Notices
Results 1 to 65 of 65
Like Tree5Likes
  • 1 Post By Flick Montana
  • 1 Post By seagypsy
  • 1 Post By seagypsy
  • 1 Post By Harold14370
  • 1 Post By seagypsy

Thread: good, bad, right, wrong.... wtf?

  1. #1 good, bad, right, wrong.... wtf? 
    has lost interest seagypsy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    3,103
    good
    bad
    right
    wrong

    also moral or immoral

    I dont understand these words. I understand how others use them and do my best to use them in the same way for the sake of communicating an idea, but what these words actually mean is actually a mystery to me.

    To me, these are merely subjective terms relative to some state of existence preferred within the mind of the person using it. And that outside the context of that individuals personal preferences, these words have no real meaning. Their interpretations seem to be belief based and therefor extremely vague in terms of effective communication.

    I don't think these terms have any purpose in the discussion of science which serves to provide an objective model of reality, absent of all subjective opinion. These words confuse and infuriate me at times. They do not compute.


    Speaking badly about people after they are gone and jumping on the bash the band wagon must do very well for a low self-esteem.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  2.  
     

  3. #2  
    Life-Size Nanoputian Flick Montana's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Flatland
    Posts
    5,437
    They're relative terms defined within your own experiential context.

    Except right and wrong in the literal sense. If you think 2+2=5, you're wrong.


    "Sometimes I think the surest sign that intelligent life exists elsewhere in the universe is that none of it has tried to contact us." -Calvin
    Reply With Quote  
     

  4. #3  
    has lost interest seagypsy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    3,103
    Quote Originally Posted by Flick Montana View Post
    They're relative terms defined within your own experiential context.

    Except right and wrong in the literal sense. If you think 2+2=5, you're wrong.
    It seems the only time right and wrong have any meaning, by my understanding, is when applied to mathematics. Anything that cannot be tested, recreated, and substantiated should not have these words to describe them, imo.

    Seems it would be more accurate to say that something is satisfactory or pleasing rather than good. and unpleasant or unacceptable instead of bad.
    Speaking badly about people after they are gone and jumping on the bash the band wagon must do very well for a low self-esteem.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  5. #4  
    Life-Size Nanoputian Flick Montana's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Flatland
    Posts
    5,437
    There are plenty of vague descriptors in the English language. I'm a big fan of the language, but we've adopted every possible term we can pronounce and applied it to every variation of meaning we can come up with.

    For instance, "I'm sorry" and "My bad" mean essentially the same thing. Unless you're at a funeral.
    Dywyddyr likes this.
    "Sometimes I think the surest sign that intelligent life exists elsewhere in the universe is that none of it has tried to contact us." -Calvin
    Reply With Quote  
     

  6. #5  
    has lost interest seagypsy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    3,103
    Quote Originally Posted by Flick Montana View Post
    There are plenty of vague descriptors in the English language. I'm a big fan of the language, but we've adopted every possible term we can pronounce and applied it to every variation of meaning we can come up with.

    For instance, "I'm sorry" and "My bad" mean essentially the same thing. Unless you're at a funeral.
    lmao... imagine someone saying "my bad' at a funeral. The reactions would be hilarious... ok maybe only to me. I know I have a relatively twisted view of the world and a sick sense of humor.
    Speaking badly about people after they are gone and jumping on the bash the band wagon must do very well for a low self-esteem.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  7. #6  
    Universal Mind John Galt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    14,168
    Quote Originally Posted by Flick Montana View Post
    For instance, "I'm sorry" and "My bad" mean essentially the same thing. Unless you're at a funeral.
    If you killed the recently interred, then my bad might be appropriate.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  8. #7  
    has lost interest seagypsy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    3,103
    Quote Originally Posted by John Galt View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Flick Montana View Post
    For instance, "I'm sorry" and "My bad" mean essentially the same thing. Unless you're at a funeral.
    If you killed the recently interred, then my bad might be appropriate.
    The sad thing is, i don't think anyone would doubt that i did.
    Speaking badly about people after they are gone and jumping on the bash the band wagon must do very well for a low self-esteem.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  9. #8  
    Ophiolater Nehushtan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Posts
    72
    Quote Originally Posted by Flick Montana View Post
    Except right and wrong in the literal sense. If you think 2+2=5, you're wrong.
    That would be right and wrong in the sense of deductive logic. 2 + 2 = 5 is wrong because it doesn’t follow from the Peano axioms of the natural numbers.
    Holding on to anger is like drinking poison and expecting the other person to die.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  10. #9  
    Forum Masters Degree MrMojo1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    South Florida, USA
    Posts
    618
    Quote Originally Posted by seagypsy View Post
    good
    bad
    right
    wrong

    also moral or immoral

    ...I don't understand these words.They do not compute.
    These words are commonly used to render an evaluation of an action or consequence. IMO Morals/Ethics is a system for evaluating actions and their consequences as either beneficial of detrimental. It takes a mind/s to establish what the systems is and agreement to what is beneficial/detrimental. Good and right (moral or ethical) are beneficial evaluations, and right or wrong (immoral or unethical) are detrimental evaluations within that moral/ethical system. These evaluations become meaningless if there isn't any established system. If there is no system, then there is no moral/ethical quality (amoral).

    I hope this helps.
    Last edited by MrMojo1; March 10th, 2013 at 02:30 PM.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  11. #10  
    Northern Horse Whisperer Moderator scheherazade's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    Yukon, Canada
    Posts
    4,066
    Quote Originally Posted by seagypsy View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by John Galt View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Flick Montana View Post
    For instance, "I'm sorry" and "My bad" mean essentially the same thing. Unless you're at a funeral.
    If you killed the recently interred, then my bad might be appropriate.
    The sad thing is, i don't think anyone would doubt that i did.
    Unless, of course, we were both attending the same funeral and we both made the same remark.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  12. #11  
    has lost interest seagypsy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    3,103
    Quote Originally Posted by scheherazade View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by seagypsy View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by John Galt View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Flick Montana View Post
    For instance, "I'm sorry" and "My bad" mean essentially the same thing. Unless you're at a funeral.
    If you killed the recently interred, then my bad might be appropriate.
    The sad thing is, i don't think anyone would doubt that i did.
    Unless, of course, we were both attending the same funeral and we both made the same remark.
    I hate funerals, I don't even plan to attend my own.
    scheherazade likes this.
    Speaking badly about people after they are gone and jumping on the bash the band wagon must do very well for a low self-esteem.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  13. #12  
    Forum Radioactive Isotope sculptor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    4,211
    hahahaha
    Reply With Quote  
     

  14. #13  
    Northern Horse Whisperer Moderator scheherazade's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    Yukon, Canada
    Posts
    4,066
    Quote Originally Posted by seagypsy View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by scheherazade View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by seagypsy View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by John Galt View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Flick Montana View Post
    For instance, "I'm sorry" and "My bad" mean essentially the same thing. Unless you're at a funeral.
    If you killed the recently interred, then my bad might be appropriate.
    The sad thing is, i don't think anyone would doubt that i did.
    Unless, of course, we were both attending the same funeral and we both made the same remark.
    I hate funerals, I don't even plan to attend my own.
    Let me know how that works out for you! I may care to emulate that feat.

    The main thing for me is that my horses go to good homes and my friends have one hell of a send-off party on my estate's tab. People never forget a good party, lol...
    Reply With Quote  
     

  15. #14  
    has lost interest seagypsy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    3,103
    Quote Originally Posted by scheherazade View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by seagypsy View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by scheherazade View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by seagypsy View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by John Galt View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Flick Montana View Post
    For instance, "I'm sorry" and "My bad" mean essentially the same thing. Unless you're at a funeral.
    If you killed the recently interred, then my bad might be appropriate.
    The sad thing is, i don't think anyone would doubt that i did.
    Unless, of course, we were both attending the same funeral and we both made the same remark.


