Bitcoin Forum
October 24, 2017, 02:55:42 AM *
News: Latest stable version of Bitcoin Core: 0.15.0.1  [Torrent]. (New!)
 
   Home   Help Search Donate Login Register  
Poll
Question: Can a world without morals be "good"
yes, goodnes is subjective - 9 (39.1%)
No, morality is a requirement for goodness - 11 (47.8%)
I'm not sure - 3 (13%)
Total Voters: 23

Pages: « 1 [2]  All
  Print  
Author Topic: Morality is a guilt trip  (Read 1735 times)
This is a self-moderated topic. If you do not want to be moderated by the person who started this topic, create a new topic.
Anon136
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1288



View Profile
August 02, 2013, 01:34:25 AM
 #21

imagine that you are part of an army tasked with defending your society from invaders. you know with relative certainty that these invaders will kill every man woman and child in your society if you should fail to defeat them in battle. if you go to battle than there is a 50% chance that you will die in battle. Your presence in the battle will increase your societies chance of winning from 50% to 51%. if you abandon the battle and hide in the woods than your chance of dieing in battle is reduced to 0% and the chance that your society will win the battle is only decreased from 51% to 50%. So it is rational for you as the individual to abandon the battle BUT if everyone else makes the same rational calculation as you than there is a 100% chance that everyone in your entire society will die.

economists call this problem "market failure" which is specifically a situation where individual rationality does not translate to group rationality. just like how thumbs are an evolutionary adaptation aimed at addressing the problem of being unable to grasp things, morality too is an evolutionary adaptation just like thumbs, only it is aimed at addressing the problem of market failure.

Rep Thread: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=381041
If one can not confer upon another a right which he does not himself first possess, by what means does the state derive the right to engage in behaviors from which the public is prohibited?
1508813742
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1508813742

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1508813742
Reply with quote  #2

1508813742
Report to moderator
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
1508813742
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1508813742

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1508813742
Reply with quote  #2

1508813742
Report to moderator
1508813742
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1508813742

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1508813742
Reply with quote  #2

1508813742
Report to moderator
1508813742
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1508813742

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1508813742
Reply with quote  #2

1508813742
Report to moderator
Mike Christ
aka snapsunny
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1092



View Profile
August 02, 2013, 02:22:45 AM
 #22

I'm not sure.  I believe morality is masked self-interest.  If all of us are better off, I'll be way better off.  If there is ever a situation in which either you or I must die to continue living, I will die, because I'd rather take the very slim chance of there being an afterlife than deal with a real living Hell.

Anon136
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1288



View Profile
August 02, 2013, 02:33:24 AM
 #23

I'm not sure.  I believe morality is masked self-interest.  If all of us are better off, I'll be way better off.  If there is ever a situation in which either you or I must die to continue living, I will die, because I'd rather take the very slim chance of there being an afterlife than deal with a real living Hell.

It is axiomatically the case that all action is self interested. The idea of a non self interested action is a paradox. the fact that you have taken an action is its self proof that you believed the action was in your interest.

Rep Thread: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=381041
If one can not confer upon another a right which he does not himself first possess, by what means does the state derive the right to engage in behaviors from which the public is prohibited?
crumbs
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 210



View Profile
August 02, 2013, 11:42:12 AM
 #24

...
It is axiomatically the case that all action is self interested. The idea of a non self interested action is a paradox. the fact that you have taken an action is its self proof that you believed the action was in your interest.

Consider the following (Let's call "good stuff" hedons, even though it's imprecise):

1. Perceived self-interest --
   An act which the actor believes will maximise hedonic value, but in reality does not. (investing in a stock that tanks)
2. Short-term self-interest --
   An act which offers immediate gratification, but is known by the actor to reduce overall hedonic value. (shooting dope, smoking crack, being lazy etc., etc.)
3.  Irrationality --
   "My liver is bad, but i won't see a doctor.  Because fuq, that's why!" (Dostoevsky posts on 4chan)

And, of course, there's your definition of self-interest.  If self-interest is axiomatic, then it's axiomatic.  When you start with a given that all actions are motivated by self-interest, there's nothing left to prove.
Pages: « 1 [2]  All
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Sponsored by , a Bitcoin-accepting VPN.
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!