| Morality. It's a one way street. Current time: 05-24-2013, 12:48 AM |
||||||||
|
|
|
Morality. It's a one way street.
|
|
02-01-2011, 01:22 AM
(This post was last modified: 05-14-2012 08:03 AM by eye2i2hear.)
Post: #15
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Morality. It's a one way street.
Dionysus Wrote:I think what I'm trying to get at, and I have a vague memory of discussing this with you before, is that if it were possible to, for example, write a "morality expert system" computer program in which you codify all the rules of morality, and someone could input a scenario into the program and get back what the moral thing to do would be, and it passes muster with human judges (a la a Turing test), a strong argument can be made that logic (on which a computer operates) and morality are essentially the same.I honestly don't a.) recall a past discourse, and b.) know enough about what computer logic entails to really say, but I'm inclined to believe that's why it's crucial to include (or emphasize) reasoning and rationale within the scope of the word logic? [I'm inclined to even hope for a new label all together] Quote:Otherwise, I think it has to be conceded that morality transcends logic. Sorry for being so periphrastic.Well, "transcend" is but more woo in the mix, imho. Tiz the very primordial stuff of Gods and Right(s) [and yet provokingly again for some, Property] (the re-opening of the proverbial barn door). What do you make of the presentment that: what has been immoral in the past, but is no longer that, isn't so, not because of some transcendence, but rather, consistent and persistent logical argument? And in almost every, if not every, instance? Granted, there's often some emotional appeal (border line woo?) along with the argument, but at core, it's about persistence in logic, reason, and rationale, no? Morality, as far as what I find most to hold about such, carries a once and for all and for always unchangeable either-or requirement regarding specifics within it. Transcendence aside, perhaps, I intend to contemplate further how closely logic (LRR) and what morality may be, are to being one and the same. Presently though, as it's popularly regarded, I still find a crucial distinction. Indeed, is to argue LRRly (logically) but at core to un-bury/de-blind innate morality... (and is this innateness also known as empathetic ability)...?! ??? ![]() Taboo, anyone?? _______________________________
If you wish to communicate with me, first define your terms. ~Voltaire The problem with communication is the illusion that it has occurred. ~George Bernard Shaw ... |
|||
|
« Next Oldest | Next Newest »
|
User(s) browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)

Search
Member List
Calendar
Help
View a Printable Version
Send this Thread to a Friend
View the Last Post of this Thread
Giving the Most Point to this Thread
Subscribe to this thread



![[Image: Thinking_Gorilla-280x410.jpg]](http://profdandunlap.com/sitebuilder/images/Thinking_Gorilla-280x410.jpg)

