|
| Thread: What Moral Philosopher Are You? |  This thread is pages long: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 · «PREV / NEXT» |
|
TheDeath
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
with serious business
|
posted August 27, 2008 08:20 PM |
|
|
Quote:
But if the strong protect the weak, that creates an adverse incentive for there to be more weak people.
Otherwise there is an overload of tyrants. Take your pick. Being weak is not something "bad" (i mean, in the sense that you are guilty, or convicted, or "evil" or whatever).
By helping them you are showing that you are BETTER because you do something for them and not necessarily expect the same thing back (maybe it's out of their control for example!). For example, how do you prove you are better than a selfish guy? By not being selfish.
|
|
Asheera
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
Elite Assassin
|
|
posted August 27, 2008 08:21 PM |
|
|
Let's just drop this, k?
____________
|
|
Combine
Tavern Dweller
Combine Mastermind
|
|
posted August 27, 2008 08:30 PM |
|
Edited by Combine at 20:31, 27 Aug 2008.
|
1. Nietzsche (100%) Information link
2. Kant (94%) Information link
3. Ayn Rand (84%) Information link
4. Jean-Paul Sartre (80%) Information link
5. Stoics (78%) Information link
6. Spinoza (76%) Information link
7. Cynics (75%) Information link
8. Aristotle (71%) Information link
9. Aquinas (63%) Information link
10. David Hume (63%) Information link
11. St. Augustine (63%) Information link
12. John Stuart Mill (53%) Information link
13. Jeremy Bentham (51%) Information link
14. Ockham (48%) Information link
15. Prescriptivism (46%) Information link
16. Plato (42%) Information link
17. Nel Noddings (32%) Information link
18. Epicureans (25%) Information link
19. Thomas Hobbes (23%)
Nietzsche 100%!That was really unexpected 
|
|
mvassilev
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted August 27, 2008 11:24 PM |
|
|
TheDeath:
Quote:
Otherwise there is an overload of tyrants.
Tyrrany is when the strong control the weak. But I don't advocate tyrrany. I would prefer to be strong and be around other strong people than be weak and be around other weak people. How can the strong control the strong?
Quote:
Being weak is not something "bad" (i mean, in the sense that you are guilty, or convicted, or "evil" or whatever).
It's bad for the person who is weak, and it also may be bad for the people around the weak person.
Quote:
For example, how do you prove you are better than a selfish guy? By not being selfish.
Do you really want to go there again? 
____________
Eccentric Opinion
|
|
Dingo
Responsible
Legendary Hero
God of Dark SPAM
|
|
posted August 27, 2008 11:51 PM |
|
|
1.Jeremy Bentham (100%)
2. Aquinas (91%)
3. Ayn Rand (82%)
4. John Stuart Mill (80%)
5. Aristotle (79%)
6. Kant (75%)
7. Epicureans (73%)
8. Plato (73%)
9. Prescriptivism (73%)
10. St. Augustine (67%)
11. Spinoza (66%)
12. Jean-Paul Sartre (65%)
13. Thomas Hobbes (50%)
14. Stoics (47%)
15. Nel Noddings (46%)
16. Cynics (39%)
17. David Hume (27%)
18. Nietzsche (27%)
19. Ockham (22%)
____________
The Above Post/Thread/Idea Is CopyRighted by, The Dingo Corp.
|
|
TheDeath
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
with serious business
|
|
posted August 28, 2008 12:17 PM |
|
|
Quote:
How can the strong control the strong?
There will always be someone stronger. Always
Quote:
It's bad for the person who is weak, and it also may be bad for the people around the weak person.
How do you define "weakness"?? Mighty weakness? (not necessarily physical). That's like saying black people are weaker -- in fact they WERE considered once that way -- and they were mighty weaker since they were enslaved. You think you're better now? Just because "it's different"???? That's what they thought as well...
Quote:
Do you really want to go there again?
How do you suggest you become better than him? By being mightier?
I like how Primitive you think if so. 
____________
The above post is subject to SIRIOUSness.
No jokes were harmed during the making of this signature.
|
|
william
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
LummoxLewis
|
|
posted August 28, 2008 12:19 PM |
|
|
Damn it. Does this thread need to turn into a quote war as well?!? Isn't it possible that you could just stop quote wars for just a day or two? It just starts to get old. Seriously.
____________
~Ticking away the moments that
make up a dull day, Fritter and
waste the hours in an off-hand
way~
|
|
TheDeath
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
with serious business
|
|
posted August 28, 2008 12:23 PM |
|
|
Asheera said:Quote:
Let's just drop this, k?
.
Then mvass continued. Blame him
and btw, I only pointed out that I am shocked with the Nietzsche results. Mvass started arguing about it.
____________
The above post is subject to SIRIOUSness.
No jokes were harmed during the making of this signature.
|
|
Asheera
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
Elite Assassin
|
|
posted August 28, 2008 01:06 PM |
|
|
Quote:
Well for me that's like saying "I wouldn't want to be a jew" which is well, dunno, kinda weird.
Of course it is weird, because this is a silly comparison. A much better approach would be like: "I don't like lesbians", meaning that I wouldn't want to be one, not that I have a problem with them and want to exterminate them.
Quote:
There will always be someone stronger. Always
Agreed. After all, my favorite quote (for my fantasy character) is: "No matter how powerful one becomes, there is always someone stronger. That's why I'm in a constant pursuit of power, so I can be prepared when an enemy tries to take advantage of me."
This doesn't mean that strong people HAVE to protect the weak, just not exploit them.
Quote:
btw, I only pointed out that I am shocked with the Nietzsche results.
FYI, even "soft" Kooka got Nietzsche at 77%
____________
|
|
TheDeath
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
with serious business
|
|
posted August 28, 2008 01:13 PM |
|
|
Quote:
This doesn't mean that strong people HAVE to protect the weak, just not exploit them.
Well if you want to be neutral...
Quote:
FYI, even "soft" Kooka got Nietzsche at 77%
"soft" Kooka? 
anyway the test is kinda flawed by 95% is a bit too much 
@William: this post was on topic
|
|
Minion
Legendary Hero
|
|
posted August 28, 2008 02:09 PM |
|
|
1. Jean-Paul Sartre (100%)
2. Kant (96%)
3. John Stuart Mill (92%)
4. Aquinas (70%)
5. Nel Noddings (69%)
6. Jeremy Bentham (65%)
7. Ockham (62%)
8. St. Augustine (62%)
9. Epicureans (60%)
10. Prescriptivism (60%)
11. Ayn Rand (55%)
12. Spinoza (50%)
13. Thomas Hobbes (50%)
14. David Hume (44%)
15. Nietzsche (43%)
16. Plato (40%)
17. Cynics (39%)
18. Stoics (38%)
19. Aristotle (34%)
I was sure that Kant would get high ratings, and I do have some Sartre in my bookself as well. Haven't read him for a long time, but the individualis he endorces must have been the key factor here. But Kant is the man. Him I value exceptionally high among philosophers. But Mill, I differ with many of his ideas, but then again there are points where he nails it well.. these happened to be the questions asked here. Well, morally we may be on the same track, however, I don't consider myself an utilitarianist.
____________
"These friends probably started using condoms after having produced the most optimum amount of offsprings. Kudos to them for showing at least some restraint" - Tsar-ivor
|
|
mvassilev
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted August 28, 2008 04:31 PM |
|
|
TheDeath:
Quote:
There will always be someone stronger.
Well, I suppose that's true. But I'd rather be strong and be around strong people than be weak and be around weak people. You see, weak people annoy me.
Quote:
How do you define "weakness"?? Mighty weakness?
How do you define weakness? What's "mighty weakness"?
Quote:
How do you suggest you become better than him?
No, I mean, why would you say that he's bad in the first place?
