"When Morality Is Hard to Like"

I recommend people pick up the latest SciAm Mind. I'd type out the articles but it's ridiculously long. The opening paragraph of the one quoted in the title:

http://www.sciamdigital.com/index.cfm?fa=Products.ViewIssuePreview&ARTICLEID_CHAR=CBABCA99-3048-8A5E-105B37636ADE51C8

In the easiest sense, it shows that people with "damage" (not sure how they assess that) to their ventromedial prefrontal cortex are more likely to adopt utilitarian choices for saving the most people it can, rather than the more "normal", whereby everyone would rather let everyone die. However, these findings short of shifted when playing the "ultimatum game," where emotion took over between the "damaged" subjects.

I will digress some problems I have with their methods.

1. They assume their subjects are telling the truth.
2. They don't consider thousands of years of evolution, or express how their findings would differ under a less tainted, and less socialized mind.
3. The studies are young, but they make no real effort at a conclusion.

I will, however, post a nice comment found in it:

"I think there may be a bit of a misunderstanding. Utilitarians would be extremely likely to give to charity that distributes bed nets in Africa, for example, because the good of saving lives far exceeds anything that person could spend money on (assuming he is relatively well off). Recognizing the good to humanity of raising a good, functional child, he may well win father of the year. Recognizing the good that affection brings, he may well be very affectionate and loving. Utilitarianism does not imply acting robotically. It just means that one acts in a way that attempts to maximize the happiness of all sentient beings from now until infinity.

Furthermore, all morality is based on assumptions. There is no "right" ethical system. But utilitarianism in particular can be constructed by combining notions of valuing happiness and having infinite empathy (valuing every individual as one values oneself). It's not a lack of empathy that brings about utilitarianism. It is full empathy."

................And?

For someone so hung-up on purpose, you missed it.

Apparently everyone else is agreeing with you.

Brain damaged people make bad choices. Therefore morality is a lie.

Apparently everyone else is agreeing with you.

I'm not surprised the people here missed it, or are uninterested; it is the FES. I don't expect very much.

Quote from: midnight on March 05, 2008, 12:08:39 AM

Apparently everyone else is agreeing with you.

I'm not surprised the people here missed it, or are uninterested; it is the FES. I don't expect very much.

Then why bother? I think this would actually be the bigger picture in this case, apathy is nigh.

Then why bother?

Dumb question; self-interest. Why bother with anything then?

Quote from: Daedalus on March 05, 2008, 03:00:27 PM

Then why bother?

Dumb question; self-interest. Why bother with anything then?

Why bother with something you know is futile to begin with? Point invalidated.

Why bother with something you know is futile to begin with? Point invalidated.

Already answered. Did you miss that the first time?

Escaping Mids' shadow must be hard.

I have no shadow. I am shadow.

Quote from: Daedalus on March 05, 2008, 04:52:43 PM

Why bother with something you know is futile to begin with? Point invalidated.

Already answered. Did you miss that the first time?

Escaping Mids' shadow must be hard.

Cry moar kthxbai

My weeping is only surpassed by your identity crisis.

My weeping is only surpassed by your identity crisis.

If I forget to take my medicine then I'll be sick. If you can even call MPD an actual sickness...

Serious thread is serious.

Quote from: midnight on March 05, 2008, 12:08:39 AM

Apparently everyone else is agreeing with you.

I'm not surprised the people here missed it, or are uninterested; it is the FES. I don't expect very much.

You being unable to catch the attention of your audience or make a recognizable point is our fault?

You being unable to catch the attention of your audience or make a recognizable point is our fault?

That people here are uninterested in the presented topic is no one's fault. And not "getting" a point is certainly not my fault.

Quote from: Saint Raist on March 11, 2008, 04:15:45 PM

You being unable to catch the attention of your audience or make a recognizable point is our fault?

That people here are uninterested in the presented topic is no one's fault. And not "getting" a point is certainly not my fault.

The first step to public speaking is making a point. If the audience does not "get" the point, then you did not successfully make it. The other is getting their attention, you also failed. This being a public forum, yes this is your fault.

And, to agree with and expand upon Raist, you also need to have a point, to begin with. You either didn't, or you fail at communicating it... If you didn't care, you shouldn't have posted. Since you did, you cared.

Quote from: Saint Raist on March 11, 2008, 04:15:45 PM

You being unable to catch the attention of your audience or make a recognizable point is our fault?

That people here are uninterested in the presented topic is no one's fault. And not "getting" a point is certainly not my fault.

It never is, is it?

It never is, is it?

If it was, you'd be at fault a lot, given the stuff you spout.

He is irrelevant in your argument, therefore, you still fail at your agenda.

Nay. By the logic in their arguments, someone is inept if they can't teach a mentally retarded person.

Nay. By the logic in their arguments, someone is inept if they can't teach a mentally retarded person.

That wasn't what I said, in the slightest bit. Perhaps you should read over my comments again?

That wasn't what I said, in the slightest bit. Perhaps you should read over my comments again?

I wasn't referring to you, because as you pointed out, that's not what you said.

Nay. By the logic in their arguments, someone is inept if they can't teach a mentally retarded person.

No, you are inept if you walk up to a bunch or retards and try to make a point and fail. Though since you are not talking to retards, i'm really liking the defending yourself by insulting us. Proves your intelligence. And your lack of public speaking skills that you failed to respond to......

No, you are inept if you walk up to a bunch or retards and try to make a point and fail. Though since you are not talking to retards, i'm really liking the defending yourself by insulting us. Proves your intelligence. And your lack of public speaking skills that you failed to respond to......

I wasn't insulting anybody, but thanks for assuming. I was illustrating the logic you're invoking, that if people are incapable of arriving at a point, the speaker is at fault.

Quote from: Saint Raist on March 13, 2008, 03:35:55 PM

No, you are inept if you walk up to a bunch or retards and try to make a point and fail. Though since you are not talking to retards, i'm really liking the defending yourself by insulting us. Proves your intelligence. And your lack of public speaking skills that you failed to respond to......

I wasn't insulting anybody, but thanks for assuming. I was illustrating the logic you're invoking, that if people are incapable of arriving at a point, the speaker is at fault.

If in doubt of a message you can only get, insult.

Quote from: Saint Raist on March 13, 2008, 03:35:55 PM

No, you are inept if you walk up to a bunch or retards and try to make a point and fail. Though since you are not talking to retards, i'm really liking the defending yourself by insulting us. Proves your intelligence. And your lack of public speaking skills that you failed to respond to......

I wasn't insulting anybody, but thanks for assuming. I was illustrating the logic you're invoking, that if people are incapable of arriving at a point, the speaker is at fault.

So if you are driving a bus full of retards somewhere it is their fault you can't get them to chuckey cheeses?

So if you are driving a bus full of retards somewhere it is their fault you can't get them to chuckey cheeses?

Fukken sigged.