Good/Evil

[Crunchy Cat]

I'm not satisfied with them as axioms. Is altruism measurable? How do we quantify it? Sorry to be a pedant.

Isn't it perfectly valid to have the circular definition:

Actions which cause you no guilt are good or neutral.
Actions which cause guilt are evil.

This seems to cover everything from mass murderers to Mother Theresa.

Altruism could be quantified as a statistic. We have a population and a set
of empirical factors that have been observed to elicit altruistic behavior.
We then take a look at how much of the population these factors are
applied to and how many exhibit altruistic behavior. This in effect could
be used as a measurement of altruisim with a population. The some thing
could be done for exploitation. Consequently, if we attempt to
assign 'degrees' to altruisim or explotation then were going into the subjective


I would disagree with the 'Actions which cause...' assertions because we
are taking an emotional phenomenon (guilt) which can differ wildly from
individual to individual (i.e. what makes one person feel guilty produces
an absence of guilt in another). Some people feel no guilt when killing,
while some people feel guilt if they relax and watch some TV.

-CC

 

[leda]

You are just shifting the weight of the definition from altruism to altruistic behaviour.
We agreed that good/evil was a subjective distinction.
Therefore it needs a subjective definition.
The thing about my definition is it only gives us a method of deciding whether our own actions are good or evil.
If the mass murderer feels no guilt, chances are, he does not believe he has committed an evil act.
If a couch potato feels guilt for watching T.V. that is because in their belief system, watching T.V. is evil.
I know its a circular argument, but it does work as an objective definition of a subjective phenomena.

 

[WANDERER]

There are not enuogh Christians to make this sub-Forum interesting.
Just a bunch of Atheists agreeing with each other.
Where are the Christians with all their wacky ideas?

 

[Crunchy Cat]

You are just shifting the weight of the definition from altruism to altruistic behaviour.

Well... altruism is a behavior after all :

Unselfish concern for the welfare of others; selflessness.

We agreed that good/evil was a subjective distinction.

Agreed.

Therefore it needs a subjective definition.

Why would it need a subjective definitiion?

The thing about my definition is it only gives us a method of deciding whether our own actions are good or evil.

The definition doesn't seem to define what 'good' and 'evil' are though.
I could just as easly say someones actions are 'polywhump' if it makes
the person feel guilty.

Let me know what you think.

-CC

 

[Crunchy Cat]

There are not enuogh Christians to make this sub-Forum interesting.
Just a bunch of Atheists agreeing with each other.
Where are the Christians with all their wacky ideas?

I don't think 'Leda' is an atheist.

 

[WANDERER]

But she's only one and not a very 'good' one.
Too easy.
I once spent a year debating this real fanatic that had a working knowledge of philosophy, now that was fun.
I miss you Eden of the Mind.
Good times.

Are people still discussing 'God'?
Didn't they hear he/she/it is dead.
I guess as new generations come up the same old issues come up as well and must be dealt with.
Booooooooring.
I've heard it all, said it all.
Now I'm just repeating myself.
Even this thread was originally posted, by me, in another Forum long ago.
I think I'll move on now.

 

[leda]

How come I, despite being entirely logical rather than rhetorical on this thread, got judged to be a Christian? I'm appalled.

 

[Jenyar]

Maybe because you used 'guilt' and 'evil' in the same sentence, and actually used 'subjective' in connection with truth in a logical argument. Usually only Christians dare to do that.

 

[Crunchy Cat]

How come I, despite being entirely logical rather than rhetorical on this thread, got judged to be a Christian? I'm appalled.

I made an assertion that you're not an atheist. This by no means condems
you to christianity

 

[§outh§tar]

But she's only one and not a very 'good' one.
Too easy.
I once spent a year debating this real fanatic that had a working knowledge of philosophy, now that was fun.
I miss you Eden of the Mind.
Good times.

Are people still discussing 'God'?
Didn't they hear he/she/it is dead.
I guess as new generations come up the same old issues come up as well and must be dealt with.
Booooooooring.
I've heard it all, said it all.
Now I'm just repeating myself.
Even this thread was originally posted, by me, in another Forum long ago.
I think I'll move on now.

How can Life be dead?

Hmm