Neurons?
Explain to me why the following things are wrong
- Thread starter Norsefire
- Start date
Neurons?
Don't you see? Murder is entirely OK if you see it that way.
Subjectivity then means that you can do as you please when you please
Enmos
Valued Senior Member
It seems you are just arguing for the sake of arguing.
If you think it's ok why don't you do it ?
I will be arrested and executed. Besides, I do not believe that it is OK.
However, if indeed I did, I could do it. I would still be arrested........but then that would be tyranny.
Enmos
Valued Senior Member
No, you accept to play by the rules and you accept to suffer the consequences if you break them, by being a part of society.
I'm off now.. talk to you later (preferably not in this thread
) And who says I accept this? What if I believe I do not accept this?
Simon Anders
Valued Senior Member
Then morals are groups of neurons?
(don't get me wrong, people believe in the morals and have moral standopints and there must be some kind of brain correlate, but 1) this will get pretty hard to be specific about and 2) it will not come off as 'an authority'.)
I think we would have to say something like morals are patterns in the neurons or patterns in the way neurons fire. Which would cover 'skill with a crossbow' also.
VI, James, mad. Just because i said i dont think they are intrinsic doesnt mean i dont belive they are important.
We are currently doing an exercise on the valuses of trustworthyness (and related values) vs the values of inovation (and related values)
Now someone can grow up never having met another person and be inovative. Its something which comes from inside (which is why i disagree with my lecture that its a value) where as when you look at trustworthyness, you can only be trustworthy IF someone else puts trust in you. The same with honesty, you cant be honest if there is nothing to tell.
This means that these values are part of the social contract we have with sociaty and there for learned rather than inherinted. When you concider other sociaties like head hunters for instance have compleatly different values (like the VALUE that they kill all strangers on site) then the value about murder goes out the window. Even when you look at the 10 comandments they arnt aposolute, "mosas" just ment dont kill eachother (which would lower his number of followers), killing OTHER tribes was fine. The knights and the church had no problems with slaves. Rape has been used as a weapon of war since the dawn of time and all of us are probably the products of rape. These are all good values but they arnt build into us
I would love to link my lecture but i think you would need my password to view it (which im oviously not going to give you)
We are currently doing an exercise on the valuses of trustworthyness (and related values) vs the values of inovation (and related values)
Now someone can grow up never having met another person and be inovative. Its something which comes from inside (which is why i disagree with my lecture that its a value) where as when you look at trustworthyness, you can only be trustworthy IF someone else puts trust in you. The same with honesty, you cant be honest if there is nothing to tell.
This means that these values are part of the social contract we have with sociaty and there for learned rather than inherinted. When you concider other sociaties like head hunters for instance have compleatly different values (like the VALUE that they kill all strangers on site) then the value about murder goes out the window. Even when you look at the 10 comandments they arnt aposolute, "mosas" just ment dont kill eachother (which would lower his number of followers), killing OTHER tribes was fine. The knights and the church had no problems with slaves. Rape has been used as a weapon of war since the dawn of time and all of us are probably the products of rape. These are all good values but they arnt build into us
I would love to link my lecture but i think you would need my password to view it (which im oviously not going to give you
)You didn't answer the question as to why you said no? See above.
What leads you to the point of view that murder is OK?