@frogus. I went through your reply three times and I still don't understand.
My point was that this is not Utilitarianism;
'The greatest happiness for the greatest number'
This is just a fact. The people (J.S. Mill primarily) that first formulated Utilitarianism didn’t state their principle like that.
They put it something like this:
"The greatest moral good is to maximise pleasure/happiness/utility."
There is of course a lot more to be said but this is the fundamental principle in utilitarianism.
There is a good reason why Mill didn't add "for the greatest number of people" to that principle. That is because the principle you stated create an internal logical contradiction - independent of any condition in the world.
My original post was just meant to be a clarification of what utilitarianism is and isn’t.
@ Curdis. I still want to discuss QM. Right now how ever I am too busy. Don't worry I'm not running away I just want time so I can give it some attention and not annoy you with ill stated views.
I didn't really bounce Eeyore. I had a cough, and I happened to be behind Eeyore, and I said "Grrrr-oppp-ptschschschz."
No I do not think that you are misrepresenting me, I will accept that Everett's idea for multiple realities are speculative, but no more speculative then the idea which is current in quantum mechanics. But anyway it does not need infinite universes for it to be correct, it only needs to be infinite in the timelike sense, given a certain amount of time, even a low probability event becomes probable, even one so improbable as our universe forming with the specific constraints it had.
Rereading it though yes that is what I was trying so say about it.
Humans determine what is good, not God or Gods, and what is good one time is not always good all the time. Assume that God is Good one side of the spectrum, on the other we have the Devil, on the Evil side of the spectrum, Niether God nor the Devil is capable fo determining what is right or wrong, both act according to their own natures, which is to be good or evil, Does that make much sense? Humans on the other hand determine what is good or evil, because we are capable of determining the difference,we are the decision makers not some supernatural entities.
I care not for endings or beginnings, but for the eternal and infinite spaces of the universe, and for the endless exploration of eternity, and mysteries which I will find plumbing the infinite depths.
"Do not turn inward to find peace and wisdom, turn outward instead to find liberation from the narrow boundaries of self", quote from Gary Paul Nabhan, paraphrased of course
"When a distinguished but elderly scientist states that something is possible, he is almost certainly right. When he states that something is impossible, he is very probably wrong" quote from Arthur C. Clarke, thought it was interesting.
Tips on living longer: eat right, exercise, and yes castrate yourself, eunuchs live longer then normal people.
Originally posted by AbysmalNature
Humans determine what is good, not God or Gods, and what is good one time is not always good all the time. Assume that God is Good one side of the spectrum, on the other we have the Devil, on the Evil side of the spectrum, Niether God nor the Devil is capable fo determining what is right or wrong, both act according to their own natures, which is to be good or evil, Does that make much sense? Humans on the other hand determine what is good or evil, because we are capable of determining the difference,we are the decision makers not some supernatural entities.
But without an objective moral point of reference (God), you'll argue yourself hoarse with someone who believes what you think to be wrong and immoral to actually be right and good, and vice versa. So from this point of view, humans cannot determine, cannot tell the difference, between what is good and what is evil. To repeat what Dostoyevsky said, "Without God, everything is permissible."
Which means essentially that there is no objective point of view, good and evil are entirely subjective relative to the culture which made it and the humans who make up the culture. What is good to one culture, such as for example the Aztecs or the Egyptians is not good to someone such as the Greeks or the Romans, you look crossculturally and you find that though there are set moral standards within the culture, there are often significant moral differences between cultures.
Who says everything is not permissable, who says that is not true right now, why does there have to be a objective standard for what defines good and evil, why is that so important, if there were one single standard as defined by a God, then why have standards changed over time.
Besides like I said if all good comes from God, then logically God can not be evil, therefore not know evil, therefore not be able to define evil, anymore then the Devil which is supposably pure evil could define good.
Who is to say that there is any standard, or moral guidepost, God you say but as defined by which God or Goddess and which interpretation of which God or Godess. Bearing in mind of course that even people within one religion have different ideas about what that God would consider good or evil.
I care not for endings or beginnings, but for the eternal and infinite spaces of the universe, and for the endless exploration of eternity, and mysteries which I will find plumbing the infinite depths.
"Do not turn inward to find peace and wisdom, turn outward instead to find liberation from the narrow boundaries of self", quote from Gary Paul Nabhan, paraphrased of course
"When a distinguished but elderly scientist states that something is possible, he is almost certainly right. When he states that something is impossible, he is very probably wrong" quote from Arthur C. Clarke, thought it was interesting.
Tips on living longer: eat right, exercise, and yes castrate yourself, eunuchs live longer then normal people.
No amount of rhetoric will ever persuade me to believe that the murder of innocent men, women, and children, is wrong, rape is wrong, genocide is wrong, and numerous other inhuman acts that checker human history, is wrong, nor can be dismissed as mere social conventions particular to any one culture or civilization. There are some crimes that cannot be justified no matter where you live, or what time period you live in, and deep down I think we all know it.
No amount of rhetoric will ever persuade me to believe that the murder of innocent men, women, and children, is wrong, rape is wrong, genocide is wrong, and numerous other inhuman acts that checker human history, is wrong
I hope that was a typo
This is just a fact. The people (J.S. Mill primarily) that first formulated Utilitarianism didn’t state their principle like that.
alright...but I do not know or care enough to argue about what utilitarianism is or isn't. I have been told before that my views where utilitarianist, after presenting them as they were without influence...since then, I have read a little bit of John Stuart Mill, but that's not the point. Just forget I ever brought the word utilitarianism up. Or pretend it means something else .
anyway...I think my sparring partners have left. I'll come back when Quantum Physics is off the menu...see yall later hope you find out if god exists or not.
Love and Hope and Sex and Dreams are Still Surviving on the Street
so you say that 'good' can be defined as 'what god would do' (I guess). This obviously can't be used as an argument for god's goodness, because it assumes that god is good. It says 'if god is good, then he must be good.' but if we assume he is evil, then 'what god would do' is evil. so I think that we must already know that god is good, or the argument falls down. How do we know that he is good? Subjective morality
Love and Hope and Sex and Dreams are Still Surviving on the Street
Innocent is there anyone who is ever truly innocent, in history from our viewpoint rape, genocide, murder is wrong, but from that viewpoint at least if it was being done to the other guy, it was good and even accepted.
InHuman you say, on the contray quite human, those acts seem horrifyin now, and we assume that such actions will not ever happen again, but we would be wrong in that assumption, because it is a part of human nature.
War for example, is that not just a civilized sanction of murder, if a business dumps chemicals into the water and they kill thousands of people isn't that murder by the thousands, but people are still not prosecuted for it. There are numerous crimes which are sanctioned and accepted by the people of today, simply because they have never even considered it as a crime.
Morals change, destroying the environment might be seen as the ultimate genoicide. Genoicide is even being conducted now, bearing in mind you do not need to kill people to commit it, you simply have to wipe out their culture.
Morals are momentary, and even the most horrific crimes are okay as long as they happen to someone else.
I care not for endings or beginnings, but for the eternal and infinite spaces of the universe, and for the endless exploration of eternity, and mysteries which I will find plumbing the infinite depths.
"Do not turn inward to find peace and wisdom, turn outward instead to find liberation from the narrow boundaries of self", quote from Gary Paul Nabhan, paraphrased of course
"When a distinguished but elderly scientist states that something is possible, he is almost certainly right. When he states that something is impossible, he is very probably wrong" quote from Arthur C. Clarke, thought it was interesting.
Tips on living longer: eat right, exercise, and yes castrate yourself, eunuchs live longer then normal people.
From the Golden Apple, a great, forgotten musical, with lyrics by John Latouche. To be sung as an old song-and-tap number, a la Fred Astaire:
"Some can be bought for money
And some there are that glory can buy--
Some yield their purity
In search of security;
Some drown their dreams
In a bottle of rye.
Some go for empty knowledge,
And some think sex, will set their bodies free--
The man of the hour
Will settle for power,
Yes every soul alive has his fee,
Except for wonderful people...
Noble people...
Mmmmmmmarvelous people...
Like you, and like meeeee.
Sorry, couldn't resist, after reading @AbysmalNature's last post. Mea culpa.
To the Righteous belong the fruits of violent victory. The rest of us will have to settle for warm friends, warm lovers, and a wink from a quietly supportive universe.
Originally posted by frogus haha ha @fable. nice post....you cultured old rogue you...
but still not quite spam!!! ahh one day your mask will slip...
I try, @Frogus. I've had good examples to learn from such as Waverly, Weasel, Brink...But somehow, it never takes.
And to tie in still further my previous post with the subject at hand, The Golden Apple was a clever work that retold the Iliad and the Odyssey in terms of Little Town vs Big Town USA, 1890-1930. Paris is a traveling salesman, who runs off with Helen, a very foward young lady, married to the village banker, Mr. Menalaus; she's also a farmer's daughter. Ulysses and his pals are forced to go after her when the old militant geezers raise a stink about honor.
They journey to the City, where Ulysses easily out-wrestles Paris is an old-style match; but wily Mayor Hector (whose lyrics I just quoted) decides to steal away the team forever, one by one, drawing them to their doom in the Big City's wiles. The decades move forward musically, too, as each of Ulysses' friends is lost to one temptation after another--until only Ulysses himself is left, surmounting the temptation of Fate herself, to give him all the power he might want in exchange for his heart and his love.
Fantastic score.
To the Righteous belong the fruits of violent victory. The rest of us will have to settle for warm friends, warm lovers, and a wink from a quietly supportive universe.
I just want time so I can give it some attention and not annoy you with ill stated views.
