[mike777]

I happen to believe that there is some objective knowledge and objective morality that is based on epistemic reasons alone. An intuitive view that there is a way things are that is independent of human opinion, and that we are capable of arriving at belief about how things are that is objectively reasonable, binding on anyone capable of appreciating the relevant evidence regardless of their social or cultural perspective.

I agree there exists belief in subjective morality and knowledge in the world that is affected by a social and cultural perspective.

[luke warm]

Lobowolf, on Feb 13 2009, 12:14 PM, said:

Winstonm, on Feb 13 2009, 01:26 AM, said:

So you are saying morality may not be an absolute - you believe it is but there is no way for any of us to prove our positions.

Are you claiming this unprovable belief extends to all things - that a part of all knowledge is belief and there are no material facts?  I don't care one way or the other, but if that is your belief it would help me understand your worldview.

I don't know if this sums up his position, but it sounds pretty close to mine.

he has some of it correct, though i of course don't believe there's no room for material facts in a person's worldview... the only thing i'd add to this is that it's my view that the one who sees morality as relative can never say that any one act is immoral - or moral... it would just depend

mike said:

I happen to believe that there is some objective knowledge and objective morality that is based on epistemic reasons alone. An intuitive view that there is a way things are that is independent of human opinion, and that we are capable of arriving at belief about how things are that is objectively reasonable, binding on anyone capable of appreciating the relevant evidence regardless of their social or cultural perspective.

I agree there exists belief in subjective morality and knowledge in the world that is affected by a social and cultural perspective.

i agree with all of that, fwiw

[Wackojack]

My first and last post on this thread. A personal view of one who does not normally read the "water cooler"

Jimmy starts the ball rolling with some reference I didn't understand about Bobby Fisher and Iceland. Thereafter the discussion lurches into evolution and then onto morality. The main characters (I won't name them) lining up on one side, mostly putting their arguments quite passionately and some very eloquently. A few lost me. On the other side apart from the odd bit of encouragement from peripheral characters, was you, Jimmy. What were you saying? In spite of reading and re-reading what you said, I found it impenetrable and incomprehensible. The words you use are every day words but when they are put together, for me, they seemed devoid of all meaning. I really do wish I could understand what you are saying. But I can't. I would not have been putting it quite so bluntly had you not started this thread.

Sorry. God help me.

[kenberg]

Theoretical matters are always the hardes to settle.
I offer a bridge analogy and then a challenge:

I am playing tomorrow with I guy who does not like to play Drury. I like Drury. We have agreed not to play Drury. He likes fit showing jump shifts. But he plays them differently than I do. We have agreed to not play fit jump shifts. These agreements came quickly.

If we launched a discussion on why Drury is or is not a good convention, and how our world views influenced our opinions, we would be totally exhausted by the time we reached the table.


So here is a (hopefully friendly) challenge, say to Jimmy and Winston: Suppose you were required, for 24 hours, to live your life in accordance with the world view of the other. What might you do differently? I sincerely doubt that Jimmy would start raping children (as those of us without religion are supposedly allowed to do) or that Winston would give all of his money to the poor (It is easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle... if I remember my Biblical teachings correctly). If I do not play Drury, I know how my bidding will change. But if I change my worldview?

Largely I think my worldview grows out of my experience and decisions that I make based on those experiences. There is something of a feedback loop no doubt but I think the primary direction of flow is as I describe. To some extent, this guarantees that my views, about Drury or about the meaning of life, will be less than universally compelling. But it does seem to me to be the natural way to reach such conclusions.

[Winstonm]

Ken,

I did as you suggested and spent the day with Jimmy's worldview - something went horribly wrong - I converted to Druryism.

[Winstonm]

Wackojack, on Feb 14 2009, 05:58 AM, said:

My first and last post on this thread.  A personal view of one who does not normally read the "water cooler"

Jimmy starts the ball rolling with some reference I didn't understand about Bobby Fisher and Iceland.  Thereafter the discussion lurches into evolution and then onto morality.  Sorry.  God help me.

This thread has all the fascination of a bad car wreck.

[Lobowolf]

Wackojack, on Feb 14 2009, 05:58 AM, said:

Jimmy starts the ball rolling with some reference I didn't understand about Bobby Fisher and Iceland.

The Spassky-Fischer match (first match - '72) merits close study.

[helene_t]

kenberg, on Feb 14 2009, 04:59 PM, said:

I sincerely doubt [....] that Winston would give all of his money to the poor

No if he changed his worldview so as to believe in the stimulus package, he would spend all his money on baseball, beer and prostitutes

[Winstonm]

helene_t, on Feb 14 2009, 02:32 PM, said:

kenberg, on Feb 14 2009, 04:59 PM, said:

I sincerely doubt [....] that Winston would give all of his money to the poor

No if he changed his worldview so as to believe in the stimulus package, he would spend all his money on baseball, beer and prostitutes

I wonder if I could get to second base with the prostitutes?

[jdonn]

Winstonm, on Feb 14 2009, 11:49 AM, said:

This thread has all the fascination of a bad car wreck.

Possibly the first thing in this thread I've agreed with in quite a while. I've never seen so many words used to express so little actual meaning. It's like a(n American) football player running sideline to sideline, handing off the ball to his teammate who also runs sideline to sideline, and after 60 seconds have gone off the clock and 500 yards have been run, the ball has actually advanced backwards 3 yards.

[luke warm]

kenberg, on Feb 14 2009, 10:59 AM, said:

~~ raping children (as those of us without religion are supposedly allowed to do) ~~

that isn't fair

[hrothgar]

Interesting article

http://pewresearch.org/pubs/1105/darwin-de...igion-evolution

[Winstonm]

These poll numbers are staggering and show the leading reason for the future demise of the U.S. as the world's last superpower.

Quote

According to an August 2006 survey by the Pew Research Center's Forum on Religion & Public Life and the Pew Research Center for the People & the Press, 63 percent of Americans believe that humans and other animals have either always existed in their present form or have evolved over time under the guidance of a supreme being. Only 26 percent say that life evolved solely through processes such as natural selection. A similar Pew Research Center poll, released in August 2005, found that 64 percent of Americans support teaching creationism alongside evolution in the classroom.

No free, self-governing nation can long overcome this amount of self-induced ignorance and inate stupidity without falling prey to leaders who will take advantage of those supersticions.

[matmat]

Winstonm, on Feb 14 2009, 07:40 PM, said:

helene_t, on Feb 14 2009, 02:32 PM, said:

kenberg, on Feb 14 2009, 04:59 PM, said:

I sincerely doubt [....] that Winston would give all of his money to the poor

No if he changed his worldview so as to believe in the stimulus package, he would spend all his money on baseball, beer and prostitutes

I wonder if I could get to second base with the prostitutes?

without spilling your beer, no doubt.

[gwnn]

meh its not as bad as it sounds.... even mcdonald sis gone so its all happiness.

[quiddity]

jdonn, on Feb 14 2009, 07:58 PM, said:

Winstonm, on Feb 14 2009, 11:49 AM, said:

This thread has all the fascination of a bad car wreck.

Possibly the first thing in this thread I've agreed with in quite a while. I've never seen so many words used to express so little actual meaning. It's like a(n American) football player running sideline to sideline, handing off the ball to his teammate who also runs sideline to sideline, and after 60 seconds have gone off the clock and 500 yards have been run, the ball has actually advanced backwards 3 yards.

That's fine - advancing the ball has never been a priority in water cooler discussions. The point is always to eat up the clock.

[Fluffy]

oh Csaba, you are boring too much latelly, hope I can handle you my videogame soon

[gwnn]

I bought a copy of Machinarium. Have to find a place to download it. Then it will be peace and quiet.