Can there be shared community values?

This is the main board for discussing philosophy - formal, informal and in between.

Moderator: Only_Humean

Forum rules
Forum Philosophy

Can there be shared community values?

Postby thinkdr » Wed Nov 15, 2017 4:03 am

It came to my attention that the wife of the former CEO and founder of the J. M. Smucker Company is active in the civic life of Orrville, Ohio, USA. Among her many other philanthropic activities, she coordinated the initiation of the Heartland Educational Community, Inc. It was set up by the aforementioned corporation, along with regional universities, foundations, and with the help of The Institute for Global Ethics. The Heartland has the stated goal of "shifting the focus from school to education, and shifting the responsibility from school to community."

I learned that in recent years she has conducted 24 Community Ethics seminars. It is a Character Education program which emphasizes shared community values. {So far this sounds more like Applied Ethics than like an Ethical Theory discussion. Let us though examine what her organization means by "Shared Community Values."}

The values which emerged (as those upon which there is a global-wide consensus that this is what "ethics" is about) are these:

Honesty, Respect, Responsibility, Compassion, Self-control, Commitment, Fairness, Moral Courage, and Cooperation.


If Ethics means anything it is a concern with these values.

[Incidentally, centering in on values avoids all the unnecessary difficulties that arise when "action" is made the central focus. For that results in grappling with such pseudo-issues as "Is a lie wrong because of the results that may ensue, or because it is a lie - and lies are always forbidden?" To phrase it another way: "Is a lie permissible when it leads to some good outcome (as a Consequentialist would argue), or is it forbidden just because the act is a lie?" (and Deontology explains why a lie is always wrong since it can't be universalized without ending all civilization.)

Philosophers have been known to dispute these matters, while slipping easily among usage of the terms "consequence," "act," "action," and "activity," without defining any of these words, or bothering to differentiate them.]


:idea: :arrow: It is logical, for theoretic convenience, to divide Ethics into two branches: Individual Ethics and Social Ethics. Then the question arises, How classify the shared community values? In what branch do each of them belong?

It seems to me that it is sensible to regard Honesty, Compassion, Fairness and Cooperation as concerns where others are involved, and thus I would put them in the Social Ethics department of Ethical Theory.

Furthermore, Commitment and Self-control are best classified as belonging to Individual Ethics as topics for analysis and explication.

There are however values that overlap both fields. Here I would say belong: Respect, Responsibility, and Moral Courage {and maybe even Honesty, since we can lie to ourselves.} An individual can have Self-Respect and can respect others. There is Responsibility assumed by the person as part of a commitment to be a moral individual of good character who wants to live ethically; and there definitely is also Social Responsibility (which includes a quest for social justice, and an extension of human rights (to gays, women, those of dark complexion, those of 'foreign' national origin, or who hold 'strange' religious ideas, etc.)

Moral Courage, when it takes the form of an individual being a whistle-blower who unearths and reveals corruption in an institution, in government, or in a corporation or business falls into the intersection of Individual and Social Ethics. It is inter-departmental - interdisciplinary, so to speak.
For most of these values I devote a chapter of its own -showing how they fit into the big picture, and clarifying them - in my essay, Living Successfully, a link to which is here: http://myqol.com/wadeharvey/PDFs/HOW%20 ... SFULLY.pdf

Your reviews of this approach to Ethical Theory is welcomed.
Did you learn anything of value by perusing the manuscript?
Can you suggest any improvements when the contents of this paper is combined with the material in the earlier effort, BASIC ETHICS: A systematic approach http://www.myqol.com/wadeharvey/PDFs/BASIC%20ETHICS.pdf

I wrote the latter booklet three years ago; and the former this year (2017.) The latter offers a more-logical presentation, as it proceeds from Meta-philosophy to philosophy; and from Moral Philosophy to Ethics as a science; from pure Theory to Applied Ethics - that is, to policy questions and to practical implications of the axioms and theorems.

Many critics say a Science of Ethics is impossible, but they fail to define their terms nor do they attempt to understand where the scientific Ethicists are coming from: how they employ their terminology, what motivates them.

Your views?
:idea:For further reading and insight into the topics of Ethics check out these links, and thereby add to your reading enjoyment

LIVING WELL: how ethics helps us flourish
[NEW] :!: http://www.myqol.com/wadeharvey/PDFs/LI ... ourish.pdf

ETHICS FOR THE 21st CENTURY - (2015) http://www.myqol.com/wadeharvey/PDFs/ETHICS%20FOR%20THE%2021ST%20CENTURY.pdf

BASIC ETHICS: a systematic approach (2014) http://tinyurl.com/mfcgzfz

ETHICAL ADVENTURES http://wadeharvey.myqol.com/wadeharvey/PDFs/ETHICAL%20ADVENTURES.pdf

and ASPECTS OF ETHICS http://wadeharvey.myqol.com/wadeharvey/ ... ics%20.pdf

When you Google this selection you may wish tostart with page 20 to skip the technicalities. Marvin C. Katz - ETHICS: A College Course http://wadeharvey.myqol.com/wadeharvey/Ethics_A_College_Course.pdf
thinkdr
 
Posts: 457
Joined: Sat May 12, 2012 7:05 pm

Re: Can there be shared community values?