    I hate funerals, I don't even plan to attend my own.
    Let me know how that works out for you! I may care to emulate that feat.

    The main thing for me is that my horses go to good homes and my friends have one hell of a send-off party on my estate's tab. People never forget a good party, lol...
    My plan is that if I attend my own funeral, I will still be alive. Well at the beginning of it anyway. And I will have a glorious ending. Basically the funeral will be everyone's chance to tell me, while still living, what they actually think of me. I will in turn tell them what I think of them. Then with lots of fan fair end my existence. and everyone goes home with parting gifts.

    but considering our society looks down on the intentional termination of ones own life, I doubt I will get away with that.
    Speaking badly about people after they are gone and jumping on the bash the band wagon must do very well for a low self-esteem.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  16. #15  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Apocalyptic Paradise
    Posts
    6,613
    Quote Originally Posted by seagypsy View Post
    but considering our society looks down on the intentional termination of ones own life, I doubt I will get away with that.
    If you succeed, they can't do anything about it.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  17. #16  
    has lost interest seagypsy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    3,103
    Quote Originally Posted by Neverfly View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by seagypsy View Post
    but considering our society looks down on the intentional termination of ones own life, I doubt I will get away with that.
    If you succeed, they can't do anything about it.
    true but they can prevent the success.
    Speaking badly about people after they are gone and jumping on the bash the band wagon must do very well for a low self-esteem.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  18. #17  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Posts
    8,795
    Quote Originally Posted by seagypsy View Post
    good
    bad
    right
    wrong

    also moral or immoral

    I dont understand these words. I understand how others use them and do my best to use them in the same way for the sake of communicating an idea, but what these words actually mean is actually a mystery to me.

    To me, these are merely subjective terms relative to some state of existence preferred within the mind of the person using it. And that outside the context of that individuals personal preferences, these words have no real meaning. Their interpretations seem to be belief based and therefor extremely vague in terms of effective communication.

    I don't think these terms have any purpose in the discussion of science which serves to provide an objective model of reality, absent of all subjective opinion. These words confuse and infuriate me at times. They do not compute.
    Most people have a sense of right and wrong, a feeling of what is moral or immoral, which they think is in some sense absolute or objective. If someone is religious, they probably think the moral code was decreed by God. Atheists still think of their morality as absolute. Some just accept it as a fact of being human. Others think there is an objective basis for their morality, perhaps as an instinct to promote the welfare of humanity or some such. None of this can be defended on any scientific basis, in my opinion.

    Morality would manifest itself in situations such as not stealing something from someone, even if you would never get caught. Your conscience would bother you if you stole it. You would feel guilty. I suppose that there are some people who don't have a conscience.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  19. #18  
    Forum Professor jrmonroe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    1,444
    I agree seagypsy. These words try to describe subjective observances —

    I just bought some really good apples!

    Having yourself cremated is a bad idea.

    It isn't right that I don't qualify for food stamps.

    Sanctioning North Korea is wrong.
    And then, for example, one must ask why you think the apples are "good" — inexpensive? big? tasty? don't rot quickly? red and shiny? fresh off the farm? etc.

    I try to avoid these kinds of words.
    Grief is the price we pay for love. (CM Parkes) Our postillion has been struck by lightning. (Unknown) War is always the choice of the chosen who will not have to fight. (Bono) The years tell much what the days never knew. (RW Emerson) Reality is not always probable, or likely. (JL Borges)
    Reply With Quote  
     

  20. #19  
    has lost interest seagypsy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    3,103
    Quote Originally Posted by Harold14370 View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by seagypsy View Post
    good
    bad
    right
    wrong

    also moral or immoral

    I dont understand these words. I understand how others use them and do my best to use them in the same way for the sake of communicating an idea, but what these words actually mean is actually a mystery to me.

    To me, these are merely subjective terms relative to some state of existence preferred within the mind of the person using it. And that outside the context of that individuals personal preferences, these words have no real meaning. Their interpretations seem to be belief based and therefor extremely vague in terms of effective communication.

    I don't think these terms have any purpose in the discussion of science which serves to provide an objective model of reality, absent of all subjective opinion. These words confuse and infuriate me at times. They do not compute.
    Most people have a sense of right and wrong, a feeling of what is moral or immoral, which they think is in some sense absolute or objective. If someone is religious, they probably think the moral code was decreed by God. Atheists still think of their morality as absolute. Some just accept it as a fact of being human. Others think there is an objective basis for their morality, perhaps as an instinct to promote the welfare of humanity or some such. None of this can be defended on any scientific basis, in my opinion.

    Morality would manifest itself in situations such as not stealing something from someone, even if you would never get caught. Your conscience would bother you if you stole it. You would feel guilty. I suppose that there are some people who don't have a conscience.
    I agree that most people display what appears to be a "sense" of right and wrong, but isn't that "sense" a learned one? Evidence would be the extensive differences in culture. I worry about stating that I have no conscience mainly because making such a statement would have me labeled as one who should be feared and therefore locked away. I like being free to come and go as I please. I observe and conform willingly to what the majority of people perceive as right and wrong. I do not resist, because I have observed throughout my life, that those who resist conformity often suffer terrible consequences that can include loss of the privilege to live.

    If I woke up stranded on an island inhabited by cannibals who had not yet at that point decided I was the next meal, I would likely do what I could to find out how they decide who to eat, and avoid doing anything that would have me fall into that category. And I would have no problems with eating human flesh. Unless it tastes bad, but I assume it will taste different depending on the lifestyle the meal had previously lived. Like with any other meat, domestic turkey does not taste the same as wild turkey.

    I am not like the atheists you describe. I do not believe we have a natural sense of right and wrong. I think we draw on the knowledge of those who came before us. Our parents teach us what probable effects certain actions will have. I think we have a natural instinct to survive and so we use our brain for what it is best at. To find the easiest way to reduce risks to our survival. If abstaining from activities that cause others to feel hostile towards us reduces the risk of others wanting us dead then it is logical that we abstain from those high risk activities. However, from one culture to the next, which activities inspire hostility vary.

    For instance wearing blue in a territory claimed by the bloods would be unwise, but it is not objectively wrong to wear blue. It is however unwise to wear blue in bloods territory. Walking around nude at a nude beach in France leaves you to risk only sunburn. And it is socially acceptable, unlikely to inspire anyone to want to cause you harm. However, walking nude in the city of Mecca would be unwise because it is socially unacceptable there and would likely cost you your life. Is being nude objectively right or wrong? No. But being nude can be wise or unwise depending on which human beings are present when you choose to be nude.

    Some societies would view my perspective as being mentally ill. Dangerous. And worthy cause to lock me away. But to me it is based on logic. And because I prefer to maintain the privileges I currently have, being able to come and go as I please, being allowed to live, I don't consider myself a risk to anyone. It is only logical to conform in order to maintain the privileges currently bestowed upon me by the society that I reside with.

    Your post leads me to ask another question. How do we define the sensation of guilt? To me, it seems guilt is based on the fear of being perceived as bad. Whether it is self perception, or perceptions of those we care about. As the example you used, stealing, could be considered ok in some cultures. Or not even perceived. There was a documentary I watched once where an American researcher went to study a tribe that had been discovered in the rainforest. They had been recently discovered by loggers in the area. They had never seen white people before but welcomed the researcher into their village. When he arrived they did not wear clothing, had no concept of personal possession. No concept of marriage.All things belonged to all members of the tribe. All lactating women would feed any hungry child that presented itself to her. They didn't take much notice to who was who's mother or father. All adults were parents to all children. Everyone got along fine. Then the white guy answered their questions about our culture and they soon became possessive and aggressive towards each other. They wanted clothing. They developed strong egos. And they became like us. And they had their first acts of aggression towards each other. It was a sad story. I wish I could remember the name of it so this could be verified. I am hoping some other readers at least have seen the same documentary that I did and can verify that I am at least not making it up.