Asheera:
Quote:
A much better approach would be like: "I don't like lesbians", meaning that I wouldn't want to be one, not that I have a problem with them and want to exterminate them.
An even better approach would be "I don't like poor people." Not meaning that you have a problem with them and want to exterminate them, but that you wouldn't want to be poor.
____________
Eccentric Opinion
|
|
pandora
Honorable
Legendary Hero
The Chosen One
|
|
posted August 28, 2008 04:44 PM |
|
|
The best approach would be to stop generalizing all people based on matters of race / religion / sexual orientation / lifestyle etc.
Please keep the thread ontopic.
____________
"In the end, we will remember not the words of our enemies, but the silence of our friends."
|
|
mvassilev
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted August 28, 2008 04:45 PM |
|
|
Quote:
The best approach would be to stop generalizing all people based on matters of race / religion / sexual orientation / lifestyle etc.
It appears that you are misunderstanding what I'm saying. What I'm saying is that I wouldn't want to be poor because of the negative aspects inherent in being poor. I wouldn't want to be weak because of the negative aspects inherent in being weak. Doesn't mean that poor people and weak people can't be nice, but I'd rather be strong and nice than weak and nice.
____________
Eccentric Opinion
|
|
TheDeath
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
with serious business
|
|
posted August 28, 2008 04:50 PM |
|
|
Since I am tired of quote wars and frankly mvass, regardless of how many times I show you that selfish is "evil" and creates hate (and no, you didn't reply to my 'bee' example, apart from saying "a bee society is bad" -- of course it is since it wouldn't have selfish guys around). 
just to clarify what I meant, since you asked my definition of "mighty weakness":
Why are weak people weak in the first place? Because us, "mighty" people, can take over them, if we want. Regardless if we use our advantages or simply our physical strength or luck, does not matter.
and Nietzsche has a different ideology than "I hate to be poor" as you obviously reduce to extremes, as always. Doesn't prove anything apart from ridiculous and absurd analogies.
|
|
pandora
Honorable
Legendary Hero
The Chosen One
|
|
posted August 28, 2008 04:52 PM |
|
|
Fair enough, but my statement still stands - as does the one about staying ontopic 
There is an alarming trend here to start with the quote wars, and have all threads eventually turn into the same thing.
____________
"In the end, we will remember not the words of our enemies, but the silence of our friends."
|
|
mvassilev
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted August 28, 2008 05:11 PM |
|
|
TheDeath:
Quote:
regardless of how many times I show you that selfish is "evil" and creates hate
I have told you numerous times that hatred is against self-interest, but you seem to give up whenever I start telling you why. But let me tell you why, again. If a guy hates black people and kills them, he has acted against his rational self-interest, since he has destroyed many of those who would benefit him, directly or indirectly. To be more specific, let us say that a racist kills a black doctor. Then, a few years later, this racist gets AIDS. Now, let us say that this doctor was close to a cure for AIDS, but was killed before his research could come to any actual cure. Certainly this racist acted against his own self-interest. Thus, hatred is against self-interest.
Or take another example. Let us say that 13% of the workforce is black. The racist kills 13% of the workforce. This lowers everybody's standard of living, including the racist's. Also, this prevents much expansion in the future. Thus, hatred is against self-interest.
(Note: when I say "self-interest", I am referring to rational self-interest, unless I say otherwise.)
Quote:
Why are weak people weak in the first place? Because us, "mighty" people, can take over them, if we want.
Er... no. I mean, this may be true to a certain extent, but most of the time it's the other way around: the strong can take over the weak because they are weak, but they are not weak because they can be taken over. Just take a group of equally weak people (though that's hard to measure) and a group of equally strong people (the strong group being stronger than the weak group). You will see quite a difference, even when none of them are strong enough to take over any of the others. The main difference between a strong person and a weak person - the difference that creates all others - is that strong people do their best to solve their problems by themselves, while weak people are emotional, cry, and try to get other people to do it for them.
Quote:
and Nietzsche has a different ideology than "I hate to be poor" as you obviously reduce to extremes, as always.
I don't like Nietzsche much, either, because he is too emotionalistic and opposed to traditional ethics for the sake of being opposed for traditional ethics. In a sense, he's like a hippie, although he favors strength.
Pandora:
Quote:
There is an alarming trend here to start with the quote wars, and have all threads eventually turn into the same thing.
Sorry. 
____________
Eccentric Opinion
|
|
pandora
Honorable
Legendary Hero
The Chosen One
|
|
posted August 28, 2008 05:16 PM |
|
Edited by pandora at 17:22, 28 Aug 2008.
|
Did I stutter?
If you can't stop yourself, use the thread that you created with him to continue this discussion and direct him to it to reply. If you continue to engage in offtopic quote wars here I will penalize you.
edit following the Death's next post: This applies to both of you.
____________
"In the end, we will remember not the words of our enemies, but the silence of our friends."
|
|
TheDeath
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
with serious business
|
|
posted August 28, 2008 05:20 PM |
|
Edited by TheDeath at 17:20, 28 Aug 2008.
|
No mvass, that black people example is the SAME example all over again. If you do yourself a favor and search in the OSM where I gave the bee example, you actually said "Now I see what you are trying to talk about. But yet a bee society would be impractical" or some other nonsense, because you couldn't find arguments.
Also your example is reducing it to absurdity. (correct me if I'm wrong but we discussed this at CH).
so let me rephrase the question then: how are you different than a selfish person? By not being selfish.
There done. Period. End of discussion. Back on topic.
what you're still trying to reply?
anyway I drop this. have fun discussing with Jolly Joker in CH.
EDIT: also I see you change your views every day, so probably you'll realize sooner or later what I say.
|
|
mvassilev
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted January 05, 2009 02:15 AM |
|
|
I've been looking at this test again, and have realized that there are several questions which have more than one answer that I agree with. So, with the explanations given below, which should I put?
2. PURPOSE TO LIFE Does each person have a moral purpose/morally ideal way to live?
I agree with
b) Yes, but the way to live in order to meet that purpose is unique for each individual
c) Yes, but following moral law is the only standard that a person must meet
d) No, yet there are ways to act that are inherently more conducive to the self-interest of the person who is acting
It is morally ideal for people to adhere to the non-aggression principle, which is ultimately in their own self-interest.
3. PROPER ORIGIN OF MORALITY Where does the proper distinction between "good" and "bad" come from?
I agree with
b) Every individual, through their choice to pursue that which they desire
e) Human nature, with the natural interests of people
People have different preferences, so they attach "good" and "evil" to different qualities. However, both the preferences and the perception of the qualities is strongly influenced by society and the interests of other individuals.
4. SOCIETAL INFLUENCE Must a person be coerced/influenced at some level by societal powers in order to live morally/virtuously?
I agree with
b) Yes, people will try to be good when they have knowledge of the virtuous life, but societal guidance and reinforcement (sometimes forceful) is necessary.
c) Sort of, society doesn't have to coerce a person to find morality, but the interest/rights of others in society must conveyed to a person in order for that person to determine right from wrong.
Society's interests have to be conveyed to an individual, and he must use this to find morality. However, morality is not a constricting straitjacket, and society only has to forcefully reinforce it whenever there is a violation of the non-aggression principle.
9. INDIVIDUAL & OTHERS Is the self-pleasure or self-preservation of the individual ever in conflict with the same type of interests of others?
I agree with
a) No, and virtuous living is consistently beneficial to the individual and the community.
d) Yes, and acting in one's own self-interest is fine.
There may be a conflict, but unless the conflict results in a violation of the non-aggression principle, the result is beneficial to the individual and to society as a whole.
12. VIRTUOUS PERSON A virtuous person can be described best as:
I agree with
b) Strong, powerful and rational
f) Concerned with others, yet very rational
Strong, powerful, rational, and concerned with others.
____________
Eccentric Opinion
|
| |
|
|