Postby thinkdr » Wed Nov 22, 2017 1:16 am

This thread is about the Community Values seminars. They are devised to arrive at a consensus as to what are the values of a specific community; a cross-section of that community {village, town, municipality} are invited to the seminar which then functions much like a Focus Group, or a consensus-building Warren Avis group. They are experiments in how to deepen one's awareness of, and commitment to, ethical values. 8)

These character education seminars that were held under the guidance of The Institute for Global Ethics. This organization found that when people around the world were asked, in their native tongue, what "Ethics" meant to them? they, time and again, replied by mentioning some of those values listed in the first post above.

In the seminars, those assembled would discuss these concepts and specify and clarify what each of the values meant to them personally. It seems to be a way of teaching ethics to adults. I brought it to your attention for your evaluation and comments. Do you have another, or a better, method to offer?

Your comments are most welcome :!:
:idea:For further reading and insight into the topics of Ethics check out these links, and thereby add to your reading enjoyment

LIVING WELL: how ethics helps us flourish
[NEW] :!: http://www.myqol.com/wadeharvey/PDFs/LI ... ourish.pdf

ETHICS FOR THE 21st CENTURY - (2015) http://www.myqol.com/wadeharvey/PDFs/ETHICS%20FOR%20THE%2021ST%20CENTURY.pdf

BASIC ETHICS: a systematic approach (2014) http://tinyurl.com/mfcgzfz

ETHICAL ADVENTURES http://wadeharvey.myqol.com/wadeharvey/PDFs/ETHICAL%20ADVENTURES.pdf

and ASPECTS OF ETHICS http://wadeharvey.myqol.com/wadeharvey/ ... ics%20.pdf

When you Google this selection you may wish tostart with page 20 to skip the technicalities. Marvin C. Katz - ETHICS: A College Course http://wadeharvey.myqol.com/wadeharvey/Ethics_A_College_Course.pdf
thinkdr
 
Posts: 457
Joined: Sat May 12, 2012 7:05 pm

Re: Can there be shared community values?

Postby James S Saint » Wed Nov 22, 2017 1:56 am

.
The current and near future social ethics methodology;


Who needs a seminar when children can be programmed from infancy?
Clarify, Verify, Instill, and Reinforce the Perception of Hopes and Threats unto Anentropic Harmony :)
Else
From THIS age of sleep, Homo-sapien shall never awake.

The Wise gather together to help one another in EVERY aspect of living.

You are always more insecure than you think, just not by what you think.
The only absolute certainty is formed by the absolute lack of alternatives.
It is not merely "do what works", but "to accomplish what purpose in what time frame at what cost".
As long as the authority is secretive, the population will be subjugated.

Amid the lack of certainty, put faith in the wiser to believe.
Devil's Motto: Make it look good, safe, innocent, and wise.. until it is too late to choose otherwise.

The Real God ≡ The reason/cause for the Universe being what it is = "The situation cannot be what it is and also remain as it is".
.
James S Saint
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 25782
Joined: Sun Apr 18, 2010 8:05 pm

Re: Can there be shared community values?

Postby thinkdr » Mon Nov 27, 2017 10:59 pm

James writes:

"Who needs a seminar when children can be programmed from infancy?"

Do you believe that if children learn (or as you say, "are programmed") those values - including Responsibility, Honesty, and Cooperation - mentioned in the original post, that this is "bad."?
:idea:For further reading and insight into the topics of Ethics check out these links, and thereby add to your reading enjoyment

LIVING WELL: how ethics helps us flourish
[NEW] :!: http://www.myqol.com/wadeharvey/PDFs/LI ... ourish.pdf

ETHICS FOR THE 21st CENTURY - (2015) http://www.myqol.com/wadeharvey/PDFs/ETHICS%20FOR%20THE%2021ST%20CENTURY.pdf

BASIC ETHICS: a systematic approach (2014) http://tinyurl.com/mfcgzfz

ETHICAL ADVENTURES http://wadeharvey.myqol.com/wadeharvey/PDFs/ETHICAL%20ADVENTURES.pdf

and ASPECTS OF ETHICS http://wadeharvey.myqol.com/wadeharvey/ ... ics%20.pdf

When you Google this selection you may wish tostart with page 20 to skip the technicalities. Marvin C. Katz - ETHICS: A College Course http://wadeharvey.myqol.com/wadeharvey/Ethics_A_College_Course.pdf
thinkdr
 
Posts: 457
Joined: Sat May 12, 2012 7:05 pm

Re: Can there be shared community values?

Postby Arminius » Mon Nov 27, 2017 11:33 pm

thinkdr wrote:James writes:

"Who needs a seminar when children can be programmed from infancy?"

Do you believe that if children learn (or as you say, "are programmed") those values - including Responsibility, Honesty, and Cooperation - mentioned in the original post, that this is "bad."?

If I may answer. :)

The so-called "values“ can be used/misused by almost everyone. So, for example, responsibility, honesty, cooperation can be misused by, for example, leftists, centrists, rightists. Think of the current leftist dictatorship of "political correctness“ which requires from the children to think and say, for example, that "non-whites are good“ and or even because "whites are evil“, that it is everyone’s "responsibility“ and "honesty“ to think and say this over and over again, also to do this in "cooperation“ over and over again.
Image
User avatar
Arminius
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 5696
Joined: Sat Mar 08, 2014 10:51 pm
Location: Saltus Teutoburgiensis

Re: Can there be shared community values?

Postby Mr Reasonable » Tue Nov 28, 2017 6:52 am

Current leftist dictatorship? In the US? Right wingers control all 3 branches of government here currently.
You see...a pimp's love is very different from that of a square.
Dating a stripper is like eating a noisy bag of chips in church. Everyone looks at you in disgust, but deep down they want some too.

What exactly is logic? -Magnus Anderson

Support the innocence project on AmazonSmile instead of Turd's African savior biker dude.
http://www.innocenceproject.org/
User avatar
Mr Reasonable
resident contrarian
 
Posts: 24708
Joined: Sat Mar 17, 2007 8:54 am
Location: pimping a hole straight through the stratosphere itself

Re: Can there be shared community values?

Postby Arminius » Tue Nov 28, 2017 7:27 am

These days, ruling or having the most power has not very much to do with the formal government, for example the public government of a state or a nation. And I was not talking about such a public government. I was talking about a dictatorship of a ruling system. The rulers of this ruling system do not rule in a public way, but in a private and secret way. They are more like drug dealers of a global extent than like politicians of a national extent.

GH.jpg
Hierarchy of Gangsters.
GH.jpg (63.02 KiB) Viewed 474 times

So, Trump, for instance, is by far not the most powerful man in the world.

Additionally: I would like to know who those "right wingers" really are that you are talking about. It is possibly very questionable whether they are real "right wingers" or not. But anyway: Fact is that they are not the real rulers.
Image
User avatar
Arminius
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 5696
Joined: Sat Mar 08, 2014 10:51 pm
Location: Saltus Teutoburgiensis

Re: Can there be shared community values?

Postby thinkdr » Wed Nov 29, 2017 2:34 am

Yes, everything can be misused.

And everything is questionable.

Now can we get back to the topic of this thread?!

My position on the topic question is: Yes, there can be shared community values. Yes, the values listed, such as cooperativeness on shared worthwhile goals, are qualities that a person of good character would have.
Ethics is definitely concerned with these values mentioned; they are highly relevant to Ethics. 8) :) :)

Does anyone here agree?
Would such adult-education seminars help make the world a better place?

What say you?
:idea:For further reading and insight into the topics of Ethics check out these links, and thereby add to your reading enjoyment

LIVING WELL: how ethics helps us flourish
[NEW] :!: http://www.myqol.com/wadeharvey/PDFs/LI ... ourish.pdf

ETHICS FOR THE 21st CENTURY - (2015) http://www.myqol.com/wadeharvey/PDFs/ETHICS%20FOR%20THE%2021ST%20CENTURY.pdf

BASIC ETHICS: a systematic approach (2014) http://tinyurl.com/mfcgzfz

ETHICAL ADVENTURES http://wadeharvey.myqol.com/wadeharvey/PDFs/ETHICAL%20ADVENTURES.pdf

and ASPECTS OF ETHICS http://wadeharvey.myqol.com/wadeharvey/ ... ics%20.pdf

When you Google this selection you may wish tostart with page 20 to skip the technicalities. Marvin C. Katz - ETHICS: A College Course http://wadeharvey.myqol.com/wadeharvey/Ethics_A_College_Course.pdf
thinkdr
 
Posts: 457
Joined: Sat May 12, 2012 7:05 pm

Re: Can there be shared community values?

Postby Prismatic567 » Wed Nov 29, 2017 4:07 am

thinkdr wrote:My position on the topic question is: Yes, there can be shared community values. Yes, the values listed, such as cooperativeness on shared worthwhile goals, are qualities that a person of good character would have.
Ethics is definitely concerned with these values mentioned; they are highly relevant to Ethics. 8) :) :)

Does anyone here agree?
Would such adult-education seminars help make the world a better place?

What say you?
Yes I agree.

It is quite obvious the majority do share the minimal value 'Thou Shalt Not Kill' with differences on the fringe regarding exceptions to the rule.

What is progressive is humanity [represented by all recognized Nations] has now reached the stage [contrast 200 years ago] of sharing the same common value as least legally, i.e. "Slavery is a Crime".

Humans are born with an inherent drive for greater improvement on morality and its values, so in time, humans will progress to sharing more moral values. What we need is to expedite the progress with reliance from philosophy proper.
I am a progressive human being, a World Citizen, NOT-a-theist and not religious.
Prismatic567
Philosopher
 
Posts: 1192
Joined: Sun Nov 02, 2014 4:35 am

Re: Can there be shared community values?

Postby James S Saint » Wed Nov 29, 2017 4:27 am

thinkdr wrote:James writes:

"Who needs a seminar when children can be programmed from infancy?"

Do you believe that if children learn (or as you say, "are programmed") those values - including Responsibility, Honesty, and Cooperation - mentioned in the original post, that this is "bad."?

You didn't specify, "concerning what"; honesty concerning what, responsibility concerning what, cooperation concerning what?

Have you ever heard the expression, "If it can go wrong, it will go wrong"?

    If it can be used for bad, it WILL be used for bad.
Man has proven that over and over and over.

    "Honesty concerning how evil Islam is. Responsibility concerning working against Islam. Cooperation concerning the fight against Islam." Or China. Or Korea, or the Evil Republicans.

How is infant programming NOT going to be used for political, power mongering? Almost no one actually cares about ethics. What they care about is the fight for the "good" which is inevitably defined as the fight against the "bad". That is the reality. And due to the nature of social interaction, the "bad" is anyone not being "honest", being "responsible", or not "cooperating" in the fight to crush those bad people who are not doing those things. That is exactly what you have been promoting since you first came here whether you know it or not.

This happens because if you cause them to believe what you say, they will choose to fight for it (exactly what you have been attempting to get people to do). And to fight for one thing, is to fight against another. But people are not very discerning or precise (including yourself). They must have very clear understanding of precisely WHO the enemy is. They believe in the power of people and thus the only true enemy must be people. And in order to give them a clear sense of who the enemy is, an enemy must be kept in sight, even if one has to be created. And that involves insidious games of deceit, duplicity, and secret surveillance and judgment - the "Darkness".

Exactly define precisely what is good and what is evil such that there is no ambiguity and there can be no mistake, and then you can accomplish some good. Of course the problem is that you cannot do that.

    What actually determines good and evil is the manner in which it is sought. Manners makes the Man


thinkdr wrote:Would such adult-education seminars help make the world a better place?

What say you?

Only if you manage to influence and overcome the current trend of far, far more advanced and influential people persuading the population in other directions, otherwise your efforts will be just a little more noise used to their advantage.
Clarify, Verify, Instill, and Reinforce the Perception of Hopes and Threats unto Anentropic Harmony :)
Else
From THIS age of sleep, Homo-sapien shall never awake.

The Wise gather together to help one another in EVERY aspect of living.

You are always more insecure than you think, just not by what you think.
The only absolute certainty is formed by the absolute lack of alternatives.
It is not merely "do what works", but "to accomplish what purpose in what time frame at what cost".
As long as the authority is secretive, the population will be subjugated.

Amid the lack of certainty, put faith in the wiser to believe.
Devil's Motto: Make it look good, safe, innocent, and wise.. until it is too late to choose otherwise.

The Real God ≡ The reason/cause for the Universe being what it is = "The situation cannot be what it is and also remain as it is".
.
James S Saint
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 25782
Joined: Sun Apr 18, 2010 8:05 pm

Re: Can there be shared community values?

Postby Arminius » Wed Nov 29, 2017 2:49 pm

thinkdr wrote:Yes, everything can be misused.

And everything is questionable.

Now can we get back to the topic of this thread?!

Are you saying that misusing things and humans has not to do with the topic of this thread? Are you saying that questionability of the distribution of power, political positions and how all that is "legalized" has not to do with the topic of this thread?

You are wrong!
Image
User avatar
Arminius
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 5696
Joined: Sat Mar 08, 2014 10:51 pm
Location: Saltus Teutoburgiensis

Re: Can there be shared community values?

Postby Anomaly654 » Wed Nov 29, 2017 7:17 pm

It seems to me that it is sensible to regard Honesty, Compassion, Fairness and Cooperation as concerns where others are involved

…if one has a good character one will be likely to keep one’s promises, will honor one’s contracts, fulfill one’s obligations, be responsible, and do one’s duty.

I agree completely, but for me if an approach to these virtues is based on this....
…there are no moral absolutes. Ethical science, in common with other sciences, does not deal in absolutes.

...then my take, to the question...
Would such adult-education seminars help make the world a better place?

...is that it's difficult to see how it's possible to build the virtues noted when any consensus on the proper virtues underpinning an ethical system arrived at in a meeting are potentially null the moment everyone walks out the door. It seems to me the notion of holding ethics meetings--a good idea in itself--if based on a perceived deterioration of societal ethical/moral values and behaviors, can never be repaired if the fix is to serve up more of what plays a big role in causing the problem in the first place. Just my two cents.
User avatar
Anomaly654
 
Posts: 35
Joined: Mon Oct 23, 2017 6:55 pm

Re: Can there be shared community values?

Postby Arminius » Wed Nov 29, 2017 9:25 pm

James S Saint wrote:
thinkdr wrote:James writes:

"Who needs a seminar when children can be programmed from infancy?"

Do you believe that if children learn (or as you say, "are programmed") those values - including Responsibility, Honesty, and Cooperation - mentioned in the original post, that this is "bad."?

You didn't specify, "concerning what"; honesty concerning what, responsibility concerning what, cooperation concerning what?

Have you ever heard the expression, "If it can go wrong, it will go wrong"?

    If it can be used for bad, it WILL be used for bad.
Man has proven that over and over and over.

    "Honesty concerning how evil Islam is. Responsibility concerning working against Islam. Cooperation concerning the fight against Islam." Or China. Or Korea, or the Evil Republicans.

How is infant programming NOT going to be used for political, power mongering? Almost no one actually cares about ethics. What they care about is the fight for the "good" which is inevitably defined as the fight against the "bad". That is the reality. And due to the nature of social interaction, the "bad" is anyone not being "honest", being "responsible", or not "cooperating" in the fight to crush those bad people who are not doing those things. That is exactly what you have been promoting since you first came here whether you know it or not.

This happens because if you cause them to believe what you say, they will choose to fight for it (exactly what you have been attempting to get people to do). And to fight for one thing, is to fight against another. But people are not very discerning or precise (including yourself). They must have very clear understanding of precisely WHO the enemy is. They believe in the power of people and thus the only true enemy must be people. And in order to give them a clear sense of who the enemy is, an enemy must be kept in sight, even if one has to be created. And that involves insidious games of deceit, duplicity, and secret surveillance and judgment - the "Darkness".

Exactly define precisely what is good and what is evil such that there is no ambiguity and there can be no mistake, and then you can accomplish some good. Of course the problem is that you cannot do that.

    What actually determines good and evil is the manner in which it is sought. Manners makes the Man


thinkdr wrote:Would such adult-education seminars help make the world a better place?

What say you?

Only if you manage to influence and overcome the current trend of far, far more advanced and influential people persuading the population in other directions, otherwise your efforts will be just a little more noise used to their advantage.

It seems that Thinkdr is an "ethical Prismatic" and that Prismatic is a "religious Thinkdr". Their "progress" is regress. At least, what they want to be realized is dangerous. It is similar to what certain humans have already experienced. Look at the history of communism. Communists are always saying that they want to "make the world a better place" and that therefore "adult-education seminars" and many similar things are needed (also the belief in the false conclusion "God is impossible"), thus: they want even more dictatorship.

Currently, liberalists and communists are in the same globalistic boat called "humanitarianism" - not knowing what "humanitarianism" means, what "humanity" means, what "human" means. They are confusing "good" and "bad" ("evil"), "true" and "false" ("wrong"), "objective" and "subjective", "ideal" and "real", "possible" and "impossible", "progressive" and "regressive".
Image
User avatar
Arminius
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 5696
Joined: Sat Mar 08, 2014 10:51 pm
Location: Saltus Teutoburgiensis

Re: Can there be shared community values?

Postby Prismatic567 » Thu Nov 30, 2017 2:51 am

Arminius wrote:It seems that Thinkdr is an "ethical Prismatic" and that Prismatic is a "religious Thinkdr". Their "progress" is regress. At least, what they want to be realized is dangerous. It is similar to what certain humans have already experienced. Look at the history of communism. Communists are always saying that they want to "make the world a better place" and that therefore "adult-education seminars" and many similar things are needed (also the belief in the false conclusion "God is impossible"), thus: they want even more dictatorship.

Currently, liberalists and communists are in the same globalistic boat called "humanitarianism" - not knowing what "humanitarianism" means, what "humanity" means, what "human" means. They are confusing "good" and "bad" ("evil"), "true" and "false" ("wrong"), "objective" and "subjective", "ideal" and "real", "possible" and "impossible", "progressive" and "regressive".
From your post it is very obvious the infection of the "zombie parasite' is very critical and serious that is resulting in your very strong resistance to improvement and change.

Your 'Their "progress" is regress' is very intellectually stupid.
What I had introduced is all humans has an inherent drive for higher morality and ethics and this is proven in the progress with the Laws on killing and slavery.
It is obvious such views do not has any direct relation with communism, the regressive left and all the vitriols you are throwing at me.

What is real is your illusory belief 'God is real and possible' makes you [& all theists] complicit with all the terrible terrors, violence and all other evils committed by a percentile of theists who are evil prone and inspired by immutable evil laden verses from the same illusory God you believe. Btw, the Abrahamic God [4+ billion believers] is the worst and vile dictator besides whatever good it has.
I am a progressive human being, a World Citizen, NOT-a-theist and not religious.
Prismatic567
Philosopher
 
Posts: 1192
Joined: Sun Nov 02, 2014 4:35 am

Re: Can there be shared community values?

Postby Arminius » Thu Nov 30, 2017 8:26 am

So, Prismatic 567, you have again proven that you have proven nothing.

Your emotional response makes it clear that I have nailed it: You are regressive. And you use words that mask this fact.

You use one of the nihilistic "programs" in order to try a transvaluation of values, and the result is always: failure.

We know from all communistic experiments how regressive communism is. I am not throwing this against you, it is not necessary, because you yourself are doing that for me.

So, thank you for your stupidity. :D
Image
User avatar
Arminius
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 5696
Joined: Sat Mar 08, 2014 10:51 pm
Location: Saltus Teutoburgiensis

Re: Can there be shared community values?

Postby Prismatic567 » Thu Nov 30, 2017 8:47 am

Arminius wrote:So, Prismatic 567, you have again proven that you have proven nothing.

Your emotional response makes it clear that I have nailed it: You are regressive. And you use words that mask this fact.

You use one of the nihilistic "programs" in order to try a transvaluation of values, and the result is always: failure.