    But if you can give me the benefit of the doubt, and the benefit of the doubt that the tribe did really exist and wasn't fabricated by the film maker, it does demonstrate that many of the concepts that are ever so common in modern societies are not necessarily hardwired into our brains. And that even guilt is based on subjective perceptions of what is right or wrong.
    Last edited by seagypsy; March 11th, 2013 at 08:53 AM.
    Speaking badly about people after they are gone and jumping on the bash the band wagon must do very well for a low self-esteem.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  21. #20  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Posts
    8,795
    Quote Originally Posted by seagypsy View Post
    I agree that most people display what appears to be a "sense" of right and wrong, but isn't that "sense" a learned one? Evidence would be the extensive differences in culture. I worry about stating that I have no conscience mainly because making such a statement would have me labeled as one who should be feared and therefore locked away. I like being free to come and go as I please. I observe and conform willingly to what the majority of people perceive as right and wrong. I do not resist, because I have observed throughout my life, that those who resist conformity often suffer terrible consequences that can include loss of the privilege to live.

    If I woke up stranded on an island inhabited by cannibals who had not yet at that point decided I was the next meal, I would likely do what I could to find out how they decide who to eat, and avoid doing anything that would have me fall into that category. And I would have no problems with eating human flesh. Unless it tastes bad, but I assume it will taste different depending on the lifestyle the meal had previously lived. Like with any other meat, domestic turkey does not taste the same as wild turkey.

    I am not like the atheists you describe. I do not believe we have a natural sense of right and wrong. I think we draw on the knowledge of those who came before us. Our parents teach us what probable effects certain actions will have. I think we have a natural instinct to survive and so we use our brain for what it is best at. To find the easiest way to reduce risks to our survival. If abstaining from activities that cause others to feel hostile towards us reduces the risk of others wanting us dead then it is logical that we abstain from those high risk activities. However, from one culture to the next, which activities inspire hostility vary.

    For instance wearing blue in a territory claimed by the bloods would be unwise, but it is not objectively wrong to wear blue. It is however unwise to wear blue in bloods territory. Walking around nude at a nude beach in France leaves you to risk only sunburn. And it is socially acceptable, unlikely to inspire anyone to want to cause you harm. However, walking nude in the city of Mecca would be unwise because it is socially unacceptable there and would likely cost you your life. Is being nude objectively right or wrong? No. But being nude can be wise or unwise depending on which human beings are present when you choose to be nude.

    Some societies would view my perspective as being mentally ill. Dangerous. And worthy cause to lock me away. But to me it is based on logic. And because I prefer to maintain the privileges I currently have, being able to come and go as I please, being allowed to live, I don't consider myself a risk to anyone. It is only logical to conform in order to maintain the privileges currently bestowed upon me by the society that I reside with.

    Your post leads me to ask another question. How do we define the sensation of guilt? To me, it seems guilt is based on the fear of being perceived as bad. Whether it is self perception, or perceptions of those we care about. As the example you used, stealing, could be considered ok in some cultures. Or not even perceived. There was a documentary I watched once where an American researcher went to study a tribe that had been discovered in the rainforest. They had been recently discovered by loggers in the area. They had never seen white people before but welcomed the researcher into their village. When he arrived they did not wear clothing, had no concept of personal possession. No concept of marriage.All things belonged to all members of the tribe. All lactating women would feed any hungry child that presented itself to her. They didn't take much notice to who was who's mother or father. All adults were parents to all children. Everyone got along fine. Then the white guy answered their questions about our culture and they soon became possessive and aggressive towards each other. They wanted clothing. They developed strong egos. And they became like us. And they had their first acts of aggression towards each other. It was a sad story. I wish I could remember the name of it so this could be verified. I am hoping some other readers at least have seen the same documentary that I did and can verify that I am at least not making it up.

    But if you can give me the benefit of the doubt, and the benefit of the doubt that the tribe did really exist and wasn't fabricated by the film maker, it does demonstrate that many of the concepts that are ever so common in modern societies are not necessarily hardwired into our brains. And that even guilt is based on subjective perceptions of what is right or wrong.
    I agree that it is learned. If it weren't learned, then everybody would follow the same moral code. They don't. However I think the behavior of someone with a conscience would be different than someone without a conscience. Let's say you found a wallet with money in it and there is nobody else around. If you are just coldly calculating how your actions will be perceived by others, then you can just take the money and drop the wallet in the trash. Nobody will ever find out. Of course you might make it a policy to act as if you have a conscience. This way, you'll never slip up and accidentally get caught.

    Another example would be someone who sacrifices their life for a cause, or to save another person. That person is not calculating consequences to themselves. They are acting according to a moral code.

    That said, it is true that a person's conscience is affected by whether or not they will be found out. They might feel guilty only after getting caught doing something, then have a "jailhouse conversion."
    Reply With Quote  
     

  22. #21  
    Forum Radioactive Isotope cosmictraveler's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Key West, Florida, Earth
    Posts
    4,788
    good
    bad
    right
    wrong

    also moral or immoral

    I dont understand these words.
    Then you might be a pschycopath.

    I cannot believe that you can't understand those words and, to me, are trolling about this matter.

    When anyone can't undestand somrething they usually just open a dictionary to understand what the words mean, have you ever done that and if so why can't you understand definitions of words?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  23. #22  
    has lost interest seagypsy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    3,103
    Quote Originally Posted by Harold14370 View Post
    Of course you might make it a policy to act as if you have a conscience. This way, you'll never slip up and accidentally get caught.

    Another example would be someone who sacrifices their life for a cause, or to save another person. That person is not calculating consequences to themselves. They are acting according to a moral code.

    That said, it is true that a person's conscience is affected by whether or not they will be found out. They might feel guilty only after getting caught doing something, then have a "jailhouse conversion."
    I think in the case of one sacrificing their life, it is because for some reason, they have placed more value and importance on something other than their own survival. Perhaps they have found a way to rationalize ignoring their instinct for self preservation by believing that their own life does not matter, however in order to place importance of something else above their own existence, they have to submit to some other belief system that they likely learned. Unless the sacrifice of life was not intentional. For instance sometimes mother bears will lose their own lives trying to preserve the life of their cubs. But this may have happened only because they didn't recognize the danger they were putting themselves in. For instance, if they are fishing their cub out of some deep water at the bottom of a water fall when a huge sharp stick comes over the falls and impales her. Did she give her life intentionally? Not likely. But the life was still lost.

    There have been times when animal mothers will abandon a newborn when food and water resources are scarce. Because lugging the newborn around reduces her chances of survival. feeding the infant increases her nutritional needs and without sufficient food and water resources for her to sustain her self, she certainly cannot sustain them both. So she leaves the newborn to die. She feels the loss, but can we say it is guilt?

    It is quite conceivable that a human mother may kill her own child to prevent it's suffering. If she perceives that her actions were indeed for the "good" of the child then it would be illogical to expect her to feel guilt over it. However if she learns after the fact that her fears were unjustified, then she may feel guilt for her actions. Still the guilt is based on her perceptions of what is good or bad.

    I personally, think conscience is born out of strict adherence to an accepted moral code. The majority of atheists are brought up in environments created by those who believed in a creator. And so we are taught early on to conform to behaviors acceptable by the majority. The majority being theists. It is something learned so intensively that it feels like nature. Much the way Michael Jackson probably felt music was a natural behavior for him, being that it was strongly reinforced by his father from a very young age.

