Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

I am religious and believe in free will

70 (27.6%)

I am religious and do not believe in free will

10 (3.9%)

I am not religious and believe in free will

113 (44.5%)

I am not religious and do not believe in free will

61 (24%)

Total Members Voted: 249

[McTraveller]

What? No that's not at all the conclusion I'd draw.

If you're too dense to plan ahead and have no impulse control? You don't get to go consequence free for being a brute.  But if you really have no impulse control (e.g., say you had a brain tumor) then you are morally exonerated, not free from social consequences.

Maybe that's the key - don't confuse moral impact with social impact!  Consider the quote (which I'm paraphrasing) "giving to the needy doesn't require love, but loving the needy requires giving." Giving to the needy in both cases likely has the same social impact, but they have quite different moral implications.

Regarding the "if you repress your bad thoughts... you are considered an angel." I suppose maybe you are considered one by society, but you aren't one. You're a struggling, internally miserable human.

I mean, what if you are a closet dog-hater but never act on it, never attend an event, but in your heart of hearts you want to destroy all dogs in the most gruesome way possible.  I'd say you are not a "moral" person, even though society would not notice.

[Strongpoint]

This example is... incomplete at best. Stopping at merely forgiveness is where it falls short - the better prayer is to ask also to change your desires, so that you no longer want something you don't have. Pining after someone not your spouse is, if nothing else, not good for yourself even from a selfish standpoint.

Last time I checked, having fantasies about someone is actually... pleasant. And, if it stays secret, it doesn't harm anyone in any meaningful way.

What self-harm is there? Unless you hate yourself for the "immorality" of your desires. Or you want it SO bad that not having it makes you unhappy which is usually not the case.

This presupposes the highest aim is self fulfillment, and not everyone shares that belief.

No. It presupposes that people actually suffer when they must fight what is deeply wired in us by evolution like sexual drive. And it is bad because people suffering is bad. People not suffering is good. But there is no moral way out of this when your only option to not suffer is to make others suffer to a much higher degree.

The best solution, is, of course, to remove or redirect those urges but it is no damn easy(if possible at all).

  take flat earth belief for an example of "harm that doesn't cause physical or emotional pain."

Flat earth is a narrow example of a wider problem "I know better than professionals in the area" And it leads to very physical and real harm when people oppose vaccination or do similar stuff.

This is why spreading lies like Flat Earth is very clearly immoral.

[Egan_BW]

Moral systems exist to help the individual find and resist their bad impulses. So if the reason you resist doing bad things is because your moral system recognizes it as bad, then you're acting morally even if your morals are strongly conflicted with your desires. Because you're acting based on your moral system.

[dragdeler]

But morality is the sum of the ethical judgements. How could moral possibly deal with anything but appearances of established facts. Thoughts can be unethical, actions can be amoral.


And then what, we're going to measure the character of a person by intrusively thought policing, instead of by their actions?

It seems terribly contorted and is intuitively abject to me.

[Strongpoint]

Thoughts can be unethical.

And here I disagree completely. Thoughts are not part of behavior! And ethics are all about behaviors.

[McTraveller]

Yeah, that's why I take a shortcut:  everyone is immoral.   

Basically - worrying about what's moral or not, is not actually the point.  Even in my religion, which oft gets blamed for over-moralizing.  The namesake of the religion, even, had tons to say about "you're doing morality wrong*!" to both the religious elite of the day, and the people who were so shamed by the religious elite they thought themselves worthless.

*And a lot of it was "Thoughts matter, not just actions.  Your sacrifices and alms and giving are a stench to me. Your neglect of the downtrodden is horrific."

White-tower pontification of morality doesn't really benefit anyone... although I admit it is a pleasant diversion.

[Egan_BW]

Most of us aren't omniscient, though. So we can leave the judgement of others' thoughts to those better equipped.

[Strongpoint]

If I imagine myself smashing a piece of glass to pieces does it mean that something happens to glass just because of that? Is it somehow the same
as smashing but to a lesser degree? Does glass change its properties because of my thought?

If I imagine myself doing something harmful to society does it mean that something happens to society just because of that? Is it somehow the same as doing that harmful thing but to a lesser degree? Does society change its properties because of my thought?

[MaxTheFox]

I think some thoughts are just metaphysically evil. Why? They just are, even if there is no actual harm done. Imagining yourself committing pedophilia (and enjoying it) feels that way to me. Even if many lesser crimes don't. Sometimes there's just no root reason for something.

Call me irrational, whatever. It feels wrong, so I consider it wrong.

[Strongpoint]

I think some thoughts are just metaphysically evil. Why? They just are, even if there is no actual harm done. Imagining yourself committing pedophilia (and enjoying it) feels that way to me. Even if many lesser crimes don't. Sometimes there's just no root reason for something.

"Feels" is an awful way to measure morality, even for actions.

I am a very straight man, imagining doing anything remotely sexual with a dude is utterly, absolutely, totally disgusting for me. Watching gay porn will be like a mild torture for me. Even when guys are merely kissing is somewhat discomforting. This fact does nothing to change my opinion on the morality of homosexuality

There is also a long list of sexual fetishes (like the simple and rather common "golden shower" but it is innocent compared to many others) which also feels utterly disgusting.

Pedophilia is a great evil not because it is disgusting but because it causes very real, very measure, very serious harm to the most vulnerable. But thoughts about having sex with a child - do not cause harm.

[dragdeler]

It's not hard tho to tell why pedophilia is bad tho, so it kinda not "just is evil".

Ethically: what entitles me to to cause such extended physical and mental pain for my own sexual gratification?
Morally: are we just going to let them abuse OUR children?!


And that's allready a pretty extreme example, I struggle to find something that just is evil without a particular reason.

[McTraveller]

You mean things are only "evil" if they result in a physical change to the universe, or other people? That's sort of a... functional definition, not an existential definition.

It also means you shouldn't really call things good or evil - only harmful or benign, and to go further, as "personally harmful/benign" vs "publicly harmful/benign."

That's a difference between atheistic and theistic morality though... one is that there is an existential, fundamental "good/evil", the other is that everything is just pragmatic.

[MaxTheFox]

I think some thoughts are just metaphysically evil. Why? They just are, even if there is no actual harm done. Imagining yourself committing pedophilia (and enjoying it) feels that way to me. Even if many lesser crimes don't. Sometimes there's just no root reason for something.

"Feels" is an awful way to measure morality, even for actions.

I am a very straight man, imagining doing anything remotely sexual with a dude is utterly, absolutely, totally disgusting for me. Watching gay porn will be like a mild torture for me. Even when guys are merely kissing is somewhat discomforting. This fact does nothing to change my opinion on the morality of homosexuality

There is also a long list of sexual fetishes (like the simple and rather common "golden shower" but it is innocent compared to many others) which also feels utterly disgusting.

Pedophilia is a great evil not because it is disgusting but because it causes very real, very measure, very serious harm to the most vulnerable. But thoughts about having sex with a child - do not cause harm.

There's a difference to me between feeling disgusting and feeling evil. I did not mention disgust in my post. Piss fetish and the like feels disgusting and I'd never do it. Yet I don't consider it evil in the same way I consider having a pedophilia fetish.

One can despise things in more than one different way, you know.

It's not hard tho to tell why pedophilia is bad tho, so it kinda not "just is evil".

Ethically: what entitles me to to cause such extended physical and mental pain for my own sexual gratification?
Morally: are we just going to let them abuse OUR children?!


And that's allready a pretty extreme example, I struggle to find something that just is evil without a particular reason.

I know, I was talking about pedophilic fantasies though, not the act itself. Yes, I consider some thoughts evil. That might be a bitter pill to swallow. It was for my old self too.
Good night.

[Strongpoint]

Yes, but we are talking about if having pedophilic desires is evil, don't we? I chose the example of an act that is so clearly evil exactly because I want to illustrate that thoughts even about something as horrible as this... are not evil themselves.

You mean things are only "evil" if they result in a physical change to the universe, or other people? That's sort of a... functional definition, not an existential definition.

Yes, the universe, other people, other living things, something actually existing must be changed before we can even start speaking about evil or wrong in the action.

one is that there is an existential, fundamental "good/evil", the other is that everything is just pragmatic.

Rational is a better word. And yes, As I said, I use reason to determine what is good, and what is evil by measuring the effects. It all started when I said that theists need to answer different questions to determine what is moral. I specifically listed  "Is this good or evil on a cosmic scale of morality?" as a question that theists ask themselves.

And you said that you don't ask this question AT ALL. So do you ask yourself that or not?

[dragdeler]

I allmost brought it up earlier in a slightly different context: to absolve people who actually have no impulse control, like for real, head injury or such, seems hell of catholic... You know kill rape pillage all you want, as long as you get to squeeze in a little debriefing with the boss before you die, you're fine.



IMO it is more useful to define some action where the agent was completly oblivious to it's harm as evil, than it would be to define bad thoughts as evil. One creates accountability, the other is just an expression of your moral-aesthethical preferences.