OCinBuffalo Posted March 10, 2017 Share Posted March 10, 2017 (edited) Consider: You're walking down the sidewalk. Yes, suburb unmitigated morons, I am already subtracting you from the equation, because 9/10 you don't add value to the discourse here, just ask the Crayonz wannabe. Everything that guy writes stinks of Red Lobster, out of F'ing season. But, today is "Lobsterfest"....which makes me wonder....since lobster season normally involves Maine, in the fall, and that's exactly 6 months off? F'ing Suburbs == Pretend Crayonz. This is one rare instance where the charge requires them to defend it, not the other way around. How are you suburb people capable of having a lobster fest at exactly the wrong time? Answer! You have no F'ing idea, do you? Anyway, imagine 2 CITY people walking down opposite ends of the same sidewalk. They both see a man lying on the ground. The first person says "I have to help him immediately, because it's wrong if I don't"(Democrat), the other person says "I have to find out what's wrong with him, so I can help him, and to find out if he's lying/about to sucker punch me, because it's wrong if I don't"(Republican), and of course, the libertarian viewpoint, which neither R or D considers: "perhaps before anybody does anything, we should ASK the man lying on the ground what he thinks." See? You thought there was going to be an unmitigated moron in this story, didn't you? (Well, GG can PM you all and swear he knew the whole time that there wasn't, but...are you buying that?) No. The truth here is that tolerance/inference is not a constant. Tolerance/inference is a variable. Far too often we confuse morality(principles) with approach(values). Some people are the "help right away even though I don't know WTF is happening" people. Some people are "wait, WTF" people. Neither gets to claim moral superiority....anymore. Not since Trump won. The only unmitigated morons in this thread? The people that don't yet recognize that the Democrat political playbook since 1993...is literally the Houston Oilers playbook of 1993. They just don't know it yet., Edited March 10, 2017 by OCinBuffalo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GoBills808 Posted March 10, 2017 Share Posted March 10, 2017 You sure the Libertarian wasn't going to ask the man what Aleppo is? I jest. Not sure I understand your distinction between principles and values. Interesting though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OCinBuffalo Posted March 10, 2017 Author Share Posted March 10, 2017 (edited) You sure the Libertarian wasn't going to ask the man what Aleppo is? I jest. Not sure I understand your distinction between principles and values. Interesting though. It's actually simple. TLDR: Think "The 10 Commandments" : Principles. Then, think the Bills : Values. If you want depth: Then? Take the religion out of both. Morality, or, principles, is learned behavior. But, it is learned behavior that ALL humans share, apparently from birth. We now know that brain development has a lot to do with it. High-functioning sociopaths brains? Not human. You can find the concept that "Murder is Bad" in every culture, 1000s of miles away from each other, with 1000s of years of separation from each other. Besides murder, all humans know that cheating, stealing, lying, F'ing some guy's wife without his say-so, are simply: wrong. Sociopaths do not. They actually cannot. This is why there's nothing morally wrong with putting sociopaths down/out of our misery. There is research that supports genetic morality. Few species kill their own kind. While plenty are willing to engage in what amounts to a Friday night at a dive bar, everybody knows that killing, over mating, is undesirable. Laying some guy out, and then laying his girlfriend? Well, that's animal behavior. Specifically? Reptile Brain behavior. Morality is thus inherent, because our brains have evolved, mostly, beyond the reptilian. Feral humans have grown up all alone, with no community or societal "values", and they still develop morality. The story of Gilgamesh proves this, never mind the 10 Commandments. Thus, principles are universal. The 10 commandments just gets all the headlines, because it was the first time somebody wrote down 10 things that everybody "knows" causes trouble, every time, in super-definitive terms. Hence: Commandments. Not mantras. Values have nothing to do with principles. My values as a Catholic say that I can't eat meat right now. WTF does that have to do with you? Nothing. My eating meat/not has 0 effect on you, or society. Values are a choice. WTF do I care if you wear a hijab? I don't. I do care if you demand that my girlfriend wears one...because now you are enforcing your values on me, and pretending they are universal principles, when we both know they aren't. (Incidentally,if you make your girlfriend wear a hijab, there's an 80% chance her and her hillbilly-hairy downstairs is gonna end up in my hotel room. This