    There have been cases where children were found wondering the forests, apparently raised by wolves or some other animal. They did not have a natural inclination towards feeling guilt. Guilt is something taught. I remember my little brother at the age of two laughing hysterically at the sight of eyeballs popping out of minnows heads when he squeezed them in his hand. I had to teach him that it was a living thing and that death is something to avoid and unpleasant. Only after I impressed upon him that the ending of one's existence would cause feelings that he has experienced as unpleasant did he start to feel something about having killed the tiny fish. I had to even teach him that his own death would be bad. The only reason I don't feel that self preservation is learned as well, is because something that is never taught to understand what death is, will still instinctively seek out life preserving situations. Meaning if something is preventing a newborn from getting air, the newborn will instinctively do what it is physically capable of to get air, even if all it can do is turn it's head in order to find a clear access to air.

    I hate that I am making claims that I cannot directly back up. I will spend some time trying to look up stories/reports of incidents I am describing. But hopefully, you too have read about these things and know somewhat of what I am referring to. I guess I am hoping this is common knowledge out of laziness, but I will do my best to find what I can to back up my claims.

    I think you are on to something when you say someone may just act as if they have a conscience so that they never slip up and get caught. To me, it is wise to never put yourself in a position to have to lie about something. Because no matter how good you are at lying. there is always a possibility of being found out. That being said, I have found a wallet with money in it before. I kept the money, mainly because there was no id and no way I could determine who's it was. Even if someone claimed it was theirs, what if several people claimed it. The likelihood of someone else falsely claiming it would be pretty high. So to me there was no guilt in keeping what I had found. Being in a wallet did not make it any different in my perceptions than finding loose cash on the sidewalk with no one around. I have lost money before and it sucked. But I blame no one for keeping the money when they found it. And I know someone had to find it. Once I dropped $100 cash out of my pocket in a diner somewhere. I never found it but it would be unreasonable to assume it was never found. I put no responsibility on the one who found it to hunt me down and return it to me. It was my responsibility to secure the money and keep track of it. So from my perspective the guilt should fall on the one who failed to retain the wallet. Not on the one who found it. Now if id is in the wallet, then proper ownership is provided and it is legally considered theft in some places and socially considered theft so in that situation I would conform, sort of. I would not trust that no other person didn't already take a large sum of money from the wallet and would not want to risk accusation of theft. So I would likely leave the wallet where it was found and have nothing to do with it.

    I do not trust people to do what society publicly decrees to be right or wrong. I live in my own self centered reality and assume everyone else does too. I consider all possible outcomes when having to choose an action to take. And I take the action that I predict will give the outcome most favorable to me.

    So to me a conscience is dependent on one's fear of being perceived to be wrong and therefore at risk of losing life/liberty.
    scheherazade likes this.
    Speaking badly about people after they are gone and jumping on the bash the band wagon must do very well for a low self-esteem.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  24. #23  
    has lost interest seagypsy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    3,103
    Quote Originally Posted by cosmictraveler View Post
    good
    bad
    right
    wrong

    also moral or immoral

    I dont understand these words.
    Then you might be a pschycopath.

    I cannot believe that you can't understand those words and, to me, are trolling about this matter.

    When anyone can't undestand somrething they usually just open a dictionary to understand what the words mean, have you ever done that and if so why can't you understand definitions of words?
    Why the hostility? Why the unqualified accusations? Why the personal attacks?

    See what i mean by perceptions. My honesty brought on judgement. I acknowledged that my honesty would likely get me labeled as mentally ill and therefor a danger to society. And it has regardless of my stated will to conform. A psychopath has no will and perceives no need to conform to society.

    You are misusing the label.
    Last edited by seagypsy; March 11th, 2013 at 10:24 AM.
    Speaking badly about people after they are gone and jumping on the bash the band wagon must do very well for a low self-esteem.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  25. #24  
    has lost interest seagypsy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    3,103
    good
    /go͝od/
    Adjective
    To be desired or approved of.
    Noun
    That which is morally right; righteousness.
    Adverb
    Well: "my mother could never cook this good".


    bad
    /bad/
    Adjective
    Of poor quality; inferior or defective: "a bad diet".
    Adverb
    Badly: "he beat her up real bad".
    Synonyms
    adjective. ill - evil - wicked - rotten - vicious - poor - nasty
    adverb. badly - ill - poorly



    moral

    mor·al
    [mawr-uhl, mor-]
    adjective
    1.
    of, pertaining to, or concerned with the principles or rules of right conduct or the distinction between right and wrong; ethical: moral attitudes.
    2.
    expressing or conveying truths or counsel as to right conduct, as a speaker or a literary work.
    3.
    founded on the fundamental principles of right conduct rather than on legalities, enactment, or custom: moral obligations.
    4.
    capable of conforming to the rules of right conduct: a moral being.
    5.
    conforming to the rules of right conduct ( opposed to immoral ): a moral man.


    good = moral = right... can anyone of these words be defined without using the other two words?

    can you describe moral without using the words right or good
    can you describe what is right without using the words good or moral
    can you describe good without using the words right or good

    What I am expressing is that these words do not have absolute objective meanings. And so their meanings vary from one user to the other. And so are impractical in describing anything. Words without objective meanings can mean anything or nothing. So they have little use when precision is needed.


    Perhaps it is the psychopath that believes that only his definition of good or bad or moral is correct. And that the perceptions of good, bad and moral that others hold are irrelevant.

    For practical purposes, as far as I am concerned, good is whatever the local majority says is good. Moral is whatever the local majority says is moral. And bad is whatever the local majority says is bad. But there is no objective good, bad or moral.

    Cosmic, if you would insist on your own perceptions of what is good, bad or moral being the only correct perception even while existing in a society that disagrees dramatically with your perceptions then you would be exhibiting a disregard for social norms and this is a strong symptom of psychopathy.

    I have a high regard for respecting social norms because it keeps me alive. Yet you call me, the psychopath.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antisoc...ality_disorder
    Speaking badly about people after they are gone and jumping on the bash the band wagon must do very well for a low self-esteem.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  26. #25  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Posts
    8,795
    Quote Originally Posted by seagypsy View Post
    I remember my little brother at the age of two laughing hysterically at the sight of eyeballs popping out of minnows heads when he squeezed them in his hand. I had to teach him that it was a living thing and that death is something to avoid and unpleasant. Only after I impressed upon him that the ending of one's existence would cause feelings that he has experienced as unpleasant did he start to feel something about having killed the tiny fish.
    That's interesting. Did you teach him it was wrong because you felt empathy for the minnow, or what? It seems that a psychopath would have said, that's pretty cool, little brother. Or maybe they would say, just don't let anybody else see you popping minnow's eyeballs out, because they might think you're a little strange.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  27. #26  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Posts
    8,795
    Quote Originally Posted by cosmictraveler View Post
    good
    bad
    right
    wrong

    also moral or immoral

    I dont understand these words.
    Then you might be a pschycopath.

    I cannot believe that you can't understand those words and, to me, are trolling about this matter.

    When anyone can't undestand somrething they usually just open a dictionary to understand what the words mean, have you ever done that and if so why can't you understand definitions of words?
    Please don't accuse people of trolling. If you think someone is violating the forum rules, report it, and let the moderators take care of it.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  28. #27  
    has lost interest seagypsy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    3,103
    Quote Originally Posted by Harold14370 View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by seagypsy View Post
    I remember my little brother at the age of two laughing hysterically at the sight of eyeballs popping out of minnows heads when he squeezed them in his hand. I had to teach him that it was a living thing and that death is something to avoid and unpleasant. Only after I impressed upon him that the ending of one's existence would cause feelings that he has experienced as unpleasant did he start to feel something about having killed the tiny fish.
    That's interesting. Did you teach him it was wrong because you felt empathy for the minnow, or what? It seems that a psychopath would have said, that's pretty cool, little brother. Or maybe they would say, just don't let anybody else see you popping minnow's eyeballs out, because they might think you're a little strange.
    Well I was 10 years old and had already had impressed upon me the importance of conforming to social norms. I was mimicking my mother. Conforming to social norms preserves one's own safety. Teaching him not to kill, reduced the chances of him someday deciding it would be cool to see my eyeballs pop out. So to teach our children to conform, we are protecting ourselves from them, and protecting them from provoking violence upon themselves.

    It may not have been something that I was consciously aware of, self preservation, but as an analytical adult, I can understand the underlying motivations and results of my actions. by understanding subconscious motivation, I am better able to control my own actions and make logical choices rather than emotional ones. Unfortunately, I am still human and sometimes emotions get away from me and I make dumb mistakes. Luckily, I have not yet made any decisions even in my worst emotional states to go against accepted social norms.

    I am a stickler for rules that when broken carry the consequences of losing life or liberty.

    I can't say that I felt empathy for the minnow. My concern was that my brother would become a cold blooded killer. Or rather, he would continue to be one and seek other prey over time.
    Speaking badly about people after they are gone and jumping on the bash the band wagon must do very well for a low self-esteem.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  29. #28  
    Northern Horse Whisperer Moderator scheherazade's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    Yukon, Canada
    Posts
    4,066
    Originally posted by seagypsy:
    I do not trust people to do what society publicly decrees to be right or wrong.
    I observe individuals for consistency in conduct. Those who are consistent are somewhat predictable and more trustworthy in my evaluations while those who are inconsistent, I prefer not to interact with.

    I live in my own self centered reality and assume everyone else does too.
    This assumption may seem 'logical' yet I observe that humans are frequently not logical. Assumptions, therefore, may prove to be in error.

    I consider all possible outcomes when having to choose an action to take. And I take the action that I predict will give the outcome most favorable to me.
    I, also, tend to consider the widest range of outcomes when I have the luxury of time to do so but I do not always choose what is most favorable for me because I was taught that one should not exploit their advantages because not all are born to equal opportunity or ability. I will likewise resist allowing others to take intentional advantage of myself and usually strive toward an outcome that is equitable for the majority. The advantage to me of this behavior is that those whom I have assisted, enabled or empowered remain kindly disposed toward me and return to my life at unexpected times when their presence is of benefit to me. I could not have predicted this outcome when I made decisions months, years and decades prior.
    So to me a conscience is dependent on one's fear of being perceived to be wrong and therefore at risk of losing life/liberty.
    I can greatly understand and appreciate the fear of losing one's life/liberty because of a mistaken perception by others and our society has plenty of case law to demonstrate where others have been wrongly accused, found guilty and been sentenced. People are quite a fearful species in my observation and I endeavor not to give them cause to fear me unless a circumstance arises which requires an intervention.

    There is an old saying, "Choose your battles wisely."

    An interesting thread this is turning into, seagypsy. You are an introspective person and capable of expressing your thoughts well through language.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  30. #29  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Posts
    46
    "None of this can be defended on any scientific basis, in my opinion."
    The possibility of an accurate scientific predictive morality test(s) modeled on personality, physical trait(s), life experiences or even a nature nurture combination isn't as controversial as the concept that we may have a more than a societal need for a moral code. Why can't a moral doctrine be defended on a scientific basis?

    Why did morality come about? Is it because we have a biological need for freedom and morality defends it?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  31. #30  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Posts
    8,795
    Quote Originally Posted by pleaseletmebeanon View Post
    "None of this can be defended on any scientific basis, in my opinion."
    The possibility of an accurate scientific predictive morality test(s) modeled on personality, physical trait(s), life experiences or even a nature nurture combination isn't as controversial as the concept that we may have a more than a societal need for a moral code. Why can't a moral doctrine be defended on a scientific basis?

    Why did morality come about? Is it because we have a biological need for freedom and morality defends it?
    What I had in mind when I wrote that was that if morality were instinctive, we would all have the same moral code. It is somewhat the same argument that atheists often use against the religious based moral code. If there was an absolute morality set by God, then he would have made it the same for everybody. The same thing can be said about a so-called natural moral code. There is no scientific reason to prefer one over another.

    Moral doctrines came about because they probably helped the adherents to survive, or else because the helped the society which adhered to the moral code to defeat rival groups. Different societies came up with different solutions for whatever reasons.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  32. #31  
    has lost interest seagypsy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    3,103
    Quote Originally Posted by scheherazade View Post
    Originally posted by seagypsy:
    I do not trust people to do what society publicly decrees to be right or wrong.
    I observe individuals for consistency in conduct. Those who are consistent are somewhat predictable and more trustworthy in my evaluations while those who are inconsistent, I prefer not to interact with.
    I may trust individuals that I have plenty of experience with but when predicting the behaviors of people I don't know, I err on the side of caution. My observations of the human species in general is that we tend to be deceptive, self serving, aggressive, and callous. We don't tend to exhibit these behaviors on an individual basis, but when we get into group think situations, us vs them situations, it seems in the presence of perceived acceptance our less popular attributes tend to surface.

    Quote Originally Posted by scheherazade View Post
    I live in my own self centered reality and assume everyone else does too.
    This assumption may seem 'logical' yet I observe that humans are frequently not logical. Assumptions, therefore, may prove to be in error.

    I consider all possible outcomes when having to choose an action to take. And I take the action that I predict will give the outcome most favorable to me.
    I, also, tend to consider the widest range of outcomes when I have the luxury of time to do so but I do not always choose what is most favorable for me because I was taught that one should not exploit their advantages because not all are born to equal opportunity or ability. I will likewise resist allowing others to take intentional advantage of myself and usually strive toward an outcome that is equitable for the majority. The advantage to me of this behavior is that those whom I have assisted, enabled or empowered remain kindly disposed toward me and return to my life at unexpected times when their presence is of benefit to me. I could not have predicted this outcome when I made decisions months, years and decades prior.
    I have always been told I over analyze everything, but generally, i do predict the possibility of having favors returned. Not exactly as you state it. But in my case, its more a matter of making myself likable contributes to my ability to continue existing. Those who find favor among society are quickly defended against threats. Watching any reality show can demonstrate this. The person who is well liked is less likely to be voted off. At least until it becomes more desperate a situation. I was a people watcher as a kid. I noticed that those who were kind and helpful to others rarely found themselves struggling to solve their own problems without any help. And those who were cold and heartless couldn't even get a ride to the doctor without calling 911.

    No one really wants to help people they don't like. And few are able to tolerate seeing someone they do like suffer. So to be likeable is still a choice made in effort to survive. Still self serving.

    Quote Originally Posted by scheherazade View Post
    An interesting thread this is turning into, seagypsy. You are an introspective person and capable of expressing your thoughts well through language.
    This is the weirdest thing anyone has ever said to me lol. thank you.
    Speaking badly about people after they are gone and jumping on the bash the band wagon must do very well for a low self-esteem.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  33. #32  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Posts
    8,795
    I am reminded of the quote:
    Seagypsy, I prefer to think you are not as calculating and cynical as you make yourself out to be. I could be wrong about that, but I'd just rather think otherwise.
    seagypsy likes this.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  34. #33  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Posts
    46
    "...if morality were instinctive, we would all have the same moral code."

    Harold, ignoring the preference over scientific reasoning to prefer/employ a moral code based on religion or a non-religious doctrine, a biological impetus doesn't care -In the same way, your body demands nutrition and it is unconcerned that you supply its needs with kosher, halal or unblessed sources

    Without question, morality helped with survival but arguing that it was for just such a purpose ignores that groups extended their moral code to members who were not useful to their existence and likely were detrimental to their safety as a whole. Most interestingly, this model was repeated in autonomous groups.

