Morality

[Ultimate_Philosophy (Ultimate Philosophy 1001)]

@Anomaleigh

@Ultimate Philosophy 1001

Morality, as well as Aristocracy, should be determined and modified only by geniuses such as myself. Individuals limited by binary thinking, such as law-makers, should not have this responsibility, this Excalibur.
Conditional thinking, logical thinking, is neccessary.
Laws are the anthesis of enlightened thought.

I may pass a law saying do not touch a girls ass.
But if her pants are on fire, and there is no water nearby, you touch her ass.
Silly society and their rules.

In just a few moments I shall compile the ultimate morality.

Once again, Trixie prevails.

Most laws these days are more complex than, don’t touch a girls ass, they make provisions, and even if they didn’t, people, police, judges and jurors can think for themselves and make exceptions.
We have an understanding of what kind of behavior don’t touch a girls ass was trying to prevent, that it was trying to prevent aggressive sexual behavior, not altruistic behavior, so either they won’t arrest you, charge you, convict you, or at least they won’t give you a harsh sentence, if any.
There’s also such a thing as lesser of two evils.
Laws and legal processes have already become pretty advanced, society too, we’ve come a long way from the code of Hammurabi or Leviticus, which is not to say there isn’t always room for improvement.
We make laws and legal procedures as sophisticated as we can, but we can’t plan for every particular, we must use our common sense and improvise, we must always balance two.

Depends on what era. People are getting pretty stupid, therefore their systems are getting pretty stupid too.
It’s like what Ecmandu said about higher courts, there are higher courts, these one’s are like blackwater ghetto.

It’s like, here’s an analogy. You know that feeling when you are born in upper middle class city, full of science and shit, then you walk into the ghetto with a bunch of burnt buildings with water dripping down the ceiling.
That’s like, the same as being an enlightened, conscious being, soaring the Cosmos, going through beautiful worlds and scenarios, then you land on planet earth, it’s like that feeling of…what the fuck kind of shit is this, and what did I just get myself into, better lay low and not say anything, because these people are idiots.

Modern humans seem to confuse aesthetics with morality. As a guy said, “that this is an aesthetic response, not an ethical or moral one.” Its like, if a guy slaps a woman on the ass, and runs away, its a felony, totally ridiculous. If I measured my brain neurons, you’d get the same nueronal response if you made me listen to the radio. Is having a radio a felony, is being Katy Perry a felony, because she makes annoying ear-raping tunes, that disturb me and repeat over and over in my mind, is having a website with fatporn or manly gay porn a felony, I’d have to say no, and it shouldn’t be, even though it is a negative aesthetic response, aesthetics should not be punished by law, but punished in other ways, such as not paying money to listen to garbage tunes.

[surreptitious57]

@Anomaleigh

@surreptitious57

An inter subjective system for determining the most appropriate thinking or behaviour on specific subjects at any one time
In a society morality cannot be exclusively objective or subjective since consensus has to be arrived at between individuals

Right so a system for governing societies behaviour
I would say more instructing rather than governing
Since individuals are free to decide for themselves

Is it necessary to have a formal system for governing a societies behavior?
Yes it is since without any such system transgressions cannot be punished

How did these systems evolve?
Improve on what came before

So is government the embodiment of a societies morality?
No the embodiment of it is the majority view of the people
For governments are not truly representative of the people

Does it have to be a system or can it be unsystematic?
It has to be a system to punish transgressors like I said

Can each person have their own system?
Each person can have their own system
But morality is basically inter subjective

Why do we judge others and especially ourselves why would we have an instinct or a system for judgment it seems kind of contradictory doesnt it?
We judge others because we think we are morally superior to them. It would only be contradictory if non judgement was
a component of a moral system but legal ones which are based on the morality of justice are actually judgement heavy

Might morality be some sort of insanity?
It would be if you were actually insane

Why would we feel like doing something and then judge that feeling as good / bad?
Because we have the innate capacity to be both introspective and judgemental

Its almost being like double minded about ourselves or what we want
More a case of acquiring wisdom through experience I would suggest

I guess being reasonable animals gives us the capacity for self consciousness being conscious of our thoughts feelings behavior and so on and
then we have the capacity to alter these if theyre not conducive to our drives a whole or some legal or social or transcendent laws or principle
We are not always reasonable but when we are then most definitely so

[Anomaleigh]

@Random Factor

Instincts had to be coded into us. It boils down to analyzing person by person through the long term of extensive testing and packaging the results into so many strands of knowledge. Morality isnt just a matter of how we interact with others and the singular or group independent dependence or dependent independence doctrines which while sounding exactly the same with just a clever twist on words are highly complex differences, morality is also the ability to accept ones path and beyond what is societally prescribed emotional responses of morality, spare each other from the act of it to peer behind such faulty acts of good and evil to see that perhaps humanity and singular humans and even seeming random events are on paths that largely take control away from them because while they are largely making choices in the moments without the awareness of predestined and fated paths, they are largely only making the choices freely that they would otherwise feel enslaved by.

Morality is largely the degree to which we all act and it does boil down to a good vs evil or good vs bad behavior stereotype that defines in large scope the small scale of humanity and our acceptable vs unacceptable actions and our group effort to overcome backsliding to cement in place a standard that our people will someday be able to adhere to cohesively as one.

There is no way to adequately sum up the full depth of morality in simple statements. It is the defining conclusion of all forms of reason throughout eternity into the best way of doing things and all aches and pains leading up to it are just the aches and pains of failures too numerous to bear well and all aches and pains after become war wounds, battlescars of success and become easier to bear over time, not anywhere close to overnight and it is still hard work to remain true to the best path selected by eternity because as they’ve said it is a slippery path. Jesus never said it would be easy, just that it would be worth it. If it were a path that people always wanted to walk down, that would make a big difference for the better.

Hence why it pays to imagine as realistically as possible. To not get caught up in temptation or the traps of the multitude. This is not possible for every person and if anyone expects others yo feel guilt or shame as expected by ‘good’ people, then you miss tge morality that let’s them walk their paths knowing they can not be changed.

Morality is largely in question because people in general have not often been able to see enough of situations to give anything beyond the seeming bullshit sentiment of ‘everything happens for a reason’. Without being able to understand the exact reasoning behind others actions, it has been largely blind faith split by too much negativity and too much positivity in falseness to combat the negativity, to buy time for a better middle ground to be reconstructed to renew our understanding of our reasoning and why morality is important.

Humanity has been crashing and burning for being unable to see and work beyond the blinding hate spewed in every direction and the negativity and paranoia pumping constantly and being pressed by the necessity of being caught in the middle.

I’m sorry, I don’t have the energy to read this right now.
Sometimes I write long posts so I know how it feels when no one pays attention.
I’m going to wait till I have more energy to read it, it looks like a good post.
I don’t have much energy these days because I’m not eating sugar.

[Anomaleigh]

@Ultimate Philosophy 1001

@Anomaleigh

@Ultimate Philosophy 1001

Morality, as well as Aristocracy, should be determined and modified only by geniuses such as myself. Individuals limited by binary thinking, such as law-makers, should not have this responsibility, this Excalibur.
Conditional thinking, logical thinking, is neccessary.
Laws are the anthesis of enlightened thought.

I may pass a law saying do not touch a girls ass.
But if her pants are on fire, and there is no water nearby, you touch her ass.
Silly society and their rules.

In just a few moments I shall compile the ultimate morality.

Once again, Trixie prevails.

Most laws these days are more complex than, don’t touch a girls ass, they make provisions, and even if they didn’t, people, police, judges and jurors can think for themselves and make exceptions.
We have an understanding of what kind of behavior don’t touch a girls ass was trying to prevent, that it was trying to prevent aggressive sexual behavior, not altruistic behavior, so either they won’t arrest you, charge you, convict you, or at least they won’t give you a harsh sentence, if any.
There’s also such a thing as lesser of two evils.
Laws and legal processes have already become pretty advanced, society too, we’ve come a long way from the code of Hammurabi or Leviticus, which is not to say there isn’t always room for improvement.
We make laws and legal procedures as sophisticated as we can, but we can’t plan for every particular, we must use our common sense and improvise, we must always balance two.

Depends on what era. People are getting pretty stupid, therefore their systems are getting pretty stupid too.
It’s like what Ecmandu said about higher courts, there are higher courts, these one’s are like blackwater ghetto.

It’s like, here’s an analogy. You know that feeling when you are born in upper middle class city, full of science and shit, then you walk into the ghetto with a bunch of burnt buildings with water dripping down the ceiling.
That’s like, the same as being an enlightened, conscious being, soaring the Cosmos, going through beautiful worlds and scenarios, then you land on planet earth, it’s like that feeling of…what the fuck kind of shit is this, and what did I just get myself into, better lay low and not say anything, because these people are idiots.

Modern humans seem to confuse aesthetics with morality. As a guy said, “that this is an aesthetic response, not an ethical or moral one.” Its like, if a guy slaps a woman on the ass, and runs away, its a felony, totally ridiculous. If I measured my brain neurons, you’d get the same nueronal response if you made me listen to the radio. Is having a radio a felony, is being Katy Perry a felony, because she makes annoying ear-raping tunes, that disturb me and repeat over and over in my mind, is having a website with fatporn or manly gay porn a felony, I’d have to say no, and it shouldn’t be, even though it is a negative aesthetic response, aesthetics should not be punished by law, but punished in other ways, such as not paying money to listen to garbage tunes.

It sounds like you don’t believe in human nature.
There’s a difference between sexual and nonsexual touching, and the laws reflect this difference.
It has nothing to do with aesthetics, molestation is not a crime because it’s unattractive, it’s because the person feels sexually/morally violated.

[Anomaleigh]

@Superstitious

“I would say more instructing rather than governing
Since individuals are free to decide for themselves”

So for you, morality is something intrinsically libertarian?

“Yes it is since without any such system transgressions cannot be punished”

Can transgressions not be punished in a haphazard way?

“No the embodiment of it is the majority view of the people
For governments are not truly representative of the people”

So for you, morality is something intrinsically democratic?

“Each person can have their own system
But morality is basically inter subjective”

So morality must be systematized and determined democratically, uncoercively.

[surreptitious57]

@Anomaleigh

Superstitious

I would say more instructing rather than governing
Since individuals are free to decide for themselves

So for you morality is something intrinsically libertarian?
Anyone is free to do as they choose including the freedom to break the
law but in doing so they have to accept responsibility for their actions

Yes it is since without any such system transgressions cannot be punished

Can transgressions not be punished in a haphazard way?
They can although no system is perfect or can ever be

No the embodiment of it is the majority view of the people
For governments are not truly representative of the people

So for you morality is something intrinsically democratic?
Yes it is and that is because it is basically inter subjective

Each person can have their own system
But morality is basically inter subjective

So morality must be systematized and determined democratically uncoercively
Yes although I prefer to think of it as organic rather than systematic because
it slowly develops over time so is continually evolving into something better