GrahamH wrote:

jamest wrote:and one's ethics is contingent upon one's metaphysics...

Why would it be?

Ethics are the moral principles held by a person or persons which govern their behaviour. I'm at a loss to comprehend how an intelligent person or body of people could formulate such moral principles without some overarching worldview (metaphysics) underpinning them.

BWE wrote:

jamest wrote:

BWE wrote:I pretty much stopped reading when I figured out what he was trying to say. For me it's all about the utility and utility is inextricable from ethics

You seem caught within a vicious circle. I mean, if it's all about the utility and utility is inextricable from ethics and one's ethics is contingent upon one's metaphysics, then you're fucked.

It's not contingent on my metaphysics, it's contingent on my motivation.

I pretty much do ethics 'from the heart'. I trust my biology on that one. I developed an interesting set of emotions around all of that killing and preparing of animals. I think one of the stressors that led to my satori experience was being immersed in that strange nurturing violence from my first memory, at three, of seeing my dad kill a cow. What came out of it was a strange warmth and earthy relationship to the animals that we raised and ate. I'm a meat-eater 'from the heart' and no amount of logical schema seems to change that.

Yet, today I could not kill like that and in fact I have taken on the whole river valley out here in an entitlement program of free food-fur-all. (see what I did there?

Still. I'm going to be chomping a ribeye later from the plastic world.

jamest wrote:

GrahamH wrote:

jamest wrote:and one's ethics is contingent upon one's metaphysics...

Why would it be?

Ethics are the moral principles held by a person or persons which govern their behaviour. I'm at a loss to comprehend how an intelligent person or body of people could formulate such moral principles without some overarching worldview (metaphysics) underpinning them.

That's not ethics. That is Pure Fucking Evil. Takes one a while to understand why I would say that.

BWE wrote:

jamest wrote:

BWE wrote:I pretty much stopped reading when I figured out what he was trying to say. For me it's all about the utility and utility is inextricable from ethics

You seem caught within a vicious circle. I mean, if it's all about the utility and utility is inextricable from ethics and one's ethics is contingent upon one's metaphysics, then you're fucked.

It's not contingent on my metaphysics, it's contingent on my motivation.

You're not making much sense [to me]. Are you saying that your ethics are a product of the desires [which motivate you]? Because the innate desires which motivate you have little in common with ethics, if anything at all.

SpeedOfSound wrote:

BWE wrote:

jamest wrote:

BWE wrote:I pretty much stopped reading when I figured out what he was trying to say. For me it's all about the utility and utility is inextricable from ethics

You seem caught within a vicious circle. I mean, if it's all about the utility and utility is inextricable from ethics and one's ethics is contingent upon one's metaphysics, then you're fucked.

It's not contingent on my metaphysics, it's contingent on my motivation.

I pretty much do ethics 'from the heart'. I trust my biology on that one. I developed an interesting set of emotions around all of that killing and preparing of animals. I think one of the stressors that led to my satori experience was being immersed in that strange nurturing violence from my first memory, at three, of seeing my dad kill a cow. What came out of it was a strange warmth and earthy relationship to the animals that we raised and ate. I'm a meat-eater 'from the heart' and no amount of logical schema seems to change that.

Yet, today I could not kill like that and in fact I have taken on the whole river valley out here in an entitlement program of free food-fur-all. (see what I did there?

Still. I'm going to be chomping a ribeye later from the plastic world.

It is either a deeply philosophical experience or it is an ethically stunting experience. I've written quite a few essays on the nature of killing things in a production environment. I worked a mobile slaughter truck for a year and that was immensely less stressful. Except the one time my boss shot the wrong cow. That was stressful.

jamest wrote:

BWE wrote:

jamest wrote:

BWE wrote:I pretty much stopped reading when I figured out what he was trying to say. For me it's all about the utility and utility is inextricable from ethics

You seem caught within a vicious circle. I mean, if it's all about the utility and utility is inextricable from ethics and one's ethics is contingent upon one's metaphysics, then you're fucked.

It's not contingent on my metaphysics, it's contingent on my motivation.

You're not making much sense [to me]. Are you saying that your ethics are a product of the desires [which motivate you]? Because the innate desires which motivate you have little in common with ethics, if anything at all.

You are thinking too small. I am motivated to be happy. I have found that ethics are a necessary component of the larger landscape of happiness. Keeping those negative vibes to a minimum.

SpeedOfSound wrote:

BWE wrote:

jamest wrote:

BWE wrote:I pretty much stopped reading when I figured out what he was trying to say. For me it's all about the utility and utility is inextricable from ethics

You seem caught within a vicious circle. I mean, if it's all about the utility and utility is inextricable from ethics and one's ethics is contingent upon one's metaphysics, then you're fucked.

It's not contingent on my metaphysics, it's contingent on my motivation.

I pretty much do ethics 'from the heart'. I trust my biology on that one.

Look, behaving like an animal in-line with nature's drives has fuck all to do with ethics. If it does, then humanity is the only species of life worthy of the title "unethical"... and even then, only when resisting said drives.

Ethics, squire, is the beacon of all beacons distinguishing [many of] us from the rest of life.

jamest wrote:

GrahamH wrote:

jamest wrote:and one's ethics is contingent upon one's metaphysics...

Why would it be?

Ethics are the moral principles held by a person or persons which govern their behaviour. I'm at a loss to comprehend how an intelligent person or body of people could formulate such moral principles without some overarching worldview (metaphysics) underpinning them.

I am at a loss to comprehend how an intelligent person or body of people could require some overarching worldview to reason out what will make them happy. There's a reason we know that heroin and rape and robbery are ethically wrong and it has nothing to do with metaphysical speculation. Cultures and norms change.

BWE wrote:

jamest wrote:
You're not making much sense [to me]. Are you saying that your ethics are a product of the desires [which motivate you]? Because the innate desires which motivate you have little in common with ethics, if anything at all.

You are thinking too small. I am motivated to be happy. I have found that ethics are a necessary component of the larger landscape of happiness. Keeping those negative vibes to a minimum.

Then what makes you happy? If it's not the fulfilment of your natural desires which motivate you, then which moral principles are your happiness founded upon? And [then] which metaphysics are those founded upon?

jamest wrote:

SpeedOfSound wrote:

BWE wrote:

jamest wrote:
You seem caught within a vicious circle. I mean, if it's all about the utility and utility is inextricable from ethics and one's ethics is contingent upon one's metaphysics, then you're fucked.

It's not contingent on my metaphysics, it's contingent on my motivation.

I pretty much do ethics 'from the heart'. I trust my biology on that one.

Look, behaving like an animal in-line with nature's drives has fuck all to do with ethics. If it does, then humanity is the only species of life worthy of the title "unethical"... and even then, only when resisting said drives.

Ethics, squire, is the beacon of all beacons distinguishing [many of] us from the rest of life.

Your gut tells you that you would like to fart. Your brain tells you the client might be annoyed.

BWE wrote:

SpeedOfSound wrote:

BWE wrote:

jamest wrote:
You seem caught within a vicious circle. I mean, if it's all about the utility and utility is inextricable from ethics and one's ethics is contingent upon one's metaphysics, then you're fucked.

It's not contingent on my metaphysics, it's contingent on my motivation.

I pretty much do ethics 'from the heart'. I trust my biology on that one. I developed an interesting set of emotions around all of that killing and preparing of animals. I think one of the stressors that led to my satori experience was being immersed in that strange nurturing violence from my first memory, at three, of seeing my dad kill a cow. What came out of it was a strange warmth and earthy relationship to the animals that we raised and ate. I'm a meat-eater 'from the heart' and no amount of logical schema seems to change that.

Yet, today I could not kill like that and in fact I have taken on the whole river valley out here in an entitlement program of free food-fur-all. (see what I did there?

Still. I'm going to be chomping a ribeye later from the plastic world.

It is either a deeply philosophical experience or it is an ethically stunting experience. I've written quite a few essays on the nature of killing things in a production environment. I worked a mobile slaughter truck for a year and that was immensely less stressful. Except the one time my boss shot the wrong cow. That was stressful.

I saw some real bad shit! 99% of the time it goes very well but then...
Fortunate I was to be in a much more personal and less productive environment.

What was good is that I did not have this perfect little life where I only saw positive shit. all G movies and such. I got the Real and as a result I think a balance with life that is not to be had any other way.

jamest wrote:

BWE wrote:

jamest wrote:
You're not making much sense [to me]. Are you saying that your ethics are a product of the desires [which motivate you]? Because the innate desires which motivate you have little in common with ethics, if anything at all.

You are thinking too small. I am motivated to be happy. I have found that ethics are a necessary component of the larger landscape of happiness. Keeping those negative vibes to a minimum.

Then what makes you happy? If it's not the fulfilment of your natural desires which motivate you, then which moral principles are your happiness founded upon? And [then] which metaphysics are those founded upon?

What I discovered is that I'm already happy. The trick is to keep from making myself unhappy.

jamest wrote:

SpeedOfSound wrote:

BWE wrote:

jamest wrote:
You seem caught within a vicious circle. I mean, if it's all about the utility and utility is inextricable from ethics and one's ethics is contingent upon one's metaphysics, then you're fucked.

It's not contingent on my metaphysics, it's contingent on my motivation.

I pretty much do ethics 'from the heart'. I trust my biology on that one.

Look, behaving like an animal in-line with nature's drives has fuck all to do with ethics. If it does, then humanity is the only species of life worthy of the title "unethical"... and even then, only when resisting said drives.

Ethics, squire, is the beacon of all beacons distinguishing [many of] us from the rest of life.

How do you think humans survived before metaphysics? Before language? By eating each other's children?

SpeedOfSound wrote:

BWE wrote:

SpeedOfSound wrote:

BWE wrote:
It's not contingent on my metaphysics, it's contingent on my motivation.

I pretty much do ethics 'from the heart'. I trust my biology on that one. I developed an interesting set of emotions around all of that killing and preparing of animals. I think one of the stressors that led to my satori experience was being immersed in that strange nurturing violence from my first memory, at three, of seeing my dad kill a cow. What came out of it was a strange warmth and earthy relationship to the animals that we raised and ate. I'm a meat-eater 'from the heart' and no amount of logical schema seems to change that.

Yet, today I could not kill like that and in fact I have taken on the whole river valley out here in an entitlement program of free food-fur-all. (see what I did there?

It is either a deeply philosophical experience or it is an ethically stunting experience. I've written quite a few essays on the nature of killing things in a production environment. I worked a mobile slaughter truck for a year and that was immensely less stressful. Except the one time my boss shot the wrong cow. That was stressful.

I saw some real bad shit! 99% of the time it goes very well but then...
Fortunate I was to be in a much more personal and less productive environment.

What was good is that I did not have this perfect little life where I only saw positive shit. all G movies and such. I got the Real and as a result I think a balance with life that is not to be had any other way.

Still. I'm going to be chomping a ribeye later from the plastic world.

Most people resort to torture within a very short time because it's convenient and it works. It messes a lot of people's heads.

Edit: And by most I mean all of the people I've ever seen do the knocking job. Maybe 20? But yeah, 100%. It's pretty amazing how once you detach, there is no empathy. We think we are all individually above it but all it no one is. You just need the right circumstances. The people who settle in to the job sometimes stop torturing the animals but I think it's only because you discover more efficient means of getting them to do what you want.

BWE wrote:

jamest wrote:

GrahamH wrote:

jamest wrote:and one's ethics is contingent upon one's metaphysics...

Why would it be?

Ethics are the moral principles held by a person or persons which govern their behaviour. I'm at a loss to comprehend how an intelligent person or body of people could formulate such moral principles without some overarching worldview (metaphysics) underpinning them.

I am at a loss to comprehend how an intelligent person or body of people could require some overarching worldview to reason out what will make them happy. There's a reason we know that heroin and rape and robbery are ethically wrong and it has nothing to do with metaphysical speculation. Cultures and norms change.

Try fully explaining why crime & drugs are wrong without eventually confronting your worldview. The alternative is to have your explanation exposed as being empty... unfounded.

jamest wrote:

BWE wrote:

jamest wrote:

GrahamH wrote:

Why would it be?

Ethics are the moral principles held by a person or persons which govern their behaviour. I'm at a loss to comprehend how an intelligent person or body of people could formulate such moral principles without some overarching worldview (metaphysics) underpinning them.

I am at a loss to comprehend how an intelligent person or body of people could require some overarching worldview to reason out what will make them happy. There's a reason we know that heroin and rape and robbery are ethically wrong and it has nothing to do with metaphysical speculation. Cultures and norms change.

Try fully explaining why crime & drugs are wrong without eventually confronting your worldview. The alternative is to have your explanation exposed as being empty... unfounded.

Easy, because the consequences make me unhappy.

SpeedOfSound wrote:How do you think humans survived before metaphysics? Before language? By eating each other's children?

Yeah, and stealing bread and smoking marijuana.

damnit now I've got that song stuck in my head.

jamest wrote:

GrahamH wrote:

jamest wrote:and one's ethics is contingent upon one's metaphysics...

Why would it be?

Ethics are the moral principles held by a person or persons which govern their behaviour. I'm at a loss to comprehend how an intelligent person or body of people could formulate such moral principles without some overarching worldview (metaphysics) underpinning them.

Are you really at a loss?


Some people use metaphysics to rationalise their biases (social and anti-social), but who really gets their ethics from metaphysics? Do you really believe in that?
What metaphysics really entail a clear set of ethics? All those I have encountered, including yours, could justify all sorts of things I personally find unethical.

jamest wrote:
Ethics are the moral principles held by a person or persons which govern their behaviour. I'm at a loss to comprehend how an intelligent person or body of people could formulate such moral principles without some overarching worldview (metaphysics) underpinning them.

You're making an appeal to incredulity about the origins of the moral behaviours of human beings, despite that very subject having been discussed at length on Ratskep a number of times and the explanations being well understood by those with a grounding in evolution.

Sorry, no great metaphysical explanation needed, just simple species survival.