Francisco Ferrer Posted February 1, 2014 Share Posted February 1, 2014 Blah blah blah... isn't this thread about how bitcoin is going to change the world... not about spaghetti monster ethics?You're right, of course. But I don't know how to sub-divide a thread. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PDS Posted February 1, 2014 Share Posted February 1, 2014 ...and yet you repeat your Haitian garbage heap tirade. The same question can also be asked of you, because you are the one who knows best how your own life has turned out:Can you do evil without getting what you deserve as the consequences of your actions?GregI wouldn't know, Greg, since I don't try to do much evil in my day to day life. My life has turned out quite well, thank you, but there is a difference between correlation, and causation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PDS Posted February 1, 2014 Share Posted February 1, 2014 Yes, and some of them died quite painfully--and some of them enjoyed the finest luxuries of the land and died peacefully.I am contending that evil people have robbed themselves of any semblance of peace. Now you are free to disagree with this. Just take note that my original question still remains unanswered:Can you do evil without getting what you deserve as the consequences of your own actions?GregPreviously you wrote, "Consequences have absolutely nothing to do with feelings of remo[r]se or guilt."Now you say, "Evil people have robbed themselves of any semblance of peace."We'll put aside the supposed distinction between remorse ("moral anguish arising from repentance for past misdeeds") and lack of peace.What's missing from your argument is any recognition of the existence of people for whom the rights, feelings, well being and lives of others are of no concern.Lack of empathy has long been recognized by professionals as a factor in serial murderers, rapists and child molesters. For example,"In the literature of psychiatry as well as that of criminology, lack of empathy--along with a manipulative and calculating style, an absence of remorse, and impulsiveness--is frequently regarded as a defining characteristic of the psychopathic or antisocial personality disorder." James Alan Fox and Jack Levin, Extreme Killing: Understanding Serial and Mass Murder. Sage Publications, Second Edition, 2011.Furthermore, among mass murderers with ideological ends, the extinction of thousands or millions of lives is regarded not as regrettable but as a necessary end to a higher purpose.Stalin, whose artificially created famines alone killed 2.2 million to 5 million people, said, "The idea of a concentration camp is excellent," and "One of Ivan the Terrible's mistakes was to overlook the five great feudal families. If he had annihilated those five families, there would definitely have been no Time of Troubles."Why is there any reason to believe that Stalin was not at peace with himself?FF:Greg has taken to heart Emerson's admonition that a foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of small minds. You're not going to be able to pin him down, I am afraid. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PDS Posted February 1, 2014 Share Posted February 1, 2014 Blah blah blah... isn't this thread about how bitcoin is going to change the world... not about spaghetti monster ethics?You're right, of course. But I don't know how to sub-divide a thread.If we were able to subdivide each thread Greg has hijacked with his Carlos Castenada cum New Age Christian zaniness, the world (and OL) would be a much better place. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
moralist Posted February 1, 2014 Share Posted February 1, 2014 Blah blah blah... isn't this thread about how bitcoin is going to change the world... not about spaghetti monster ethics? Regarding ethics as "spaghetti monster" is what qualified you for the bitcoin Ponzi scam. Greg Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
moralist Posted February 1, 2014 Share Posted February 1, 2014 ...and yet you repeat your Haitian garbage heap tirade. The same question can also be asked of you, because you are the one who knows best how your own life has turned out: Can you do evil without getting what you deserve as the consequences of your actions? Greg I wouldn't know, Greg, since I don't try to do much evil in my day to day life. Then what about the little you do? Surely your own life can't have gone completely unexamined for this long. Do you observe the consequences of your own actions? The original question remains unanswered: Can you do evil without getting what you deserve as the consequences of your own actions? Just read this quote by Nassim Taleb: "The ancients knew very well that the only way to understand events is to cause them." Greg Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PDS Posted February 1, 2014 Share Posted February 1, 2014 ...and yet you repeat your Haitian garbage heap tirade. :wink:The same question can also be asked of you, because you are the one who knows best how your own life has turned out:Can you do evil without getting what you deserve as the consequences of your actions?Greg I wouldn't know, Greg, since I don't try to do much evil in my day to day life.Then what about the little you do? Surely your own life can't have gone completely unexamined for this long. Doyou observe the consequences of your own actions? The original question remains unanswered: Can you do evil without getting what you deserve as the consequences of your own actions?Just read this quote by Nassim Taleb:"The ancients knew very well that the only way to understand events is to cause them."GregDoes this sort of thing work with other people? I don't do evil Greg. The glibness with which you assume this is a pertinent question for most people is rather alarming. Is there something you need to confess? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
moralist Posted February 2, 2014 Share Posted February 2, 2014 I don't do evil Greg. A man who believes he is sinless! This wasn't a request for a confessional details. You only went off in that irrelevant direction as an attempted obfuscation of the point so as to evade answering it. The original question remains unaddressed and I'll even soften it so as to make your evasion even more obvious. Can you do what's morally wrong without getting what you deserve as the consequences of your own actions? Greg Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ellen Stuttle Posted February 2, 2014 Share Posted February 2, 2014 There is a very simple way to prove for yourself that you harvest what you plant. Simply do something that is morally wrong and see if you can escape getting the consequences you deserve.To this date I never have and neither can you. But there's no need to take my word on this when you can find out for yourself. So let me know how it turns out. Greg This is a beautifully crafted argument that Greg makes, and has been making, since he has "appeared" on OL.Where's the "argument"? All Greg is crafting is an assertion, with no standard of morally right or wrong provided, and no independent way of saying in advance what consequences are "deserved" for what action.EllenCome on, Ellen. [....]Come on, Greg. Where's the argument? (I undid your unnoted adding of boldface and paragraph breaks.)Ellen Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
moralist Posted February 2, 2014 Share Posted February 2, 2014 Come on, Greg. Where's the argument? (I undid your unnoted adding of boldface and paragraph breaks.) Ellen It's not an argument, Ellen. We each have already chosen the view by which we each will live and die. So arguing over what does not change is pointless. I stated my view that no one can do evil and not get what they deserve as the consequences of their own actions. You've made it perfectly clear that you disagree because your view is that people can violate the law of moral causality. So there you have it. That's both views... and everyone freely chooses and gets what they deserve as the result of their choice. Greg Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ellen Stuttle Posted February 2, 2014 Share Posted February 2, 2014 It's not an argument, Ellen.Adam said it was, a "beautifully crafted" one. I'm hoping he's reconsidering the description by now. Ellen Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Selene Posted February 2, 2014 Share Posted February 2, 2014 It's not an argument, Ellen.Adam said it was, a "beautifully crafted" one. I'm hoping he's reconsidering the description by now. EllenI stand by my statement Ellen/PDS, I will modify oneaspect. I am not certain that Greg is employing the argument by intention. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
moralist Posted February 2, 2014 Share Posted February 2, 2014 It's not an argument, Ellen. Adam said it was, a "beautifully crafted" one. I'm hoping he's reconsidering the description by now. Ellen I stand by my statement Ellen/PDS, I will modify one aspect. I am not certain that Greg is employing the argument by intention. Even I could agree with that, Adam. Stating my view can indeed be perceived as an argument by anyone who chooses to believe that people can be convinced by words on a monitor to change a previously chosen view. I hold the view that only real life experiences set into motion by our actions can possess enough power to do that, and frequently the experience needs to be so drastic as to be life altering or even life threatening. Greg Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ellen Stuttle Posted February 2, 2014 Share Posted February 2, 2014 It's not an argument, Ellen.Adam said it was, a "beautifully crafted" one. I'm hoping he's reconsidering the description by now. EllenI stand by my statement Ellen/PDS, I will modify oneaspect. I am not certain that Greg is employing the argument by intention.Then I'll repeat my question to you, Adam. What is it you think Greg's "argument" is?Ellen Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PDS Posted February 2, 2014 Share Posted February 2, 2014 I don't do evil Greg.A man who believes he is sinless! This wasn't a request for a confessional details. You only went off in that irrelevant direction as an attempted obfuscation of the point so as to evade answering it. The original question remains unaddressed and I'll even soften it so as to make your evasion even more obvious.Can you do what's morally wrong without getting what you deserve as the consequences of your own actions?GregYes. Signed, every child abuser who never got caughtSigned, every criminal a jury didn't convictSigned, every Sunday preacher who doesn't believe what he is telling othersSigned, ad nauseum. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PDS Posted February 2, 2014 Share Posted February 2, 2014 I don't do evil Greg.A man who believes he is sinless! This wasn't a request for a confessional details. You only went off in that irrelevant direction as an attempted obfuscation of the point so as to evade answering it. The original question remains unaddressed and I'll even soften it so as to make your evasion even more obvious.Can you do what's morally wrong without getting what you deserve as the consequences of your own actions?GregIsn't there a pretty wide gulf between doing evil and being sinless, as you say? You really should crack open some Augustine. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
moralist Posted February 2, 2014 Share Posted February 2, 2014 Can you do what's morally wrong without getting what you deserve as the consequences of your own actions? Greg Yes. Ok. I only wanted for you to clearly state your view that you personally can get away doing what's morally wrong and can escape experiencing the just and deserved consequences of your actions. And I stated my view that on one escapes the just and deserved consequences including experiencing the pain of what they become when they do what's morally wrong. And bringing this to the level of personal experience: I have never ever done what's morally wrong and escaped the consequences of my own actions. So my suggestion to you is that your view is derived from an unexamined life and from watching too much network television news. Greg Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PDS Posted February 2, 2014 Share Posted February 2, 2014 Since I never watch the network or any other kind of news, it looks like I will merely need to examine my life more. Thanks, Greg. You have set a fine example for this path with your obvious intellectual curiousity on such a wide variety of topics. Just curious: When you were secretly recording your friend Carlos Castenada, how did you experience negative consequences for such morally reprehensible behavior? How were you able to determine whether the negative consequences precisely "fit" your reprehensible behavior? By what standard?Since you brought up that such consequences have never escaped you in your life, please be specific.P.S.: Your snipping of my replies to make them fit your worldview would more be annoying were it not for the fact that everybody is pretty much on to your game by now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jules Troy Posted February 2, 2014 Share Posted February 2, 2014 Isn't being Christian immoral by definition Greg?Evade reality?Turn the other cheek thereby sanctioning the actions of those that would do you harm?Priests and their sexual abuse of children?Original sin?etc..etcOh crap now I am guilty of feeding the troll.. I'm sure if I say 10 hail rands GALT will forgive me! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
