Dreamwalker said:
I think that there are different reasons for my feelings towards animals and this example of incest.
The pattern I was after was more general, and should be visible in *any* moral judgement of yours.
Here, I must stress that moral reasoning is not so much about what you do, but about what your explanation for why you acted the way you did is.
Two people may commit 1st degree murder on two other people -- but their explanations as to why they did it, could be vastly different.
Dreamwalker said:
First, I do not care much about animals. As I have said, I kill various kinds of animals for food or profit, and I do not always kill them cleanly, meaning that I bash their heads on rocks because I do not have a knive to slit their throats. So it is quite obvious that I do not feel for them to a great extend, otherwise I would be unable to treat them like this.
Why do I not fell for them? Probably because I see no reason for it. They may experience pain, but I heard that starving is not such a nice experience, so little fishy gets its guts ripped out and thrown to the gulls, along with his head. Just too bad.
And it is this "Probably
because I see no reason for it." that interests me.
Dreamwalker said:
So I have an animal that sits on the street, or walks/jumps onto it, whatever. Animal gets killed, in normal traffic conditions my choices would be:
1. Evade the animal-> As a result, I might lose control over my vehicle, hit a tree/wall/traffic sign on the right side of the road or swerve onto the left lane into the traffic.
Possible outcome of this decision, I am dead or injured, some other people too, e.g. passengers or other drivers.
BUT, animal would live.
2. Hit and kill the animal-> Result: A dent in my bumper, no big deal.
Seriously, it would be highly unresponsible to not hit the animal, no matter how often this happens. (Note, I nearly never drive alone, so I would stake more than my life)
And no, I do not feel bad about it. I do not take blame if an animal runs onto the street and I rather kill it than endangering multiple lifes. I could only take blame for driving a car, or you could blame the holder of the animal.
Sure, most of us would act this way, it's a decision between greater and lesser harm.
Dreamwalker said:
But as a fact, I know that I killed another living being, alas, I do not care about it. Its life had no meaning to me.
This is the thing that leaves me speechless, and Gendanken as well.
Dreamwalker said:
If it bothers you so much, I will take the next roadkill home, skin it and eat it for lunch. Then this would be covered by a hazy justification of my need to eat.
No, that's a cover-up.
Dreamwalker said:
But I think you have a real problem with the fact that I appear quite...mmh, what would be a fitting word? In fact, I think I might appear kind of unresponsible or even cruel to you. Is it that what´s bothering you?
Not irresponsible.
Dreamwalker said:
I do not understand (note, I really mean "I do not understand") where the problem is.
You seem to lack empathy.
Dreamwalker said:
I will admit that I am a killer if that is what you want. I know that I took part in ending the life of a sentient being.
We are all killers.
Dreamwalker said:
But what are you expecting? Sympathy?
Expect? Nothing. Hope for? Empathy, compassion, yes.
Dreamwalker said:
First, I would admit that I have done something morally and lawful wrong. Alas, since I lacked knowledge, I have to accept the fact that I unintentionally have slept with my sister. I cannot well alter the event or the results. I would take responsibility for the ensuing conflict at least partly, since she also unintetionally would have slept with her brother.
But no, I would not feel bad. Because my concept of bad and good probably greatly differs in perspective to yours. Why should I feel bad? Even if I had done it quite intentionally I am not sure that I would feel bad. I would feel altered, but I do not think that "bad" describes it.
Then describe this alteration as you can best imagine that it would be.
Dreamwalker said:
Just a question, imagine you are driving a car of about 1.5 tons at 50-60 kph (normal velocity in cities) and a dog/cats jumps out from roadside thicket 2 meters ahead of you. The result? Would you swerve to the left/right to avoid it? That would be utter folly, a human and a car cannot possibly react that fast. The animal would be dead anyway, and you would crash if you try to evade.
Certainly, I'd most likely not avoid the animal in order to save myself. I haven't hit any animals myself, but I was on the passenger seat when my mother hit a deer, and my father a cat.
Dreamwalker said:
Would you feel guilty? Even thought there would have been no possibility of not hitting the animal? Why? I do not understand.
I would feel guilty. This is hard to explain, as it is a matter of values and preferences and they cannot really be logically explained.
It is simply empathy: If I hurt someone without intending to hurt them, in me, this automatically triggers empathy.
Dreamwalker said:
Why should you TAKE blame FOR something even when there was no possible way of changing or preventing it?
Because this is what moral reasoning does. While you likely will not go to jail if you commited incest in ignorance, being prosecuted by state law is not the only thing that defines "guilt", neither I am suggesting to go and turn yourself in if you commited incest in ignorance.
Dreamwalker said:
“
Definition
guilt (FEELING)
noun
a feeling of anxiety or unhappiness that you have because you have done something wrong, such as causing harm to another person ”
No, I do not feel that. So, blame me, I will take responsibility, but don´t expect me to feel guilty about it.
Dreamwalker said:
I am never worried or nervous, what for?
/.../
I am also never sad or unsatisfied. So I assume that I am quite unable to even feel guilt for something I did. The same applies to shame. I am shameless, so I probably cannot answer you queries to your satisfaction since I am not really able to experience some of the things that you employ in your posts.
Hm. That is strange. You are either not human, or you are hiding something.
This
I am never worried or nervous, what for?
startles me. It's like the "If I am sad, I don't cry because I see no reason to cry if you are sad, and crying won't solve anything" we know from some other threads.
As if one would be justified to cry, laugh, feel ashamed, guilty, happy or whatever emotion only if there is an explicity verbalizable reason for it.
There is something in this, but I can't really put my finger on it yet.
***
invert_nexus said:
All hail Queen Rosa. Lord of this thread.
Choke, Invert.