is a world-wide, racially agnostic phenomenon. Hijab-girl, in Ithaca of all places, was 2 weeks ago. I step in that schit all the time. I just want a drink or 3, then I decide I want Indian food. The rest: batschit crazy. For reasons passing understanding, I attract girls who want to be "broken", or want to rebel against their men/society/some schit I don't know/care about, in public. When the TEA party started, coincidentally, some hipster told me she wanted to tea-bag me. I ran away, because I didn't want to engage in what I thought was some kind of punishment sex for my political views. As smart as think I am, girls have been incomprehensible since I can remember. I don't have time for all that, and I can't commit to what I simply do no understand...so, that's why I'm not married, or in prison.) HOWEVER! If I find out that your girlfriend is your girlfriend, I'm gone, instantly. I don't knowingly break the adultery principle, ever. Breaking a value means nothing. Breaking a principle gets you state time, or shot, or worse: having to explain that you actually, really, really didn't know that the woman you banged was your rival high school lacrosse team head coach's wife. I schit you not, on all counts. She knew damn well who I was though, once again enforcing the "I attract crazy" postulate. Here's where trouble lies: when any human puts their values above our shared principles. A guy doesn't want to share his fortune with his albeit loser wife, so he knocks her off. Even if he doesn't get caught, he is going to feel guilty. Why? Because he put his own value of his pride, his cash, etc., ahead of the universal principle that murder == bad. People that can't separate Principles from Values == people that are going to start trouble (EDIT: Lacrosse. Coach's. Wife. ) The only question is how much trouble and hence, do we taze them, or do we execute them? Right now, we have people who are stealing, cheating and lying in order to do harm to Trump. They think they are doing right. They are not. They are merely putting their own values ahead of what we all know is moral behavior. Never forget: Deep Throat(Watergate) was convicted of corruption. (EDIT: CIA is literally the place where one goes to put their values ahead of principles, in the hope that it will prevent others from mass principle breaking...but...it's still immoral. CiA are professional, organized criminals. They have no honor, because they aren't soldiers. I'm fine with it, because I understand the big picture, but, I don't deny that they are principle-breakers. This is why I refuse to pee myself when I find out that CIA is doing CIA.) So, yeah, even the guy who is following his inherent principles by telling on Nixon...can also be capable of ignoring them, for personal gain...at the same time. Values are largely specific to culture. IF I cat-call a girl at a Bills game, I'm gonna get a WTF from basically everybody around me. However, IF I DON"T catcall a girl at a Tejano bar in Texas? She's gonna demand to know why. Worse? She's gonna accuse me of being a cop/thinking i'm white so I'm too good for her/and all sorts of batschit crazy that makes this long post even longer. Yet another lesson I got to learn the hard way. Edited March 10, 2017 by OCinBuffalo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GG Posted March 10, 2017 Share Posted March 10, 2017 Suburbs don't have sidewalks? Great news. Now I won't get a ticket for not shoveling the 4' concrete strips in front of my house. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiberius Posted March 10, 2017 Share Posted March 10, 2017 Anyway, imagine 2 CITY people walking down opposite ends of the same sidewalk. They both see a man lying on the ground. The first person says "I have to help him immediately, because it's wrong if I don't"(Democrat), the other person says "I have to find out what's wrong with him, so I can help him, and to find out if he's lying/about to sucker punch me, because it's wrong if I don't"(Republican), and of course, the libertarian viewpoint, which neither R or D considers: "perhaps before anybody does anything, we should ASK the man lying on the ground what he thinks." See? No, I think the Democrat would obviously see that asking him what was wrong was part of helping him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OCinBuffalo Posted March 10, 2017 Author Share Posted March 10, 2017 (edited) No, I think the Democrat would obviously see that asking him what was wrong was part of helping him. Really, Have you, as a Democrat, asked any Coal Miners, Steel Workers, Welders, Plumbers or Pipe Fitters what was wrong...in the last 30 days, in the last 6 months, ALL of last year, or...ever? EDIT: Do you even know what these people do, or, for extra credit: can you tell us the difference between a Plumber and a Pipe Fitter? Do you know anything, anything at all about these people, how their day goes. What they think, about...anything. I do. They are my clients. Along with nurses, waitresses(sorry, severs and flight attendants)...who call themselves waitresses, and a bevy of other people...that you know, based on your posts, practically nothing about. Newsflash: They voted Trump 8/10 times. i didn't ask. They told me. Some demanded to tell me. Why? Cause I listen. Because I make a living asking the man on the ground...before I lift a finger. Did Hillary Clinton ask the coal miners anything...before she promised to put them out of work(and, in fairness, re-train them to do something else)? Nope. Does Chuck Schumer know/care why more than a few of my clients are holding their businesses back at 49 employees/starting new companies that do the same thing...so they don't get smashed by Obamacare? Nope. Thus, have you learned a damn thing since the electoral whipping you took 90 days ago? Nope. Edited March 10, 2017 by OCinBuffalo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boyst Posted March 10, 2017 Share Posted March 10, 2017 I prefer meatheads ego Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
unbillievable Posted March 10, 2017 Share Posted March 10, 2017 The Republican would yell at him to stop blocking the road. The Democrat would steal his wallet. ..and the Liberterian would yell at the R and D to leave the man alone. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted March 10, 2017 Share Posted March 10, 2017 No, I think the Democrat would obviously see that asking him what was wrong was part of helping him. Pretty sure the Democrat would decide there's a problem with people laying on the ground and stage a protest that no one's doing anything about that, and equal pay, LGBTQ rights, free abortion on demand, forgiveness of student loans, Trump, etc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
unbillievable Posted March 10, 2017 Share Posted March 10, 2017 Pretty sure the Democrat would decide there's a problem with people laying on the ground and stage a protest that no one's doing anything about that, and equal pay, LGBTQ rights, free abortion on demand, forgiveness of student loans, Trump, etc. That's a good point. If the guy on the ground was white, the democrat would be yelling at him for taking too much space and to check his privilege. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted March 10, 2017 Share Posted March 10, 2017 That's a good point. If the guy on the ground was white, the democrat would be yelling at him for taking too much space and to check his privilege. But if the guy on the ground was liberal, he'd just reply "I'm in my safe space!" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GoBills808 Posted March 10, 2017 Share Posted March 10, 2017 It's actually simple. TLDR: Think "The 10 Commandments" : Principles. Then, think the Bills : Values. If you want depth: Then? Take the religion out of both. Morality, or, principles, is learned behavior. But, it is learned behavior that ALL humans share, apparently from birth. We now know that brain development has a lot to do with it. High-functioning sociopaths brains? Not human. You can find the concept that "Murder is Bad" in every culture, 1000s of miles away from each other, with 1000s of years of separation from each other. Besides murder, all humans know that cheating, stealing, lying, F'ing some guy's wife without his say-so, are simply: wrong. Sociopaths do not. They actually cannot. This is why there's nothing morally wrong with putting sociopaths down/out of our misery. There is research that supports genetic morality. Few species kill their own kind. While plenty are willing to engage in what amounts to a Friday night at a dive bar, everybody knows that killing, over mating, is undesirable. Laying some guy out, and then laying his girlfriend? Well, that's animal behavior. Specifically? Reptile Brain behavior. Morality is thus inherent, because our brains have evolved, mostly, beyond the reptilian. Feral humans have grown up all alone, with no community or societal "values", and they still develop morality. The story of Gilgamesh proves this, never mind the 10 Commandments. Thus, principles are universal. The 10 commandments just gets all the headlines, because it was the first time somebody wrote down 10 things that everybody "knows" causes trouble, every time, in super-definitive terms. Hence: Commandments. Not mantras. Values have nothing to do with principles. My values as a Catholic say that I can't eat meat right now. WTF does that have to do with you? Nothing. My eating meat/not has 0 effect on you, or society. Values are a choice. WTF do I care if you wear a hijab? I don't. I do care if you demand that my girlfriend wears one...because now you are enforcing your values on me, and pretending they are universal principles, when we both know they aren't. (Incidentally,if you make your girlfriend wear a hijab, there's an 80% chance her and her hillbilly-hairy downstairs is gonna end up in my hotel room. This is a world-wide, racially agnostic phenomenon. Hijab-girl, in Ithaca of all places, was 2 weeks ago. I step in that schit all the time. I just want a drink or 3, then I decide I want Indian food. The rest: batschit crazy. For reasons passing understanding, I attract girls who want to be "broken", or want to rebel against their men/society/some schit I don't know/care about, in public. When the TEA party started, coincidentally, some hipster told me she wanted to tea-bag me. I ran away, because I didn't want to engage in what I thought was some kind of punishment sex for my political views. As smart as think I am, girls have been incomprehensible since I can remember. I don't have time for all that, and I can't commit to what I simply do no understand...so, that's why I'm not married, or in prison.) HOWEVER! If I find out that your girlfriend is your girlfriend, I'm gone, instantly. I don't knowingly break the adultery principle, ever. Breaking a value means nothing. Breaking a principle gets you state time, or shot, or worse: having to explain that you actually, really, really didn't know that the woman you banged was your rival high school lacrosse team head coach's wife. I schit you not, on all counts. She knew damn well who I was though, once again enforcing the "I attract crazy" postulate. Here's where trouble lies: when any human puts their values above our shared principles. A guy doesn't want to share his fortune with his albeit loser wife, so he knocks her off. Even if he doesn't get caught, he is going to feel guilty. Why? Because he put his own value of his pride, his cash, etc., ahead of the universal principle that murder == bad. People that can't separate Principles from Values == people that are going to start trouble (EDIT: Lacrosse. Coach's. Wife. ) The only question is how much trouble and hence, do we taze them, or do we execute them? Right now, we have people who are stealing, cheating and lying in order to do harm to Trump. They think they are doing right. They are not. They are merely putting their own values ahead of what we all know is moral behavior. Never forget: Deep Throat(Watergate) was convicted of corruption. (EDIT: CIA is literally the place where one goes to put their values ahead of principles, in the hope that it will prevent others from mass principle breaking...but...it's still immoral. CiA are professional, organized criminals. They have no honor, because they aren't soldiers. I'm fine with it, because I understand the big picture, but, I don't deny that they are principle-breakers. This is why I refuse to pee myself when I find out that CIA is doing CIA.) So, yeah, even the guy who is following his inherent principles by telling on Nixon...can also be capable of ignoring them, for personal gain...at the same time. Values are largely specific to culture. IF I cat-call a girl at a Bills game, I'm gonna get a WTF from basically everybody around me. However, IF I DON"T catcall a girl at a Tejano bar in Texas? She's gonna demand to know why. Worse? She's gonna accuse me of being a cop/thinking i'm white so I'm too good for her/and all sorts of batschit crazy that makes this long post even longer. Yet another lesson I got to learn the hard way. I'm not so sure on the concept of genetic morality as you've laid it out. Many (many) species eat their own, including ours. Now, whether or not nature has put an evolutionary moral compass into certain species in the form of kuru or bovine spongiform encephalopathy is up for debate, but you'd have to parse through why certain species suffer no ill effects from cannibalism and whether or not that's indicative of a lack of morality or another agency by which they're governed. I subscribe to the idea (probably a theory) that ALL behavior, including predilections we might call morals or conceptualizations of good and evil, is informed by the evolutionary process and can be described as such. I think there's an important distinction between this and your proposal, but it's subtle: your generic morality is simply (if I'm reading you right) an inherent compass that delineates concepts of 'right' and 'wrong' ...Dawkins (The Selfish Gene, terrific if you haven't) would argue that concepts of morality and altruism are merely byproducts of an evolutionary framework hell bent on maintaining, perpetuating, and whenever possible increasing an individual's generic makeup throughout the specie. Explained thusly, you can account for the myriad types of behavior that often appears to run counter to the reductive eat-breed-die equation, and you don't even need a God to do it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azalin Posted March 10, 2017 Share Posted March 10, 2017 But I like Red Lobster. They have fresh oysters that are inexpensive, and their margaritas are surprisingly tasty. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
unbillievable Posted March 10, 2017 Share Posted March 10, 2017 I'm not so sure on the concept of genetic morality as you've laid it out. Many (many) species eat their own, including ours. Now, whether or not nature has put an evolutionary moral compass into certain species in the form of kuru or bovine spongiform encephalopathy is up for debate, but you'd have to parse through why certain species suffer no ill effects from cannibalism and whether or not that's indicative of a lack of morality or another agency by which they're governed. I subscribe to the idea (probably a theory) that ALL behavior, including predilections we might call morals or conceptualizations of good and evil, is informed by the evolutionary process and can be described as such. I think there's an important distinction between this and your proposal, but it's subtle: your generic morality is simply (if I'm reading you right) an inherent compass that delineates concepts of 'right' and 'wrong' ...Dawkins (The Selfish Gene, terrific if you haven't) would argue that concepts of morality and altruism are merely byproducts of an evolutionary framework hell bent on maintaining, perpetuating, and whenever possible increasing an individual's generic makeup throughout the specie. Explained thusly, you can account for the myriad types of behavior that often appears to run counter to the reductive eat-breed-die equation, and you don't even need a God to do it. So Morality is an evolutionary trait perpetuated by the survival advantage of maintaining group cooperation. Why does PETA exist? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GoBills808 Posted March 10, 2017 Share Posted March 10, 2017 So Morality is an evolutionary trait perpetuated by the survival advantage of maintaining group cooperation. Why does PETA exist? Well, sort of. Morality (theoretically) is a function of the probability that an actor's characteristic or trait or action or series of actions will enure to the benefit of the survival of said actor's genes. So PETA, as an organization composed of individuals, is probably a bad example if you're looking for a rationale behind morality. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
unbillievable Posted March 10, 2017 Share Posted March 10, 2017 (edited) Well, sort of. Morality (theoretically) is a function of the probability that an actor's characteristic or trait or action or series of actions will enure to the benefit of the survival of said actor's genes. So PETA, as an organization composed of individuals, is probably a bad example if you're looking for a rationale behind morality. There exists morally motivated groups who's purpose is the extinction of the species; like PETA promoting an unhealthy vegan lifestyle or Planned Parenthood killing babies. If evolution created morality to perpetuate the species, how did it morph to include ideas counter to that purpose? edit: I have a theory; and it includes finding a way to kill off the idiots. Edited March 10, 2017 by unbillievable Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiberius Posted March 10, 2017 Share Posted March 10, 2017 Pretty sure the Democrat would decide there's a problem with people laying on the ground and stage a protest that no one's doing anything about that, and equal pay, LGBTQ rights, free abortion on demand, forgiveness of student loans, Trump, etc. Pretty sure you are stupid Really, Have you, as a Democrat, asked any Coal Miners, Steel Workers, Welders, Plumbers or Pipe Fitters what was wrong...in the last 30 days, in the last 6 months, ALL of last year, or...ever? EDIT: Do you even know what these people do, or, for extra credit: can you tell us the difference between a Plumber and a Pipe Fitter? Do you know anything, anything at all about these people, how their day goes. What they think, about...anything. Plumber fixed my toilet on election day, actually. He was all pissed about Trump and said the American people would never elect such an idiot. Curious, what would a Libertarian tell the coal miner? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted March 10, 2017 Share Posted March 10, 2017 Pretty sure you are stupid Plumber fixed my toilet on election day, actually. He was all pissed about Trump and said the American people would never elect such an idiot. Curious, what would a Libertarian tell the coal miner? [This is an automated response.] This ridiculous verbiage is brought to you by... Created by DC Tom-bot, beta version 0.7. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiberius Posted March 10, 2017 Share Posted March 10, 2017 [This is an automated response.] This ridiculous verbiage is brought to you by... Created by DC Tom-bot, beta version 0.7. Oh, and you are so original Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted March 10, 2017 Share Posted March 10, 2017 Oh, and you are so original [This is an automated response.] I'm not stupid. Yes, yes you are. Created by DC Tom-bot, beta version 0.7. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts