Barack Huessin Obama's terrorist friends?

Page 3 of 3 First 123
  1. Binging on Pure ****ing Rage
    Mulletsoldier's Avatar
    Stats
    5'10"  215 lbs.
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    12,226
    Rep Power
    27064
    Level
    67
    Lv. Percent
    41.02%
    Achievements Activity AuthorityActivity ProPosting ProPosting AuthorityPosting Veteran

    Quote Originally Posted by RobInKuwait View Post
    Damn, I love having these exchanges with you, but I always get picked apart like a vulture in the end
    Hah! You are most definitely a formidable and respectful opponent, though! Much respect and credit due to you on that end.

    That's not what I was referring to when I said Christianity preaches self-sacrifice. I meant that altruism is an important moral principle in the religion, ultimately manifested when Jesus gave his life to save everybody elses. Altruism is the moral imperative that one selflessly cares for others. Altruism is the moral opposite of Selfishness. Just as the ultimate expression of Altruism is sacrificing one's self for others, the ultimate expression of Selfishness is surviving and thriving, which I view as one in the same. I'm sticking to the tree metaphor dammit!
    The negation of Selflessness would most definitely be Selfishness; however, we have a word which succinctly encapsulates that very concept: Greed! As I have said, 'greed' and 'survival' are necessarily not synonymous, as they imply gradients of accumulation:

    Greed is over-accumulation

    Survival is merely accumulating what one needs to survive.

    Ah, though altruism is an interesting concept to bring up in respects to comparative behavioural psychology! While animals may not have cognitive constructs such as 'emotion' or 'morality' - though, biologically they may experience similar neurohormonal reactions to stimuli as a human - they most definitely are 'altruistic'! That being said, altruism does not mean complete lack of regard for self; but rather, the willingness to perform potentially self-inflicting acts at the expense of the furtherance of society, or member groups.

    At any rate, this does nothing to further our discussion at hand; merely thought it was interesting!

    (Egoism would probably be the most direct negation of altruism).

    If I understand what you are saying, basically in capitalism individuals hurt each other on a micro level but at a macro level they help the economy overall. Is that correct?
    Exactly; such is a very succinct explanation of Capitalism. Now, whether you agree with this fundamental premise is a moral concern!

    I see what you are saying, but you're taking that line out of context. I said in the next line that the individual determines what is necessary for subsistence. Nobody is making anyone make money in capitalism, it is completely up to the individual to determine how much is "enough". That's why you have Bill Gates happy with 57 Billion, and the homeless guy on E. Fayette happy with essentially nothing.
    I would not relatively define subsistence, and neither would a dictionary!

    minimal (or marginal) resources for subsisting; "social security provided only a bare subsistence"
    a means of surviving; "farming is a hard means of subsistence"
    the state of existing in reality; having substance
    Subsisting and being elite-wealthy could not be more opposing terms! This is why minimum wage is often referred to as 'subsistence wage': The bare minimum wage one would need to provide for themselves.

    Well, with that definition, then obviously there is no morality in animals. I was going under the assumption that morality is merely a code of behavior that governs action.
    Morality is an ideal that an individual subscribes to, and at the point of subscription assuming that this compounded value has some authority beyond him/herself; morality does not govern behavior, one governs their behavior in terms of their own perceptions of morality. Obviously, this implies dictation, causality, purposefulness, rationality and so forth; obviously, these are not characteristics we apply to animals; obviously, animals are not moral!

    The code of behavior which most animals subscribe to is evolutionary-biological, as opposed to psychological, or social, or metaphysical in origin. In a sense, morality is innately tied to epistemology.

  2. Registered User
    RobInKuwait's Avatar
    Stats
    6'4"  269 lbs.
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Age
    35
    Posts
    2,272
    Rep Power
    1264
    Level
    34
    Lv. Percent
    69.16%
    Achievements Activity ProPosting Pro

    Quote Originally Posted by Mulletsoldier View Post
    Hah! You are most definitely a formidable and respectful opponent, though! Much respect and credit due to you on that end.
    You too....I'm going to try to stay above water with you a little more as I think I have a point you may find interesting.

    Quote Originally Posted by Mulletsoldier View Post
    The negation of Selflessness would most definitely be Selfishness; however, we have a word which succinctly encapsulates that very concept: Greed! As I have said, 'greed' and 'survival' are necessarily not synonymous, as they imply gradients of accumulation:

    Greed is over-accumulation

    Survival is merely accumulating what one needs to survive.

    Ah, though altruism is an interesting concept to bring up in respects to comparative behavioural psychology! While animals may not have cognitive constructs such as 'emotion' or 'morality' - though, biologically they may experience similar neurohormonal reactions to stimuli as a human - they most definitely are 'altruistic'! That being said, altruism does not mean complete lack of regard for self; but rather, the willingness to perform potentially self-inflicting acts at the expense of the furtherance of society, or member groups.

    At any rate, this does nothing to further our discussion at hand; merely thought it was interesting!


    (Egoism would probably be the most direct negation of altruism).
    Animals altruistic. Interesting. By who's standard is over-accumulation decided? I talk about this more below.

    Quote Originally Posted by Mulletsoldier View Post
    Exactly; such is a very succinct explanation of Capitalism. Now, whether you agree with this fundamental premise is a moral concern!
    Thanks! In my eyes capitalism is the only moral economic system.


    Quote Originally Posted by Mulletsoldier View Post
    I would not relatively define subsistence, and neither would a dictionary!

    Subsisting and being elite-wealthy could not be more opposing terms! This is why minimum wage is often referred to as 'subsistence wage': The bare minimum wage one would need to provide for themselves.
    As meatheads we know that everybody has a different number of maintenance calories to maintain their size. That extends to survival as well, certain people can sustain themselves on less calories for longer people than others. In this respect, sustenance is most definitely relative.

    If you look at Maslow's hierarchy of need, the bottom of the pyramid is what you "need", but to do better than "survive" you have to meet your needs higher on the pyramid. Self-actualization is not greed, I'd say its rational self-interest. Keep in mind, Maslow's hierarchy was primarily to show how survival and thriving come out of the same origin. Come to think of it, Maslow's hierarchy matches my tree in that respect. I'm obsessed with the tree metaphor!

    Quote Originally Posted by Mulletsoldier View Post
    Morality is an ideal that an individual subscribes to, and at the point of subscription assuming that this compounded value has some authority beyond him/herself; morality does not govern behavior, one governs their behavior in terms of their own perceptions of morality. Obviously, this implies dictation, causality, purposefulness, rationality and so forth; obviously, these are not characteristics we apply to animals; obviously, animals are not moral!

    The code of behavior which most animals subscribe to is evolutionary-biological, as opposed to psychological, or social, or metaphysical in origin. In a sense, morality is innately tied to epistemology.
    So by definition Atheists cannot have morals? I disagree with that definition.
  3. Board Sponsor
    Urban Monk's Avatar
    Stats
    6'0"  180 lbs.
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    1,461
    Rep Power
    14385
    Level
    29
    Lv. Percent
    6.52%
    Achievements Posting Pro

    Not to throw a wrench in a great debate, but Maslow's hierarchy of needs is rather outdated and has been replaced in most academic contexts. Daniel Kahneman for example shows how choices, values, and frameworks are a more appropriate measure of understanding one's actions and choices in a context of moral relativism.
    •   
       

  4. Registered User
    RobInKuwait's Avatar
    Stats
    6'4"  269 lbs.
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Age
    35
    Posts
    2,272
    Rep Power
    1264
    Level
    34
    Lv. Percent
    69.16%
    Achievements Activity ProPosting Pro

    Quote Originally Posted by Urban Monk View Post
    Not to throw a wrench in a great debate, but Maslow's hierarchy of needs is rather outdated and has been replaced in most academic contexts. Daniel Kahneman for example shows how choices, values, and frameworks are a more appropriate measure of understanding one's actions and choices in a context of moral relativism.
    I've had Psych 101 and thats it....Maslow was all I learned. I'll wiki Kahneman.
  5. Binging on Pure ****ing Rage
    Mulletsoldier's Avatar
    Stats
    5'10"  215 lbs.
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    12,226
    Rep Power
    27064
    Level
    67
    Lv. Percent
    41.02%
    Achievements Activity AuthorityActivity ProPosting ProPosting AuthorityPosting Veteran

    Quote Originally Posted by Urban Monk View Post
    Not to throw a wrench in a great debate, but Maslow's hierarchy of needs is rather outdated and has been replaced in most academic contexts. Daniel Kahneman for example shows how choices, values, and frameworks are a more appropriate measure of understanding one's actions and choices in a context of moral relativism.
    Not to throw a wrench in your contribution, but I was speaking of neither.

    I merely bring up moral skepticism as a counter-positing against moral absolutism - that is, the acceptance of socio-historical, constructionist, and individual epistemological positions on morality as opposed to accepting any truth-value of ideal, moral objective statements.
  6. Binging on Pure ****ing Rage
    Mulletsoldier's Avatar
    Stats
    5'10"  215 lbs.
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    12,226
    Rep Power
    27064
    Level
    67
    Lv. Percent
    41.02%
    Achievements Activity AuthorityActivity ProPosting ProPosting AuthorityPosting Veteran

    Quote Originally Posted by Mulletsoldier View Post
    Not to throw a wrench in your contribution, but I was speaking of neither.

    I merely bring up moral skepticism as a counter-positing against moral absolutism - that is, the acceptance of socio-historical, constructionist, and individual epistemological positions on morality as opposed to accepting any truth-value of ideal, moral objective statements.
    I'm an ass; disregard this! Did not see Rob specifically mentioned Maslow!
  7. Registered User
    RobInKuwait's Avatar
    Stats
    6'4"  269 lbs.
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Age
    35
    Posts
    2,272
    Rep Power
    1264
    Level
    34
    Lv. Percent
    69.16%
    Achievements Activity ProPosting Pro

    Quote Originally Posted by Mulletsoldier View Post
    Not to throw a wrench in your contribution, but I was speaking of neither.

    I merely bring up moral skepticism as a counter-positing against moral absolutism - that is, the acceptance of socio-historical, constructionist, and individual epistemological positions on morality as opposed to accepting any truth-value of ideal, moral objective statements.
    Urban....I'm glad he said that to you and not me.

    Mullet....in case there's any question, you're smarter than the rest of the world

    Edit- Nevermind
  8. Binging on Pure ****ing Rage
    Mulletsoldier's Avatar
    Stats
    5'10"  215 lbs.
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    12,226
    Rep Power
    27064
    Level
    67
    Lv. Percent
    41.02%
    Achievements Activity AuthorityActivity ProPosting ProPosting AuthorityPosting Veteran

    Quote Originally Posted by RobInKuwait View Post
    You too....I'm going to try to stay above water with you a little more as I think I have a point you may find interesting.
    What does, 'stay above water mean'? I am clueless there.

    As meatheads we know that everybody has a different number of maintenance calories to maintain their size. That extends to survival as well, certain people can sustain themselves on less calories for longer people than others. In this respect, sustenance is most definitely relative.
    Of course sustenance is proportionate and relational, on the most microscopic of scales - i.e., Individual A and Individual B require distinct amounts of sustenance based upon their physiology, and activity level; however, based on normal populations, one can be assured that both fall within acceptable deviance parameters for the population as a whole.

    Microscopically, sustenance is relative (to individuals); macroscopically, it is transitive. In this sense, one cannot ascribe such broad deviance parameters to sustenance, such that all deviations of the term are accepted within our model. I.e., Bill Gates' concept of sustenance is not relative to his increasing wealth - once he breaches the normal sustenance deviation parameters, he passes into greed. Here, again, we see a divergence of our operative terms in this discussions: Greed from sustenance, greed from survival, and so forth.

    If you look at Maslow's hierarchy of need, the bottom of the pyramid is what you "need", but to do better than "survive" you have to meet your needs higher on the pyramid. Self-actualization is not greed, I'd say its rational self-interest. Keep in mind, Maslow's hierarchy was primarily to show how survival and thriving come out of the same origin. Come to think of it, Maslow's hierarchy matches my tree in that respect. I'm obsessed with the tree metaphor!
    Who said it was? However, to use your model, should your self-actualization necessarily come at the expense of mine? Are the dynamic processes of political capital compounded self-actualization, or something more or less psychological? More or less sinister?


    So by definition Atheists cannot have morals? I disagree with that definition.
    Atheists have morals, but they do not come as the consequence of deference to moral authority; I meant to say that all moral skeptics are necessarily atheists, as the denial of the objective truth-value of morality implies the denial of an ultimate source of morality (i.e., a Deity).
  9. Board Sponsor
    Urban Monk's Avatar
    Stats
    6'0"  180 lbs.
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    1,461
    Rep Power
    14385
    Level
    29
    Lv. Percent
    6.52%
    Achievements Posting Pro

    Quote Originally Posted by Mulletsoldier View Post
    Not to throw a wrench in your contribution, but I was speaking of neither.

    I merely bring up moral skepticism as a counter-positing against moral absolutism - that is, the acceptance of socio-historical, constructionist, and individual epistemological positions on morality as opposed to accepting any truth-value of ideal, moral objective statements.

    No worries. Nothing some Prime or Recreate won't make up. :-)

    J/k, J/k
  

  
 

Similar Forum Threads

  1. Replies: 28
    Last Post: 10-06-2010, 05:59 PM
  2. The Two Faces of Barack Obama
    By lutherblsstt in forum Politics
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 08-14-2010, 01:26 PM
  3. Is Barack Obama really a socialist?
    By EasyEJL in forum Politics
    Replies: 21
    Last Post: 11-06-2008, 07:30 PM
  4. New Slogans For Barack Obama
    By bpmartyr in forum Politics
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 08-01-2008, 10:17 PM
  5. Barack Obama - still smokin'???
    By anabolicrhino in forum Politics
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 03-08-2007, 06:49 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Log in
Log in