moralist Posted February 2, 2014 Share Posted February 2, 2014 Since I never watch the network or any other kind of news, it looks like I will merely need to examine my life more. I'd say so. Your view that you can do what's morally wrong while evading the consequences of your own actions would be easily shattered with even a modest amount of honest introspection of your life. But at least you have the consolation of knowing that your view is shared by the larger popular collective consensus, just as it is shared by most of the folks here. Most people believe that they can do what's morally wrong and get away with it. Just curious: When you were secretly recording your friend Carlos Castenada, how did you experience negative consequences for such morally reprehensible behavior? There were no negative consequences because filming a public personality in a public setting isn't the least bit immoral. We had no end of fun for years, and it did not come at Carlos' expense, as neither his life or his death were altered one tiny bit by our actions. I fully understand that your opinion is different and will never change. It is necessary for you to perceive me as immoral so as to invalidate my view of moral accountability while legitimizing your own view that you can escape the moral causality of your own actions. P.S.: Your snipping of my replies to make them fit your worldview would more be annoying were it not for the fact that everybody is pretty much on to your game by now. That's because I choose to respond to legitimate comments while leaving out the nastiness. Greg Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
moralist Posted February 2, 2014 Share Posted February 2, 2014 Isn't being Christian immoral by definition Greg? Evade reality? Turn the other cheek thereby sanctioning the actions of those that would do you harm? You have adopted the popular feminized liberal interpretation of that principle. Priests and their sexual abuse of children? Original sin? According to the Bible, there is hardly anything worse than doing evil under the color of religious authority. "But whoever causes one of these little ones who believe in and acknowledge and cleave to Me to stumble and sin, that is, who entices him or hinders him in right conduct or thought, it would be better more expedient and profitable or advantageous for him to have a great millstone fastened around his neck and to be sunk in the depth of the sea." In Exodus the commandment, "Thou shalt not to take the name of the Lord in vain." in Hebrew literally means not to carry the banner of the Lord in vain. This means not doing evil while acting as a representative of God. I don't think there is anything worse, because it tempts secularists who are just like you to hate God and to unjustly accuse Him for the evil that people do in His name. Greg Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
moralist Posted February 2, 2014 Share Posted February 2, 2014 I don't do evil Greg.A man who believes he is sinless! This wasn't a request for a confessional details. You only went off in that irrelevant direction as an attempted obfuscation of the point so as to evade answering it. The original question remains unaddressed and I'll even soften it so as to make your evasion even more obvious. Can you do what's morally wrong without getting what you deserve as the consequences of your own actions? Greg Isn't there a pretty wide gulf between doing evil and being sinless, as you say? There are certainly gradations of evil. That's one reason why I softened my question to "do what's morally wrong". Even though the word "sin" evokes all manner of melodramatic negative anti religious images in the minds of secularists, it is actually a term relating to archery, and means simply to "miss the mark". Greg Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jules Troy Posted February 3, 2014 Share Posted February 3, 2014 Just to clarify Greg I was just being cheeky PS: I do not hate what does not exist. Just the actions of men that do atrocities under his banner and by whatever flavor of it's word they happen to do those actions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
moralist Posted February 3, 2014 Share Posted February 3, 2014 Just to clarify Greg I was just being cheeky PS: I do not hate what does not exist. I like that, Jules. Cheeky is entertaining. The unjust accusation of God for the evil people do in His name can become the foundation for denial. It goes like this: There's so much injustice and suffering in the world so it's impossible for God to exist because how could He allow it? Whenever anyone mentions God, out pops the pedophile priests, the Inquisition, the Crusades, and witch burning! Seriously, now you can see why one of the Top Ten was devoted to making it clear how low down rotten it is to do evil in God's name. It gives people an excuse first to blame (unjustly accuse) God... and then to deny. Just the actions of men that do atrocities under his banner and by whatever flavor of it's word they happen to do those actions. That's the inevitable consequence of free will. If you are free to choose to do good... then someone else is just as free to choose to do evil. All truth is a double edge sword that cuts both ways. Greg Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ellen Stuttle Posted February 4, 2014 Share Posted February 4, 2014 Adam,Possibly you missed my post #114.I would still like to know why you describe Greg's statement as an "argument," let alone a "beautifully crafted" one.For reference, here's your initial post of praise:There is a very simple way to prove for yourself that you harvest what you plant. Simply do something that is morally wrong and see if you can escape getting the consequences you deserve.To this date I never have and neither can you. But there's no need to take my word on this when you can find out for yourself. So let me know how it turns out. GregThis is a beautifully crafted argument that Greg makes, and has been making, since he has "appeared" on OL.I would highly suggest that folks here invest the intellectual time and read Aristotle's Rhetoric.Additionally, read his Poetics, as Michael is doing.Ellen Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now