.com.unity Forums - Real World Philospohy

.com.unity Forums (http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/index.php)

- Space Empires: IV & V (http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/forumdisplay.php?f=20)

- - Real World Philospohy (http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/showthread.php?t=10706)

Re: Real World Philospohy

Totally wrong there on all counts Jack. You are bringing unrelated issues into the morality systems that are not actually assumptions, but still have little to do with the morality itself.

Re: Real World Philospohy

Quote:

Originally posted by Jack Simth:
Every ethical system ultimately has one or more "feels-right" assumptions lying under it somewhere (although some will be disguised as circular logic, "what else could it be?" defenses, or others).

Including those based on supposed divine directives. Since you can never get past the "supposed" part.

Re: Real World Philospohy

Quote:

Originally posted by spoon:
<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by Jack Simth:
Every ethical system ultimately has one or more "feels-right" assumptions lying under it somewhere (although some will be disguised as circular logic, "what else could it be?" defenses, or others).

Re: Real World Philospohy

Quote:

Originally posted by Imperator Fyron:
Totally wrong there on all counts Jack. You are bringing unrelated issues into the morality systems that are not actually assumptions, but still have little to do with the morality itself.

A flat contradiction; interesting. Can you say why a single thing I listed as being an underlying assumption isn't an assumtpion (without replacing it with a different assumption (implicitly or explicitly), of course)?

Alternately, can you say why they are truly unrelated (again, without adding a different assumption somewhere)?

If not, why the flat-out contradiction? If so, please do.

Re: Real World Philospohy

Quote:

Originally posted by Jack Simth:
<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by spoon:
<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by Jack Simth:
Every ethical system ultimately has one or more "feels-right" assumptions lying under it somewhere (although some will be disguised as circular logic, "what else could it be?" defenses, or others).

Including those based on supposed divine directives. Since you can never get past the "supposed" part. <hr /></blockquote>Well, yes. I did use "Every". I thought that was clear. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/image...s/confused.gif <hr /></blockquote>This line makes it seem like you are saying your particular belief system operates differently:

Quote:

Oh, yes, people can usually distinguish right and wrong actions without believing in God - but few will be able to say why one thing is right and another wrong; those who can will usually be leaning on various "feels-right" assumptions

It appears to me that you are saying a belief in God means that your moral assumptions don't rely on a "feels-right" assumption.
But I am glad to hear that you don't actually believe that. Though it does, I suppose, beg the question as to why you brought it up to begin with.

Re: Real World Philospohy

Quote:

Originally posted by Jack Simth:
A flat contradiction; interesting. Can you say why a single thing I listed as being an underlying assumption isn't an assumtpion (without replacing it with a different assumption (implicitly or explicitly), of course)?

Alternately, can you say why they are truly unrelated (again, without adding a different assumption somewhere)?

If not, why the flat-out contradiction? If so, please do.

A flat contradiction for something that is just flat wrong. Going into minute details would be a waste of time.

Re: Real World Philospohy

Quote:

Originally posted by Imperator Fyron:
A flat contradiction for something that is just flat wrong. Going into minute details would be a waste of time.

Do you realize that you are essentially relying on your own authority in the matter, presuming that other people will just automatically assume your statements are correct? Do you have any idea how that makes you look to someone that recognizes the tactic?

Re: Real World Philospohy

No I'm not. I am dismissing the topic as pointless to discuss further at this juncture. You wanted moral systems that did not rely on "feels-good" assumptions, and I delivered. Do with them what you will.

Re: Real World Philospohy

Quote:

Originally posted by Imperator Fyron:
No I'm not. I am dismissing the topic as pointless to discuss further at this juncture. You wanted moral systems that did not rely on "feels-good" assumptions, and I delivered. Do with them what you will.

You -said- you delivered, he's taking issue with that. Fyron, you haven't proved a thing..

Re: Real World Philospohy

Of course I didn't "prove" anything. Neither did Jack. He just asserted a bunch of things and expects everyone to take his statements on authority. I did not set out to prove anything here because this topic is not worth the time to discuss it at this juncture. Enough said.