We know from all communistic experiments how regressive communism is. I am not throwing this against you, it is not necessary, because you yourself are doing that for me.

So, thank you for your stupidity. :D
Frankly, I am posting my views and it is you who is feeling the threat [against your groundless belief] and responding in a typical offensive manner. I was responding to Thinkdr and not you but you busybody yourself and intruded to condemn.
If your posts has any thing substantive to counter my arguments I will definitely take note for intellectual and philosophical sake.
I am a progressive human being, a World Citizen, NOT-a-theist and not religious.
Prismatic567
Philosopher
 
Posts: 1192
Joined: Sun Nov 02, 2014 4:35 am

Re: Can there be shared COMMUNISTIC REGRESSION ?

Postby Arminius » Thu Nov 30, 2017 9:38 am

So, Prismatic, you do not read your own posts. But that does not help you either.

You have no arguments. You have never had any argument.

Pseudo-arguments, wrong conclusions, insubstantiality, misuse of great philosophers and other stupid swindels - it has always been the same with you. You are failing on the most fundamental level. (See all your threads.)

I have proven you wrong. And many other ILP members have proven you wrong.

Also, one of your problems is that you are not capable of knowing that the term "God is a possibility" is not the term "God is real". You do not even understand the simplest statements. We were talking about possibilities and impossibilities in your God thread (but obviously, you do not even know this) and not about realitiy as such. So, you do not know the distiction between reality and ideality.

No wonder that you are not capable of understanding Kant who was a philosopher of two eras: (1) the era of the German Enlightenment and (2) the era of the German Idealism.

And by the way: You were responding to me - even two times (see above).
Image
User avatar
Arminius
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 5696
Joined: Sat Mar 08, 2014 10:51 pm
Location: Saltus Teutoburgiensis

Re: Can there be shared community values?

Postby Anomaly654 » Thu Nov 30, 2017 6:09 pm

What I had introduced is all humans has an inherent drive for higher morality and ethics

I think this is a commonly mistaken view of ethical reality. The "higher drive for morality" is more accurately a "cumulative effect" or moral beacon impressed as a collective "societal compass". I.e., we know intuitively [and thus collectively] that to seek truth and good trumps the pursuit of falsehood and evil. But this doesn't mean all humans have this inherent drive. Obviously very many do not. The alleged seeking of "higher morality and ethics" might only be a front designed more to generate freedoms from certain moral and ethical constraints than to actually pursue moral truth for its own sake. And this of course renders the whole claim to push for a 'universal morality for all' into a "moral farce" intent in establishing an agenda.
User avatar
Anomaly654
 
Posts: 35
Joined: Mon Oct 23, 2017 6:55 pm

Re: Can there be shared community values?

Postby Prismatic567 » Fri Dec 01, 2017 3:51 am

Anomaly654 wrote:
What I had introduced is all humans has an inherent drive for higher morality and ethics

I think this is a commonly mistaken view of ethical reality. The "higher drive for morality" is more accurately a "cumulative effect" or moral beacon impressed as a collective "societal compass". I.e., we know intuitively [and thus collectively] that to seek truth and good trumps the pursuit of falsehood and evil. But this doesn't mean all humans have this inherent drive. Obviously very many do not. The alleged seeking of "higher morality and ethics" might only be a front designed more to generate freedoms from certain moral and ethical constraints than to actually pursue moral truth for its own sake. And this of course renders the whole claim to push for a 'universal morality for all' into a "moral farce" intent in establishing an agenda.
Do ALL humans has an inherent potential for a sexual drive DNA? a hunger drive?
I don't believe you will argue against this inherent 'potential.'
The point is this potential is not fully activated in all humans, some with an inactive dormant sexual drive are asexual and there are various forms of sexuality.

Whilst the sexual, hunger, security, [Maslow's basic needs] are instinctual, the drive for morality is a later development in terms of evolution [cumulative through generations] but the drive for morality is nevertheless inherent and embedded via the DNA. One clue is the presence of mirror neurons in the higher primates and humans.

Research on babies of less than one year old [to discount 'nurture'] has demonstrated babies has an inherent inborn drive and propensity for morality.

Morality is not just something that people learn, argues Yale psychologist Paul Bloom: It [morality] is something we are all born with. At birth, babies are endowed with compassion, with empathy, with the beginnings of a sense of fairness. It is from these beginnings, he argues in his new book Just Babies, that adults develop their sense of right and wrong, their desire to do good — and, at times, their capacity to do terrible things.
https://www.scientificamerican.com/arti ... of-babies/


Because this potential drive for morality is a later development embedded in the higher cortical regions of the brain, it is easily suppressed by inherent and nurturing evil elements as the child grows up. At present, this inherent drive for greater morality is suppressed within the brain of the majority.

But this inherent potential drive for morality is continually driving humans towards greater degree of morality within humanity, like the beautiful lotus flower that is pushing through mud, dirt and muck to bloom. Note the various examples of morality [banning of slavery] I have given to demonstrate this.

It is the understanding of the full mechanisms of the system and processes supporting morality that we are able to continually improve it and accelerating this knowledge [within the brain] will expedite the processes and the results of good.

I believe yours is a mistaken and deliberately blinded view not to recognize and the understand the inherent potential morality drive within all humans. Such a blinded view do not provide any room for one to release this potential where it is not activated or suppressed by nurture.

I can understand your apprehension and reservation that SOME people will invent their own standard of morality and pursue that to the detriments of humanity. Btw, this has already happened with the Abrahamic religions with their immutable moral laws from a God which is illusory an impossibility.
What I am proposing is humanity must learn the above lessons from the rigid Abrahamic morality, evil secular ideologies, etc. so as to establish a foolproof and abuse-proof Framework and System of Morality and System in the future based on accelerated multiple intelligences.

So there is a potential morality drive that is inherent within ALL humans which can be active or dormant in various people. What is critical is humanity must recognize and understand the processes involved within this inherent potential and activate it in as many people as possible. This potential give humanity the assurance that 'good' will always prevail over 'evil'.
I am a progressive human being, a World Citizen, NOT-a-theist and not religious.
Prismatic567
Philosopher
 
Posts: 1192
Joined: Sun Nov 02, 2014 4:35 am

Re: Can there be shared community values?

Postby Zero_Sum » Fri Dec 01, 2017 3:57 am

Being that sharing doesn't exist in our stratified societies I would say no.

The concept of societal sharing has been dead for thousands of years. All values are imposed and strictly enforced by force. There are only ultimatums and the illusion of social contracts.
The condition of man... is a condition of war of everyone against everyone.

I put for the general inclination of all mankind, a perpetual and restless desire of power after power, that ceaseth only in death.

-Thomas Hobbes-
User avatar
Zero_Sum
Machiavellian Negator And Cynic
 
Posts: 193
Joined: Thu Nov 30, 2017 7:05 pm
Location: United States- Global Commercial Financial Republican Empire

Re: Can there be shared community values?

Postby Prismatic567 » Fri Dec 01, 2017 5:36 am

Zero_Sum wrote:Being that sharing doesn't exist in our stratified societies I would say no.

The concept of societal sharing has been dead for thousands of years. All values are imposed and strictly enforced by force. There are only ultimatums and the illusion of social contracts.
If you are relying on casual observations and experiences, yes I agree there are obvious distrusts and selfishness among individual[s] and groups.

But if you were to research, analyze and review the whole of humanity since humans emerged you will note there is an inherent trend towards the sharing of common values within humanity.

If you were to note re evolution of living things, the earliest living things were very selfish individual[s] in ensuring their own survival which is limited.
In time, organisms evolved to co-operate as a group [insect colonies, tribes, etc.] to facilitate a greater degree of survival for the individual and also the groups, thus the species. To enable effective co-operation imperatively entails shared-values.

As one will note within evolution, the higher the cognitive consciousness of living things the greater the power of co-operations [shared-values], i.e. the highest are by human beings.

Therefore there is an inherent drive and trend towards shared-values as observed within evolution and this is present in human beings.

Can there be shared community values?
With the above existing potential and trend, we can assert there are already shared community values within human beings and the degree of sharing of values is progressing continually.

Since living things and human beings has evolved fundamentally from being selfish, this drive for selfishness is still active and dominant as an instinct. As such the acts of selfishness [individuals and groups] is more prevalent and obvious within our societies.

The critical point is, we must not be blinded by the obvious selfishness instinct and ended being ignorant of the trend of increasing and progressing co-operation and sharing common values within. We must recognize this potential for the sharing of common values and expedite this process via philosophy-proper [applying its knowledge, wisdom, principles, techniques and tools].
I am a progressive human being, a World Citizen, NOT-a-theist and not religious.
Prismatic567
Philosopher
 
Posts: 1192
Joined: Sun Nov 02, 2014 4:35 am

Re: Can there be shared community values?

Postby Zero_Sum » Fri Dec 01, 2017 5:46 am

Prismatic567 wrote:
Zero_Sum wrote:Being that sharing doesn't exist in our stratified societies I would say no.

The concept of societal sharing has been dead for thousands of years. All values are imposed and strictly enforced by force. There are only ultimatums and the illusion of social contracts.
If you are relying on casual observations and experiences, yes I agree there are obvious distrusts and selfishness among individual[s] and groups.

But if you were to research, analyze and review the whole of humanity since humans emerged you will note there is an inherent trend towards the sharing of common values within humanity.

If you were to note re evolution of living things, the earliest living things were very selfish individual[s] in ensuring their own survival which is limited.
In time, organisms evolved to co-operate as a group [insect colonies, tribes, etc.] to facilitate a greater degree of survival for the individual and also the groups, thus the species. To enable effective co-operation imperatively entails shared-values.

As one will note within evolution, the higher the cognitive consciousness of living things the greater the power of co-operations [shared-values], i.e. the highest are by human beings.

Therefore there is an inherent drive and trend towards shared-values as observed within evolution and this is present in human beings.

Can there be shared community values?
With the above existing potential and trend, we can assert there are already shared community values within human beings and the degree of sharing of values is progressing continually.

Since living things and human beings has evolved fundamentally from being selfish, this drive for selfishness is still active and dominant as an instinct. As such the acts of selfishness [individuals and groups] is more prevalent and obvious within our societies.

The critical point is, we must not be blinded by the obvious selfishness instinct and ended being ignorant of the trend of increasing and progressing co-operation and sharing common values within. We must recognize this potential for the sharing of common values and expedite this process via philosophy-proper [applying its knowledge, wisdom, principles, techniques and tools].


The agricultural revolution changed all of that and most of the shared values you see since then historically are imposed or coerced violently not happening naturally on their own.
The condition of man... is a condition of war of everyone against everyone.

I put for the general inclination of all mankind, a perpetual and restless desire of power after power, that ceaseth only in death.

-Thomas Hobbes-
User avatar
Zero_Sum
Machiavellian Negator And Cynic
 
Posts: 193
Joined: Thu Nov 30, 2017 7:05 pm
Location: United States- Global Commercial Financial Republican Empire

Re: Can there be shared community values?

Postby Prismatic567 » Fri Dec 01, 2017 10:24 am

Zero_Sum wrote:
Prismatic567 wrote:
Zero_Sum wrote:Being that sharing doesn't exist in our stratified societies I would say no.

The concept of societal sharing has been dead for thousands of years. All values are imposed and strictly enforced by force. There are only ultimatums and the illusion of social contracts.
If you are relying on casual observations and experiences, yes I agree there are obvious distrusts and selfishness among individual[s] and groups.

But if you were to research, analyze and review the whole of humanity since humans emerged you will note there is an inherent trend towards the sharing of common values within humanity.

If you were to note re evolution of living things, the earliest living things were very selfish individual[s] in ensuring their own survival which is limited.
In time, organisms evolved to co-operate as a group [insect colonies, tribes, etc.] to facilitate a greater degree of survival for the individual and also the groups, thus the species. To enable effective co-operation imperatively entails shared-values.

As one will note within evolution, the higher the cognitive consciousness of living things the greater the power of co-operations [shared-values], i.e. the highest are by human beings.

Therefore there is an inherent drive and trend towards shared-values as observed within evolution and this is present in human beings.

Can there be shared community values?
With the above existing potential and trend, we can assert there are already shared community values within human beings and the degree of sharing of values is progressing continually.

Since living things and human beings has evolved fundamentally from being selfish, this drive for selfishness is still active and dominant as an instinct. As such the acts of selfishness [individuals and groups] is more prevalent and obvious within our societies.

The critical point is, we must not be blinded by the obvious selfishness instinct and ended being ignorant of the trend of increasing and progressing co-operation and sharing common values within. We must recognize this potential for the sharing of common values and expedite this process via philosophy-proper [applying its knowledge, wisdom, principles, techniques and tools].


The agricultural revolution changed all of that and most of the shared values you see since then historically are imposed or coerced violently not happening naturally on their own.
You are referring to forms, I was referring to substance/essence of the inherent propensity within humans to share and co-operate which is not changing.

For example while humans will practice different ways of producing and consuming food over its history, the digestive system of humans to get nutrients as essence is not changing.
I am a progressive human being, a World Citizen, NOT-a-theist and not religious.
Prismatic567
Philosopher
 
Posts: 1192
Joined: Sun Nov 02, 2014 4:35 am

Re: Can there be shared community values?

Postby Zero_Sum » Fri Dec 01, 2017 3:45 pm

Prismatic567 wrote:You are referring to forms, I was referring to substance/essence of the inherent propensity within humans to share and co-operate which is not changing.

For example while humans will practice different ways of producing and consuming food over its history, the digestive system of humans to get nutrients as essence is not changing.



Shared community values is an impossibility in today's world.
The condition of man... is a condition of war of everyone against everyone.

I put for the general inclination of all mankind, a perpetual and restless desire of power after power, that ceaseth only in death.

-Thomas Hobbes-
User avatar
Zero_Sum
Machiavellian Negator And Cynic
 
Posts: 193
Joined: Thu Nov 30, 2017 7:05 pm
Location: United States- Global Commercial Financial Republican Empire

Re: Can there be shared community values?

Postby Prismatic567 » Sat Dec 02, 2017 2:24 am

Zero_Sum wrote:
Prismatic567 wrote:You are referring to forms, I was referring to substance/essence of the inherent propensity within humans to share and co-operate which is not changing.

For example while humans will practice different ways of producing and consuming food over its history, the digestive system of humans to get nutrients as essence is not changing.



Shared community values is an impossibility in today's world.
You are confining your point to a fixed period of time, i.e. today, present, now, whereas what I have presented is there is a existing potential and positive trend towards greater sharing of values among people towards the future.
This trend of sharing values is progressing as evidenced by greater sense of co-operation between people and Nations, e.g. ISS and many other global projects.

Why do you state "impossibility" when sharing of community values are already happening?

Examples of an impossibility is like the existence of a square-circle, an absolutely perfect God [as argued],
viewtopic.php?f=5&t=193474
I am a progressive human being, a World Citizen, NOT-a-theist and not religious.
Prismatic567
Philosopher
 
Posts: 1192
Joined: Sun Nov 02, 2014 4:35 am

Next

Return to Philosophy



Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users