the face randomly with their favourite toy from you becoming upset with them. I think society holds the median level of morality per group of people, town, country, state. But this level of morality is below the level that we should have as it is sectional and only the median. I think your argument is very good, because: 1) Behavior is represented by emotions; 2) There's no emotionless people; 3) Emotions group people together (hence, ethnic groups could be gathered people with unique principles, because they use the same methods of work - ie cultural building ways). So, we should classify emotions correctly to obtain right characters of them. It seems statistic is very useful here. But, are we always looking forward to good feelings? I think it is higher possible, but it's just an utilitarianism maxim. Sometimes I need to be corrected, and friends can offend me, or use other methods to wake me up from a wrong way. So, I can't say that good feelings is just one and the only. |
|
