View Single Post
kahljorn kahljorn is offline
Join Date: May 2000
Location: NO
Old Dec 18th, 2007, 11:09 PM       
What the fuck does net value mean when it comes to morality, and how could you even possibly go about adding it together?

Assuming that morality always results in good consequences is the most ignorant foolish sort of "Morality" I've ever heard of. I guess it has some obvious religious basis, but you're clearly relying on a presumption here which you haven't bothered to defend.

lol but i can see what you're saying i just think its gay and you haven't really put forth an argument, you've just said stuff that you think could be true. Your presumption is that what is good is what results in good consequences. My first objection is that things which might be bad can have good consequences, and actions which are good can have bad results. Your response is "Net.. value," whatever that is -- something incalculable and useless for any type of morality and for the basis of decision.
My second point is that, just because "good" things have "good" results, does not necessitate god's existence. What's that quote? "Is good good because it's good, or is good good because god wills it good?"

Can god will good bad and it will have good consequences -- and vice versa? Is it actually possible to change things in that way?

ps you said morality was the physics of human interaction or something didnt you so wouldnt killing the entire human race for the sake of the planet or something inhuman be "Immoral" in some sense? You see how complicated these calculations can be!

lol seriously though good things always have good consequences? that's so vague and ambiguous, and so useless for morality! How could you ever use that as the compass of your being unless you were omniscient and knew what would have the best result? You ascribe to a very deterministic view point. I think that there is some base "design" in which things can have good results, but it's not so concrete at all, and that doing bad things might have good results sometimes. But i don't think that's any reason to act badly. Do you?

you know the biggest complaint I'd level against "greatest net value" is seriously that actions might take forever until the cumulation of that value, when the universe ends (or matures), and the achievement of the ultimate point of existence (gods intent for the universe right) until you can decide what's right... and in that context what would wrong even mean? DOES IT EXIST? CAN THINGS HAPPEN CONTRARY TO GODS PLAN!?!?!?!?

didn't jesus dying save the entire world wasn't that a bad thing :O :O net value though got to keep that in mind it's okay to kill jesus because it has a good result! im rambling! later!
Reply With Quote