Know Thyself

Nothing in Excess
 
HomePortalFAQMemberlistSearchRegisterLog in

Share | 
 

 Morality

View previous topic View next topic Go down 
Go to page : Previous  1, 2
AuthorMessage
Satyr
Daemon
avatar

Gender : Male Pisces Posts : 13743
Join date : 2009-08-24
Age : 51
Location : Flux

PostSubject: Re: Morality Mon Mar 13, 2017 8:36 am

Rooted in the (inter)active processes of attraction/repulsion morality expresses this organic relationship with a world it gradually emerges within and becomes aware of.

Moving through the development of multi-cellular organisms towards necessary rules of conduct between them, naturally selecting behaviors that facilitate them, they then acquire an ethical code to manage complex, heterogeneous populations, contrary to genetically established dispositions.
If the development necessitates a behavior that contradicts naturally evolved behaviors, it constructs an external icon, an abstraction, to help in their repression and control.
At this point morality becomes authoritarian, domineering, attempting to strip away centuries of evolved behavior so as to assimilate the "individual" organism into a super-organic structure, just as the less sophisticated cell has been assimilated into more sophisticated organisms.

_________________
γνῶθι σεαυτόν
μηδέν άγαν
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://satyr.canadian-forum.com/
Satyr
Daemon
avatar

Gender : Male Pisces Posts : 13743
Join date : 2009-08-24
Age : 51
Location : Flux

PostSubject: Re: Morality Tue Mar 14, 2017 8:48 am


Sam Harris perfectly displays the danger of taking metaphors to their extreme.
This is where I've placed the noumenon/phenomenon divide.
The only place where mind/body can attach to world, or detach from it on its weakest point.
Where Nihilism insets itself in the only way it can, as symbol/word, and inverts the process in a relieving way, seductive and attractive to all those that cannot cope with the world.
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.], as representation of noumenon, is the product of the nervous system - the connector of mind/body.
It either connects the mind to the physical, the body, the apparent, or it detaches, returning back to what it has already accumulated and stored as memory, manipulating it to construct fantastic abstractions.
Memory, like genes, are noetic codified experiences.
And like genes they can lie dormant as latent potentials, not necessarily to benefit the organism.
Environment can trigger latent genetic disposition, as it can trigger a memories, into cascades of sensations, or like DNA memories can accumulate, remaining dormant until a triggering memory makes them active.
The metaphor can either be a mechanism of connecting with world, or of projecting into world accumulated memories, triggered by an event, or spilling forth as relieving by unburdening the mind; covering world with a convenient and comforting shell of abstractions.
nervous system, and its extension symbol/word acts as a conduit from world and towards it.
Herein lies the danger of confusing your own abstractions, coming from your pool of accumulated memories, projected outwards as a form of defiance, for the world itself, triggering the creation of abstractions founded on accumulated memories.

Peterson, perfectly displays the value of metaphor as a way of simplifying memories, the past, to a form the mind can process and use....and the common man can comprehend without any deeper understanding of world and his place in it.
This is, also, where the danger lies. The common man, lacking an understanding of self and world, confuses the metaphor for the real, or takes the word literally.
What is a tool for exploiting simplicity, and controlling the masses, making complex civilization possible, is also the point of weakness, where exploitation of this same simplicity can lead to disaster.
Harris approaches the subject from a scientific vantage point, of reason (Apollonian), and Peterson form a more artistic organic perspective (Dionysian), so their convergence on the topic of truth as it relates to religion and spirituality, is one of chaos in relation to order, one placing more emphasis on lucidity, trusting reason, and the other on intuition, trusting instinct.
Where one compensates for the absence of depth with clarity, the other compensates for the absence of clarity with depth, where depth remains defined in terms of possibility, so depth indicates a larger pool of memories, genetic and/or memetic, which remain vague, and reason indicates their illumination, their exposure to the present, in the form of understanding, or perceiving patterns that bring it forth as distinct.
Peterson takes past, and compares it to present, seeking patterns that connects them into a single motif, whereas Harris takes the present and seeking in past a precedent, and both are trying to find underlying patterns to bind all patterns into a single construct, a continuum connecting all experiences/memories.

Memes finding in genes primordial experiences.
Peterson understanding the memetic present from the perspective of a canon of genetics, delivered in the form of metaphors, and Harris understanding the genetic present from the perspective of a memetic past.

This dual possibility of toward mind, from world, and towards world, from mind, is where the [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]  divide can be found, and where [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] process can be inverted to meme<>gene, which is also where I place my definition of 'artificial' in relation to 'natural'.

_________________
γνῶθι σεαυτόν
μηδέν άγαν
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://satyr.canadian-forum.com/
Slaughtz



Gender : Male Pisces Posts : 979
Join date : 2012-04-28
Age : 26
Location : Brink

PostSubject: Re: Morality Mon May 15, 2017 7:20 am

I remember hearing about a conflict in morality about whether or not a person having the capacity for violence over another constituted intimidation. That is, just being stronger means you have an extra obligation to appear unthreatening or to not be so strong.

One side says that capacity does not mean "responsibility". Just because you have the capacity for force, it doesn't mean you'll act on it. The other says it is problematic.

Does anyone know the technical term for this or whom had a discussion like this?
Back to top Go down
View user profile
AutSider

avatar

Gender : Male Posts : 735
Join date : 2015-04-29
Location : Outside

PostSubject: Re: Morality Mon May 15, 2017 7:38 am

I think you mentioned having such a discussion with your professor some months ago, if I'm not mistaken. I don't recall the term (if there is one), you might want to search your posts.

It appears to be the classic case of projecting intention on the other and thus shifting responsibility for their own emotional state on them. "You made me feel X, so you must have meant to made me feel X".

Back to top Go down
View user profile
Slaughtz



Gender : Male Pisces Posts : 979
Join date : 2012-04-28
Age : 26
Location : Brink

PostSubject: Re: Morality Yesterday at 1:40 pm

I wonder if morality is necessarily quantitative/utilitarian because there are two aspects involved:

The "immoral" person whom is greedy, does "bad" through stealing or other things.
However, the same person does "good" by seeking to preserve themselves (at least Christian wise "God's Temple").

The latter can even be argued as a humanist egalitarian modern position. Deceitfuls would behave this way by saying they are good for the latter when they do the former.

To combine, one would think a liberal egalitarian utilitarian perspective is an answer.
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Sponsored content




PostSubject: Re: Morality

Back to top Go down
 
Morality
View previous topic View next topic Back to top 
Page 2 of 2Go to page : Previous  1, 2
 Similar topics
-
» The Religious Origins Of Morality And Ethics
» The Post- Modern Crisis Of Social Morality And Ethics

Permissions in this forum:You cannot reply to topics in this forum
Know Thyself :: AGORA-
Jump to: