Guest guest Posted July 24, 2002 Report Share Posted July 24, 2002 B " H So what's the problem? As I said, there are different levels of selfish. There's good selfish and there's bad selfish. The problem is that the word selfish has a very negative connotation. The relevance is that one needs to hone one's ethics to the point that what makes one feel good and, ultimately, makes one act upon, are the good things, the things that, ultimately, are good for others and good for the world. The problem in this world is that there are too many people who don't have that selfishness honed that way..... Debbie >Ultimately, that IS to make you feel better -- because repulsion is a >bad feeling, a feeling YOU want to avoid. But why do you feel repulsion at such things? Because you believe them to be wrong. Isn't that what it is ultimately about? Not that I'm denying the inherent selfishness, I just don't consider that to be ultimately relevant. Does veganism even make you feel better? I don't feel better for being vegan, but I would feel bad for doing something I consider wrong. My being vegan makes me feel no better than my not going out and murdering someone does. Michael Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 26, 2002 Report Share Posted July 26, 2002 >So what's the problem? As I said, there are different levels of >selfish. There's good selfish and there's bad selfish. The problem is >that the word selfish has a very negative connotation. The problem was you said it was ultimately selfish, where I say it is consequentially selfish, it's a big philosophical difference. Take Kantian ethics, he says everything should be done from the motive of duty, hence to be ethical necessitates being selfish, yet taking his argument about a father playing with their child you can see that he is arguing for consequential selfishness, the pleasure gained is secondary to doing the right thing because it is right, regardless of anything. Meanwhile ethical egoism is very much an ultimately selfish theory. There is a big difference. Michael Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 26, 2002 Report Share Posted July 26, 2002 B " H Ignore the fact that first off, we are talking semantics. Ignore the fact that your entire post is an attempt to say " I'm right and you are oh, so wrong! " when in reality we're saying pretty much the same thing. Underlying all your self-important clap-trap is one big thing. You misinterpreted my use of the word " ultimately " . All I meant was " when you boil it all down " or " when you get to the untimate core, central, part of the matter " . Debbie >So what's the problem? As I said, there are different levels of >selfish. There's good selfish and there's bad selfish. The problem is >that the word selfish has a very negative connotation. The problem was you said it was ultimately selfish, where I say it is consequentially selfish, it's a big philosophical difference. Take Kantian ethics, he says everything should be done from the motive of duty, hence to be ethical necessitates being selfish, yet taking his argument about a father playing with their child you can see that he is arguing for consequential selfishness, the pleasure gained is secondary to doing the right thing because it is right, regardless of anything. Meanwhile ethical egoism is very much an ultimately selfish theory. There is a big difference. Michael Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 26, 2002 Report Share Posted July 26, 2002 >Ignore the fact that first off, we are talking semantics. No we aren't, what you said, and what I think are very different ideas. >Ignore the >fact that your entire post is an attempt to say " I'm right and you >are oh, so wrong! " No it wasn't, it was simply saying that we disagree after you asked me " what's the problem " . I apologize for not realizing it was a rhetorical question and that you would rather bite my head off for answering. >When in reality we're saying pretty much the same >thing. Are we? I'm glad you know what I think better than I do. I do admit I may not have expressed it well enough though. >Underlying all your self-important clap-trap is one big thing. Thank you. That's the nicest thing anyone has ever said about me, if not rather arrogant. >You misinterpreted my use of the word " ultimately " . Did I? > All I meant was " when >you boil it all down " or " when you get to the untimate core, central, >part of the matter " . So in other words you meant the meaning of the word ultimately that is in the dictionary? I guess I didn't misinterpret then. You see I do not believe that " when you boil it all down " , or " when you get to the untimate core, central part of the matter " , that our motives are selfish. Hence the difference I tried to draw between " consequentially " and " ultimately " . Different words. Different meanings. Still if your idea of debate is to accuse people of self-important clap-trap then I will no longer bother you with my clap-trap. Michael Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 26, 2002 Report Share Posted July 26, 2002 B " H The only thing that annoys me more than people who disagree with me being petty and picky about things is people who argue with me when ULTIMATELY we are in agreement...... (and I guess we agree on the fact that we find each other arrogant) (different words, same meaning.....) (I stand by me previous post) Debbie >Ignore the fact that first off, we are talking semantics. No we aren't, what you said, and what I think are very different ideas. >Ignore the fact that your entire post is an attempt to say " I'm right and you are oh, so wrong! " No it wasn't, it was simply saying that we disagree after you asked me " what's the problem " . I apologize for not realizing it was a rhetorical question and that you would rather bite my head off for answering. >When in reality we're saying pretty much the same thing. Are we? I'm glad you know what I think better than I do. I do admit I may not have expressed it well enough though. >Underlying all your self-important clap-trap is one big thing. Thank you. That's the nicest thing anyone has ever said about me, if not rather arrogant. >You misinterpreted my use of the word " ultimately " . Did I? > All I meant was " when you boil it all down " or " when you get to the untimate core, central, part of the matter " . So in other words you meant the meaning of the word ultimately that is in the dictionary? I guess I didn't misinterpret then. You see I do not believe that " when you boil it all down " , or " when you get to the untimate core, central part of the matter " , that our motives are selfish. Hence the difference I tried to draw between " consequentially " and " ultimately " . Different words. Different meanings. Still if your idea of debate is to accuse people of self-important clap-trap then I will no longer bother you with my clap-trap. Michael Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.