Ethics - Page 3

Kham · 07-21-2007, 12:11 PM

Quote:

I must admit I haven't read Locke's Social Contract, but now I am curious to read it. Still, I have read a smattering of the philosophes and Locke's A Letter Concerning Toleration. Their ideas are interesting but I never could accept any of their philosophical systems.

Locke did not write "The Social Contract," that was Rousseau. While Locke was a Social Contract philosophe, the social contract is not exactly a moral platform. It is better understood as a political philosophy. If you live in almost any western country, you accept, tacitly, those philosophies.

Quote:

Currently I am looking into stoicism and libertarnism for a moral base.

Libertarianism seems totally detached from a moral system, and stoicism seems to be a means to a moral system, not the ends of one. But I would be interested to hear where these lead you.

My personal views on morality contain a tad of a dissonance. Morality seems intrinsic to me, all societies seem to accept basic moral principles (try finding a society thats okay with arbitrary murder or stealing). But finding a philosophical basis for morality has vexed every great philosopher from Aristotle to Kant. Maybe there just isn't a consistent philosophical basis, I cannot be sure.

pseudonous · 07-21-2007, 12:46 PM

Quote:

Locke did not write "The Social Contract," that was Rousseau.

Thanks. I read Rousseau's "The Social Contract" and was under the impression that Locke wrote his own version.

Probability_Amplitude · 08-21-2007, 05:07 AM

Jaej, I love doing that wikipedia thing too. You learn so much.

I studied metaethics last semester as a part of a unit I was taking and I found it to be fascinating. Personally, I prefer deontology to utilitarianism, albeit the differences between the two are more subtle than is usually presented.

Derbonic · 10-29-2007, 03:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JerryAgent

I do not believe in the "treat others as you would like to be treated." If someone treats you badly, it gives you excuse to treat them badly. It invites revenge, spite, jealousy, maybe even slight narcissism. If somone wronged me, yes I would love to get back at them, and I do, but afterwards that nagging feeling in my concsious comes back after the sense of victory fades. Then my conscious takes over and I am guilty. I believe I should treat others kindly no matter how I am treated, I won't settle for lesser standards.

So there's my thoughts.

Thats not do unto others... at all, yet many people think so. Do unto others...
is exactly like you put it: "treat others as you would like to be treated."
Think about your statement.
Now in the next sentance you say: " If someone treats you badly, it gives you excuse to treat them badly. "
How did you arrive at this conclusion? If you where to only be able to act in accordance to Treat others... you would not exact revenge because you would not want revenge to be taken on yourself.
Dont over complicate it. Act in a way that you wish the people around you would act - With Respect for the Individual.

romansh · 11-13-2007, 10:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jaej

Essentially, utilitarianism is a moral theory that states the option that provides the most good for the most people (the most utility) is the most moral and thus the best choice.

Sounds like something Spock would say and Captain Kirk would say the opposite???

stillcrazy · 12-26-2007, 10:29 PM

Don't you wonder why some have to go to a preacher to be told to do good, and others never step inside a church but are the nicest people you would ever want to meet.
Then you go to a person of "God" and they act like they can do anything they want and be a mean butt head, but then ask for forgivness everynight then think they are all good