    Solutions or variations on a moral code can be as simple as environmental and doesn't explain its development.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  35. #34  
    Moderator Moderator
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Washington State
    Posts
    8,416
    "...if morality were instinctive, we would all have the same moral code."

    We also largely DO have the same moral code through historic and contemporary cultures particularly within the interiors of those societies.
    Meteorologist/Naturalist & Retired Soldier
    “The Holy Land is everywhere” Black Elk
    Reply With Quote  
     

  36. #35  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Posts
    8,795
    Quote Originally Posted by pleaseletmebeanon View Post
    "...if morality were instinctive, we would all have the same moral code."

    Harold, ignoring the preference over scientific reasoning to prefer/employ a moral code based on religion or a non-religious doctrine, a biological impetus doesn't care -In the same way, your body demands nutrition and it is unconcerned that you supply its needs with kosher, halal or unblessed sources

    Without question, morality helped with survival but arguing that it was for just such a purpose ignores that groups extended their moral code to members who were not useful to their existence and likely were detrimental to their safety as a whole. Most interestingly, this model was repeated in autonomous groups.

    Solutions or variations on a moral code can be as simple as environmental and doesn't explain its development.
    I wouldn't argue that any feature of a person's anatomy or of a society's moral code is for a "purpose." Certain features probably were important for survival. Others didn't matter, like hair color or other superficial features. However, if there was a detrimental effect, this probably wouldn't survive. What did you have in mind about members who would be detrimental to safety? Societies are complex, and these so-called detrimental members could be performing a function that is not immediately obvious.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  37. #36  
    Northern Horse Whisperer Moderator scheherazade's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    Yukon, Canada
    Posts
    4,066
    Originally Posted by scheherazade
    An interesting thread this is turning into, seagypsy. You are an introspective person and capable of expressing your thoughts well through language.


    Originally posted by seagypsy:
    This is the weirdest thing anyone has ever said to me lol. thank you.
    You take the conversation into areas beyond normal 'social convention' and beyond the comfort zone of some. Even with the relative anonymity of the internet, this takes a considerable amount of personal strength because there may well be mixed or even hostile response to many topics.

    I appreciate that you take 'point' on many subjects and where I feel that I may have something relevant (or sometimes even not, lol) it pleases me be a 'wingman' on occasion.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  38. #37  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Posts
    8,795
    Quote Originally Posted by Lynx_Fox View Post
    "...if morality were instinctive, we would all have the same moral code."

    We also largely DO have the same moral code through historic and contemporary cultures particularly within the interiors of those societies.
    This is true, if "largely the same" sometimes means "completely opposite."
    Reply With Quote  
     

  39. #38  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Posts
    46
    "What did you have in mind about members who would be detrimental to safety?"

    Harold, determining what was detrimental to early society is also as complex. Obviously, most think 'age' and 'infirmity' but if a societal morality didn't intervene, we would have clinically enforced population control based on many factors.

    Environmental conditions could make a trait positive regionally but a curse in elsewhere. For instance, I would think a society that lived nomadically would find it efficient to cull population based on fitness to travel.

    Despite not understanding how morality was always expressed, man continually develops and preserves it.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  40. #39  
    Brassica oleracea Strange's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    喫茶店
    Posts
    16,684
    Quote Originally Posted by Harold14370 View Post
    What I had in mind when I wrote that was that if morality were instinctive, we would all have the same moral code.
    Exactly. After all, we all have the same taste in music, we all like the same food and generally all have identical characters.
    Without wishing to overstate my case, everything in the observable universe definitely has its origins in Northamptonshire -- Alan Moore
    Reply With Quote  
     

  41. #40  
    has lost interest seagypsy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    3,103
    Quote Originally Posted by Harold14370 View Post
    I am reminded of the quote:
    Seagypsy, I prefer to think you are not as calculating and cynical as you make yourself out to be. I could be wrong about that, but I'd just rather think otherwise.
    I would prefer to think that as well. I know Neverfly would like to think that, but the poor guy lives with me and knows better. I can say I'm just blowing smoke if it makes you feel better....
    Speaking badly about people after they are gone and jumping on the bash the band wagon must do very well for a low self-esteem.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  42. #41  
    has lost interest seagypsy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    3,103
    Quote Originally Posted by scheherazade View Post
    Originally Posted by scheherazade
    An interesting thread this is turning into, seagypsy. You are an introspective person and capable of expressing your thoughts well through language.


    Originally posted by seagypsy:
    This is the weirdest thing anyone has ever said to me lol. thank you.
    You take the conversation into areas beyond normal 'social convention' and beyond the comfort zone of some. Even with the relative anonymity of the internet, this takes a considerable amount of personal strength because there may well be mixed or even hostile response to many topics.

    I appreciate that you take 'point' on many subjects and where I feel that I may have something relevant (or sometimes even not, lol) it pleases me be a 'wingman' on occasion.
    lol sometimes lack of hostility makes me nervous. My experience has always been that anytime someone is too nice, it turns out they were conning me. I never trust people that are too quick to offer flattery and never offer criticism.

    I am not suggesting this to be the case with you. Keep in mind, I am pretty direct. I am speaking in generalities. In your case, you have corrected me plenty of times, though in a very nurturing way. Of course, that could just mean you are afraid I may stalk you and do ... things.... I am not dangerous, I swear!!
    Speaking badly about people after they are gone and jumping on the bash the band wagon must do very well for a low self-esteem.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  43. #42  
    Moderator Moderator
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Washington State
    Posts
    8,416
    Some people for whatever reason choose to see the differences in peoples. I've been all over the world and embedded in many cultures--there's well defined threads of common morality, especially towards those within those societies-- respect, not killing or harming others without consent of the larger group, not stealing, not taking another's mate, self-defense, support for women and their youngest children, charity--some of these we see in other primates, other's are probably developed by necessities and natural survival of societies. People seem to want and be mostly the same everywhere I've been and have rules for internal cooperation that have likely given those moral a survival advantage.
    Meteorologist/Naturalist & Retired Soldier
    “The Holy Land is everywhere” Black Elk
    Reply With Quote  
     

  44. #43  
    has lost interest seagypsy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    3,103
    This is the point where I have to acknowledge that the thread is drifting into an area I have not spent so much time thinking about. So I will sit quiet, read and try to learn. Sometimes the drifting evolution of a thread can be fascinating in and of itself.
    Speaking badly about people after they are gone and jumping on the bash the band wagon must do very well for a low self-esteem.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  45. #44  
    Forum Radioactive Isotope cosmictraveler's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Key West, Florida, Earth
    Posts
    4,788
    Cosmic, if you would insist on your own perceptions of what is good, bad or moral being the only correct perception even while existing in a society that disagrees dramatically with your perceptions then you would be exhibiting a disregard for social norms and this is a strong symptom of psychopathy.

    I have a high regard for respecting social norms because it keeps me alive. Yet you call me, the psychopath.
    [/QUOTE]


    Then you might be a pschycopath.
    See, I only suggested that you MIGHT be one, I never said you were.
    When the power of love overcomes the love of power the world will know peace.
    Jimi Hendrix
    Reply With Quote  
     

  46. #45  
    Northern Horse Whisperer Moderator scheherazade's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    Yukon, Canada
    Posts
    4,066
    As the term 'psychopath' has come up, here is a simple 20 question test that folks can take to self-evaluate their potentials in this area.

    20 Signs That You Are A Psychopath - Business Insider

    I granted myself 1 point for each of the first 2 questions, making my score 2 out of a possible 40. I consider that I may be slightly obsessive-compulsive but apparently I am unlikely to be a psychopath.

    Whether this makes me good, bad, right, wrong, moral or immoral remains to be determined.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  47. #46  
    has lost interest seagypsy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    3,103
    I gave myself 2 points for cunning and manipulative, and 1 point for lack of guilt or remorse. I guess I could go with 2 points there but the only reason I don't tend to feel guilt or remorse is because I am careful not to do things that I could reasonably predict that I would regret later. I don't steal, I am cautious of other's feelings, and I respect the law.

    I considered giving myself points for traits I wish I had but decided that would be dishonest. So I only scored 3 points. but even if I took points for traits I wish I had I'd still only be at 5points. I can see where criminal versatility could be quite useful and entertaining on some levels.
    Speaking badly about people after they are gone and jumping on the bash the band wagon must do very well for a low self-esteem.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  48. #47  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Posts
    8,795
    I scored a point for callous lack of empathy and one for lack of realistic long term goals.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  49. #48  
    Northern Horse Whisperer Moderator scheherazade's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    Yukon, Canada
    Posts
    4,066
    Quote Originally Posted by Harold14370 View Post
    I scored a point for callous lack of empathy and one for lack of realistic long term goals.
    Interesting.

    I can see where lack of empathy could also be construed as the ability to be objective, which would be desirable in a moderator. A lack of realistic long term goals could also be considered completely logical for some individuals. How would we determine if this is a 'good' or a 'bad' thing?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  50. #49  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Posts
    8,795
    Quote Originally Posted by scheherazade View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Harold14370 View Post
    I scored a point for callous lack of empathy and one for lack of realistic long term goals.
    Interesting.

    I can see where lack of empathy could also be construed as the ability to be objective, which would be desirable in a moderator. A lack of realistic long term goals could also be considered completely logical for some individuals. How would we determine if this is a 'good' or a 'bad' thing?
    On the lack of empathy part, what I was thinking of was that I wouldn't have had much of a problem with Seagypsy's little brother popping out the eyes of the minnows. After all, I've fished with minnows and put a hook through their back, and put them in the water as bait for pike or walleye. As long as they could swim around they made good bait, but when they died you'd just put another one on. I think this is a cultural thing though. It doesn't affect the ability to have empathy for people.

    I think it's probably a good thing for a moderator to have empathy. It helps to put yourself in someone else's place sometimes to see how or why they would react a certain way to something that's been written.

    If I had realistic long term goals, I would probably be pursuing those instead of wasting time posting on a science forum. Whether that's good or bad depends on one's perspective.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  51. #50  
    has lost interest seagypsy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    3,103
    Quote Originally Posted by Harold14370 View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by scheherazade View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Harold14370 View Post
    I scored a point for callous lack of empathy and one for lack of realistic long term goals.
    Interesting.

    I can see where lack of empathy could also be construed as the ability to be objective, which would be desirable in a moderator. A lack of realistic long term goals could also be considered completely logical for some individuals. How would we determine if this is a 'good' or a 'bad' thing?
    On the lack of empathy part, what I was thinking of was that I wouldn't have had much of a problem with Seagypsy's little brother popping out the eyes of the minnows. After all, I've fished with minnows and put a hook through their back, and put them in the water as bait for pike or walleye. As long as they could swim around they made good bait, but when they died you'd just put another one on. I think this is a cultural thing though. It doesn't affect the ability to have empathy for people.

    I think it's probably a good thing for a moderator to have empathy. It helps to put yourself in someone else's place sometimes to see how or why they would react a certain way to something that's been written.

    If I had realistic long term goals, I would probably be pursuing those instead of wasting time posting on a science forum. Whether that's good or bad depends on one's perspective.
    As I said, I also didn't have empathy for the little fish. But my brother's joy in causing harm or his inability to recognize what exactly he was doing is what bothered me. I knew of kids that were my age who were cruel to animals for no reason. But I was also a kid fond of fishing with my dad. I was the one daughter that didn't get grossed out when putting a worm on a hook and I could handle the fish directly once it was caught. But my parents had always told me never to kill without purpose. I wasn't taught that killing was inherently bad. Even the pastor of the churh concurred with my mother because I would question him about contradictions that adults teach children. Knowing that the 10 commandments said, "thou shalt not kill" while elsewhere in the bible God instructed people to kill. And the fact that murder was illegal, but going to war and killing many people was ok. I became aware at a young age, there was no absolute for what was good or bad or right or wrong. The constant contradictions were evidence of that. And it became painfully obvious that I needed to learn all the petty nuances of social taboos or I would find myself in a precarious situation one day.

    So when I saw what my brother did, I imagined he could be perceived by others as bad not because he killed the minnow but because he enjoyed it. I also killed minnows when fishing, but i didn't exhibit maniacal laughter while doing so.

    A soldier may kill more people during a war than a serial killer ever does over the course of a lifetime. but the serial killer is the one that is perceived as a threat to society. it isn't the fact that they kill other people that makes them a perceived danger, its their perceived motivations and psychological states of mind while doing so. A soldier is following social norms and obeying orders. A serial killer is a violator of social norms and is acting on his own whims. The soldier is controlled, the serial killer is not.
    John Galt likes this.
    Speaking badly about people after they are gone and jumping on the bash the band wagon must do very well for a low self-esteem.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  52. #51  
    Universal Mind John Galt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    14,168
    However, there is research - can't locate it, but will try to do so if challenged - that suggests only a small percentage of soldiers in a conflict kill readily and perhaps these are the ones with psychopathic tendencies.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  53. #52  
    Life-Size Nanoputian Flick Montana's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Flatland
    Posts
    5,437
    I've seen articles that suggest many soldiers do not fire their weapons and many more fire intentional misses. I wonder if distancing ourselves by the use of autonomous weapons will increase our willingness to kill.

    Robert E. Lee was probably not the first to say so, but he said it well when he said, "It is well that war is so terrible, or we should grow too fond of it."

    However, saying that developing drone combat further is 'wrong' could lead people to suggest that American soldiers saved by not being on the front lines is 'right'.
    "Sometimes I think the surest sign that intelligent life exists elsewhere in the universe is that none of it has tried to contact us." -Calvin
    Reply With Quote  
     

  54. #53  
    Brassica oleracea Strange's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    喫茶店
    Posts
    16,684
    Quote Originally Posted by scheherazade View Post
    As the term 'psychopath' has come up, here is a simple 20 question test that folks can take to self-evaluate their potentials in this area.

    20 Signs That You Are A Psychopath - Business Insider

    I granted myself 1 point for each of the first 2 questions, making my score 2 out of a possible 40. I consider that I may be slightly obsessive-compulsive but apparently I am unlikely to be a psychopath.

    Whether this makes me good, bad, right, wrong, moral or immoral remains to be determined.
    Possibly related to this: MACH-IV: Machiavellianism Test
    Without wishing to overstate my case, everything in the observable universe definitely has its origins in Northamptonshire -- Alan Moore
    Reply With Quote  
     

  55. #54  
    has lost interest seagypsy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    3,103
    Quote Originally Posted by Strange View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by scheherazade View Post
    As the term 'psychopath' has come up, here is a simple 20 question test that folks can take to self-evaluate their potentials in this area.

    20 Signs That You Are A Psychopath - Business Insider

    I granted myself 1 point for each of the first 2 questions, making my score 2 out of a possible 40. I consider that I may be slightly obsessive-compulsive but apparently I am unlikely to be a psychopath.

    Whether this makes me good, bad, right, wrong, moral or immoral remains to be determined.
    Possibly related to this: MACH-IV: Machiavellianism Test
    I scored 68 on that quiz. You would think it would ask you if you have any known mental disorders or ask you a bit about your background. But I guess that they are only trying to determine your current state of mind not the reason for it.
    Speaking badly about people after they are gone and jumping on the bash the band wagon must do very well for a low self-esteem.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  56. #55  
    Brassica oleracea Strange's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    喫茶店
    Posts
    16,684
    Some would say that (extreme) Machiavllianism is a mental disorder anyway.

    (I scored about 40, I think)
    Without wishing to overstate my case, everything in the observable universe definitely has its origins in Northamptonshire -- Alan Moore
    Reply With Quote  
     

  57. #56  
    Northern Horse Whisperer Moderator scheherazade's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    Yukon, Canada
    Posts
    4,066
    Somehow, this result does not surprise me, lol...

    Your score was 51 of 100.

    This puts you in the category of the low Machs, people who will hold out for the goodness of the world and avoid manipulation. Not the people Machiavelli would approve of.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  58. #57  
    Brassica oleracea Strange's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    喫茶店
    Posts
    16,684
    I dont understand these words. I understand how others use them and do my best to use them in the same way for the sake of communicating an idea, but what these words actually mean is actually a mystery to me.
    If it helps, I have exactly the same problem with the concepts of "left" and "right" (er, the directions not the political ideologies). Luckily, I was able to come up with a handy mnemonic when I was young. But I still get them mixed up sometimes if I don't think about it.

    OK. Maybe that is not quite as significant as mixing up good and evil...
    Without wishing to overstate my case, everything in the observable universe definitely has its origins in Northamptonshire -- Alan Moore
    Reply With Quote  
     

  59. #58  
    Life-Size Nanoputian Flick Montana's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Flatland
    Posts
    5,437
    Quote Originally Posted by Strange View Post
    OK. Maybe that is not quite as significant as mixing up good and evil...
    Where I live, "left" is synonymous with "evil".
    "Sometimes I think the surest sign that intelligent life exists elsewhere in the universe is that none of it has tried to contact us." -Calvin
    Reply With Quote  
     

  60. #59  
    Brassica oleracea Strange's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    喫茶店
    Posts
    16,684
    Quote Originally Posted by Flick Montana View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Strange View Post
    OK. Maybe that is not quite as significant as mixing up good and evil...
    Where I live, "left" is synonymous with "evil".
    Around here it is merely sinister.
    Without wishing to overstate my case, everything in the observable universe definitely has its origins in Northamptonshire -- Alan Moore
    Reply With Quote  
     

  61. #60  
    has lost interest seagypsy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    3,103
    I associate left with the hand that i can't write with very well. Though that is starting to apply to both hands since I type more than I use a pencil or pen now. I can barely read my hand writing now.
    Speaking badly about people after they are gone and jumping on the bash the band wagon must do very well for a low self-esteem.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  62. #61  
    Northern Horse Whisperer Moderator scheherazade's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    Yukon, Canada
    Posts
    4,066
    Quote Originally Posted by seagypsy View Post
    I associate left with the hand that i can't write with very well. Though that is starting to apply to both hands since I type more than I use a pencil or pen now. I can barely read my hand writing now.
    Illegible handwriting? You shall soon be capable of an upgrade to 'doctor' or 'lawyer' if you can meet the other required skill sets.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  63. #62  
    has lost interest seagypsy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    3,103
    I tend to be able to mingle socially with both groups of people for a while before they realize I have no education at all in their fields lol. Probably due to my inquisitive nature. As a child I was always taking things apart to see how they work. Usually inanimate objects. But I learned to use my imagination to dissect minds and bodies as well. No living bodies, but I have killed my own food before. I see living things as extremely complex machines. And I just want to know how they work, including their programming.
    Speaking badly about people after they are gone and jumping on the bash the band wagon must do very well for a low self-esteem.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  64. #63  
    Northern Horse Whisperer Moderator scheherazade's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    Yukon, Canada
    Posts
    4,066
    Quote Originally Posted by seagypsy View Post
    I tend to be able to mingle socially with both groups of people for a while before they realize I have no education at all in their fields lol. Probably due to my inquisitive nature. As a child I was always taking things apart to see how they work. Usually inanimate objects. But I learned to use my imagination to dissect minds and bodies as well. No living bodies, but I have killed my own food before. I see living things as extremely complex machines. And I just want to know how they work, including their programming.
    Likewise, I tend to be just 'different enough' that neither the blue-collar or white-collar folks know quite how to pigeon hole me. I'm a good listener and it's usually easy enough to get people talking about their areas of interest or expertise in social situations.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  65. #64  
    has lost interest seagypsy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    3,103
    Quote Originally Posted by scheherazade View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by seagypsy View Post
    I tend to be able to mingle socially with both groups of people for a while before they realize I have no education at all in their fields lol. Probably due to my inquisitive nature. As a child I was always taking things apart to see how they work. Usually inanimate objects. But I learned to use my imagination to dissect minds and bodies as well. No living bodies, but I have killed my own food before. I see living things as extremely complex machines. And I just want to know how they work, including their programming.
    Likewise, I tend to be just 'different enough' that neither the blue-collar or white-collar folks know quite how to pigeon hole me. I'm a good listener and it's usually easy enough to get people talking about their areas of interest or expertise in social situations.
    In my case, I think it is more of a case that the people I fool are not actually fooled, they are just so obsessed with not being seen as rude that none of them have the integrity to call me on my bullshit.
    Speaking badly about people after they are gone and jumping on the bash the band wagon must do very well for a low self-esteem.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  66. #65  
    Northern Horse Whisperer Moderator scheherazade's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    Yukon, Canada
    Posts
    4,066
    Quote Originally Posted by seagypsy View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by scheherazade View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by seagypsy View Post
    I tend to be able to mingle socially with both groups of people for a while before they realize I have no education at all in their fields lol. Probably due to my inquisitive nature. As a child I was always taking things apart to see how they work. Usually inanimate objects. But I learned to use my imagination to dissect minds and bodies as well. No living bodies, but I have killed my own food before. I see living things as extremely complex machines. And I just want to know how they work, including their programming.
    Likewise, I tend to be just 'different enough' that neither the blue-collar or white-collar folks know quite how to pigeon hole me. I'm a good listener and it's usually easy enough to get people talking about their areas of interest or expertise in social situations.
    In my case, I think it is more of a case that the people I fool are not actually fooled, they are just so obsessed with not being seen as rude that none of them have the integrity to call me on my bullshit.
    The Yukon, in my case, is a small population of incredible diversity and people are generally pretty tolerant of 'individualism' and 'cultural differences' unless someone is being a complete ass or disrupting the proceedings. At one social gathering, a relative newcomer to the territory made a point of calling someone 'short, fat and funny' without realizing that this person was a top member of an organization (associated with motorcycles) that it is best not to mess with.

    On that particular day, the individual in question had consumed just enough fortified beverage that they looked at the mouthy idiot, sweltering in a brand new plaid lumberjack shirt and jeans and decided that it would be inappropriate to harm anyone so apparently bereft of awareness and possibly ruin a good party. The gentleman just laughed at the slight and the conversation moved on.
    Reply With Quote  
     

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 3
    Last Post: December 26th, 2010, 07:56 AM
  2. 'good' vs. 'bad' calories
    By gib65 in forum Health & Medicine
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: April 1st, 2010, 02:09 PM
  3. Pollute so bad that its good.
    By miomaz in forum Earth Sciences
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: July 3rd, 2008, 05:58 PM
  4. OS X - Bad or Good
    By sderenzi in forum Computer Science
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: June 30th, 2007, 04:00 PM
  5. Born good or bad?
    By Rationalist in forum Behavior and Psychology
    Replies: 21
    Last Post: January 29th, 2007, 04:26 PM
Bookmarks
Bookmarks
Posting Permissions
  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •