|
|
|
marfknox
SFN Die Hard
USA
3739 Posts |
Posted - 06/13/2007 : 15:58:40 [Permalink]
|
Dude wrote: How constructive. | Just read marfknox's post, after she calls me a lair, for a fine example. |
No I didn't, but now I will. Liar. | I am uninterested in a debate over the definition of ethics because any definition that goes beyond the basic idea of making distinctions bwtween right and wrong is inevitably tainted by the personal ethics of those trying to define it. |
I ain't looking for a debate about the definition of "ethics". You said that ethics is about making distinctions between right and wrong, and I essentially responded by pointing out that "right" and "wrong" aren't objective concepts.
I then went on to explicitly disagree with you about certain feelings being unethical, and explained why. You gonna counter my disagreement, or continue to sidetrack this discussion with your bitching? |
"Too much certainty and clarity could lead to cruel intolerance" -Karen Armstrong
Check out my art store: http://www.marfknox.etsy.com
|
 |
|
|
Dude
SFN Die Hard
USA
6891 Posts |
 Posted - 06/13/2007 : 16:10:24 [Permalink]
|
| You said that ethics is about making distinctions between right and wrong, and I essentially responded by pointing out that "right" and "wrong" aren't objective concepts. |
You see what I mean? She's doing it again. She can't engage in a conversation about what ethics is for more than half a sentence, then she turns the topic to the subjective nature of right and wrong.
Ethics is nothing more than making distinctions between right and wrong. Ethics itself is absolutely 100% objectively defined.
But you can't have a conversation about the definition of ethics without some halfwit inappropriately interjecting value judgements.
This is the reason I'm uniterested in this conversation.
|
Ignorance is preferable to error; and he is less remote from the truth who believes nothing, than he who believes what is wrong.
-- Thomas Jefferson
"god :: the last refuge of a man with no answers and no argument." - G. Carlin
Hope, n.
The handmaiden of desperation; the opiate of despair; the illegible signpost on the road to perdition. ~~ da filth |
|
|
|
|
marfknox
SFN Die Hard
USA
3739 Posts |
Posted - 06/13/2007 : 16:11:57 [Permalink]
|
You know, I actually thought this conversation might be interesting, because I genuinely disagreed with Dude's statements about certain feelings being unethical. In an effort to get things back on track, first I repeat this: I very much would argue that it is OK to have a desire to hurt people, and I will explain why:
It is totally normal and natural for people to have violent impulses, especially in moments of anger, and allowing ourselves to feel and accept feelings these emotions can help us move on. There is no evidence that such impulses cause a person to be more likely to act violently. For something to be “wrong” in my book, someone has to be hurt in some way. Who is hurt by such feelings?
Perhaps you might argue that someone is hurt by feeling bad about spilt milk because those unjustified feelings hurt themselves. But I've found that repressing and judging my own feelings makes things worse, not better. For example, yesterday I was feeling worse and worse because I ran out of time to do some things I wanted to do before work. Suddenly, I broke down in tears and started whining about my situation. After having expressed and legitimized these feelings, I felt relieved and could recognize how silly it was to be so upset over something so small. I went to work cheerful.
I entirely disagree with you that feelings should be considered right or wrong. Only actions should be considered subject to ethical judgment. In fact, Dude, it is wrong to make moral or ethical judgments on mere feelings, because it encourages repression and guilt of things which are harmless. There are plenty of philosophies (such as types of Buddhism) which argue that people should accept how they feel, even when those feelings are conventionally considered “bad”. Acceptance leads to freedom to move forward. |
And next, I submit this episode of The Show with Ze Frank, which helps explain what I'm getting at, perhaps better than I can: http://www.zefrank.com/theshow/archives/2006/12/121906.html
"This is how I feel today; this is my baseline."
In short: Judging negative emotions as unethical only creates more negative emotions. Better to accept our emotions, without judgment, and work on controlling our actions.
|
"Too much certainty and clarity could lead to cruel intolerance" -Karen Armstrong
Check out my art store: http://www.marfknox.etsy.com
|
|
|
|
Dude
SFN Die Hard
USA
6891 Posts |
Posted - 06/13/2007 : 16:19:41 [Permalink]
|
To further my point that ethical judgements do apply to emotions and feelings...
Is it right or wrong to feel satifaction at the death of another human being? Is it wrong to hope another person will die?
Is it wrong for a mother to feel revulsion at the sight of an infant?
Is it wrong to want to inflict injury or death on another person?
Here's the catch: No matter your answer, you have just passed an ethical judgement on a feeling.
I don't actually care what anyone's answer to those questions is. The mere fact that you can ask them means that you can make an ethics call with regard to the specific emotion.
|
Ignorance is preferable to error; and he is less remote from the truth who believes nothing, than he who believes what is wrong.
-- Thomas Jefferson
"god :: the last refuge of a man with no answers and no argument." - G. Carlin
Hope, n.
The handmaiden of desperation; the opiate of despair; the illegible signpost on the road to perdition. ~~ da filth |
|
|
|
|
marfknox
SFN Die Hard
USA
3739 Posts |
Posted - 06/13/2007 : 16:21:51 [Permalink]
|
Dude wrote: You see what I mean? She's doing it again. She can't engage in a conversation about what ethics is for more than half a sentence, then she turns the topic to the subjective nature of right and wrong.
Ethics is nothing more than making distinctions between right and wrong. Ethics itself is absolutely 100% objectively defined. |
OK, so "ethics" is objectively defined as "making distinctions between right and wrong". There, we agree. But the problem is that "right" and "wrong" are subjective. So any ethical judgment you make (such as the one you made on feelings, which is what this thread is about) are subjective judgments. If you want other people to accept your judgment that certain feelings are unethical (such as the desire to hurt someone or feeling upset over spilled milk), you need to make a persuasive argument, because I'm making an argument that it is perfectly ethical to have those same feelings.
| But you can't have a conversation about the definition of ethics without some halfwit inappropriately interjecting value judgments. |
This whole thread was started because YOU made a judgment that boron questioned - YOU made the judgment that certain feelings are unethical. Now are you going to back that up or just go around calling people undeserved names? If I have a desire to hurt someone, but never act on it, no one is hurt. If no one is hurt, why is that wrong? What is this, Biblical times?
This is the reason I'm uniterested in this conversation.
|
If YOU are uninterested in this conversation then why are you responding to peoples' posts? |
"Too much certainty and clarity could lead to cruel intolerance" -Karen Armstrong
Check out my art store: http://www.marfknox.etsy.com
|
|
|
|
Dude
SFN Die Hard
USA
6891 Posts |
Posted - 06/13/2007 : 16:24:29 [Permalink]
|
marfknox said:
In short: Judging negative emotions as unethical only creates more negative emotions. Better to accept our emotions, without judgment, and work on controlling our actions.
|
This is exactly the reason I don't want to participate in a debate over the definition of ethics. You have bypassed the base question and turned it (yet again) into a debate about your personal ethics. Your statement above is your personal values set on how to deal with emotions that you have already judged to be negative.
|
Ignorance is preferable to error; and he is less remote from the truth who believes nothing, than he who believes what is wrong.
-- Thomas Jefferson
"god :: the last refuge of a man with no answers and no argument." - G. Carlin
Hope, n.
The handmaiden of desperation; the opiate of despair; the illegible signpost on the road to perdition. ~~ da filth |
|
|
|
|
Dude
SFN Die Hard
USA
6891 Posts |
Posted - 06/13/2007 : 16:30:17 [Permalink]
|
marfknox said:
| This whole thread was started because YOU made a judgment that boron questioned - YOU made the judgment that certain feelings are unethical. |
No, it started because B10 disagreed that emotions are subject to ethical judgement. Good thing you have already taken my side on that particular argument.
You also continue to illustrate the reason why I don't want to have a debate about the definition of ethics. You continue to do exactly what I said someone would do!
|
Ignorance is preferable to error; and he is less remote from the truth who believes nothing, than he who believes what is wrong.
-- Thomas Jefferson
"god :: the last refuge of a man with no answers and no argument." - G. Carlin
Hope, n.
The handmaiden of desperation; the opiate of despair; the illegible signpost on the road to perdition. ~~ da filth |
|
|
|
|
marfknox
SFN Die Hard
USA
3739 Posts |
Posted - 06/13/2007 : 16:30:41 [Permalink]
|
Dude wrote:
Is it right or wrong to feel satifaction at the death of another human being? Is it wrong to hope another person will die?
Is it wrong for a mother to feel revulsion at the sight of an infant?
Is it wrong to want to inflict injury or death on another person?
Here's the catch: No matter your answer, you have just passed an ethical judgement on a feeling. |
Even if you judge it ethically neutral? I don't think those emotions are right or wrong. I think they are morally and ethically neutral. Is it right or wrong for a rock to exist? Is it right or wrong that the sky is blue?
| I don't actually care what anyone's answer to those questions is. The mere fact that you can ask them means that you can make an ethics call with regard to the specific emotion. |
Talk about moving the goalposts! Part of the reason this was started was because you insisted that certain feelings were unethical or wrong. The topic of this post is whether or not certain feelings should properly be considered wrong, not whether we can pass any kind of ethical judgment, including neutrality.
You have twisted this conversation into something meaningless. Which is a shame, because it could actually be interesting to discuss whether people on this forum think the feelings you listed above are unethical, ethical, or ethically neutral. |
"Too much certainty and clarity could lead to cruel intolerance" -Karen Armstrong
Check out my art store: http://www.marfknox.etsy.com
|
|
|
|
Dude
SFN Die Hard
USA
6891 Posts |
Posted - 06/13/2007 : 16:36:39 [Permalink]
|
marfknox said:
| Which is a shame, because it could actually be interesting to discuss whether people on this forum think the feelings you listed above are unethical, ethical, or ethically neutral. |
A pointless conversation would ensue. It is accepted by almost everyone here that actual ethical judgements are subjective.
Besides, you already agreed that emotions can be judged "negative", which was the point of this specific thread. "Can feelings be unethical?" seems to be the title of the thread.
|
Ignorance is preferable to error; and he is less remote from the truth who believes nothing, than he who believes what is wrong.
-- Thomas Jefferson
"god :: the last refuge of a man with no answers and no argument." - G. Carlin
Hope, n.
The handmaiden of desperation; the opiate of despair; the illegible signpost on the road to perdition. ~~ da filth |
|
|
|
|
marfknox
SFN Die Hard
USA
3739 Posts |
Posted - 06/13/2007 : 16:38:44 [Permalink]
|
I wrote: | whether we can pass any kind of ethical judgment, including neutrality. |
Just to be really clear about what I'm saying: a "judgment" of something being ethically neutral is not really an ethical judgment at all. Unless we want to agree that absurdities such as it is unethical that my cat has bad breath are meaningful. |
"Too much certainty and clarity could lead to cruel intolerance" -Karen Armstrong
Check out my art store: http://www.marfknox.etsy.com
|
|
|
|
marfknox
SFN Die Hard
USA
3739 Posts |
Posted - 06/13/2007 : 16:42:32 [Permalink]
|
Dude wrote: | A pointless conversation would ensue. |
So conversations about things which aren't objective are pointless? Art criticism and debate/discussion is pointless? Conversations about what should be considered right and wrong are pointless? And if you really think the conversation is pointless, why are you still here?
| It is accepted by almost everyone here that actual ethical judgements are subjective. |
No shit.
| Besides, you already agreed that emotions can be judged "negative", which was the point of this specific thread. "Can feelings be unethical?" seems to be the title of the thread. |
Can be, sure, but not that they should be. My cat's bad breath can be judged unethical, but how meaningful is that judgment? |
"Too much certainty and clarity could lead to cruel intolerance" -Karen Armstrong
Check out my art store: http://www.marfknox.etsy.com
|
|
|
|
Dude
SFN Die Hard
USA
6891 Posts |
Posted - 06/13/2007 : 17:10:34 [Permalink]
|
marfknox said:
| My cat's bad breath can be judged unethical, but how meaningful is that judgment? |
....
The relevance of a specific issue isn't relevant to this conversation.
Again, this isn't about what you want to turn it into. I don't care what your specific judgements are. The fact that you have made them is the issue here.
And yes, withholding a judgement or deciding something is neutral... is still making a judgement call.
|
Ignorance is preferable to error; and he is less remote from the truth who believes nothing, than he who believes what is wrong.
-- Thomas Jefferson
"god :: the last refuge of a man with no answers and no argument." - G. Carlin
Hope, n.
The handmaiden of desperation; the opiate of despair; the illegible signpost on the road to perdition. ~~ da filth |
|
|
|
|
marfknox
SFN Die Hard
USA
3739 Posts |
Posted - 06/13/2007 : 17:15:10 [Permalink]
|
| And yes, withholding a judgement or deciding something is neutral... is still making a judgement call. |
Withholding a judgment is making a judgment?
I disagree. |
"Too much certainty and clarity could lead to cruel intolerance" -Karen Armstrong
Check out my art store: http://www.marfknox.etsy.com
|
|
|
|
Dude
SFN Die Hard
USA
6891 Posts |
Posted - 06/13/2007 : 17:21:25 [Permalink]
|
"If you choose not to decide, you still have made a choice" -Freewill by Rush.
|
Ignorance is preferable to error; and he is less remote from the truth who believes nothing, than he who believes what is wrong.
-- Thomas Jefferson
"god :: the last refuge of a man with no answers and no argument." - G. Carlin
Hope, n.
The handmaiden of desperation; the opiate of despair; the illegible signpost on the road to perdition. ~~ da filth |
|
|
|
|
dv82matt
SFN Regular
760 Posts |
Posted - 06/13/2007 : 17:36:39 [Permalink]
|
One could argue that only thoughts and emotions are properly subject to ethical judgements. After all intent is a crucial element of an ethical judgement.
Not entirely practical of course, but it is arguable in principle. |
|
|
 |
|
Can Feelings be Unethical?
