Morality is fake and doesn’t exist

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

Moderator: Only_Humean

Forum rules
Forum Philosophy

Re: Morality is fake and doesn’t exist

Postby Jakob » Fri May 11, 2018 9:51 am

Karpel Tunnel wrote:
- James' central tenet, which I've struggled to find exception to and yet have not, says that nothing exists unless it can affect something.
James idea is not falsifiable, so it is a safe assertion. This does not mean if is false, however it seems to me it is either tautological or speculation.

Yes, well it is falsifiable only using this computer he had said he had built, which generates virtual particles spontaneously based on the RM algorithms. I've been waiting to see that machine, "Jack", in action since 2012.

One advantage of VO is its falsifiability at every position. A falsifiable universal!
Image
For behold, all acts of love and pleasure are my rituals
User avatar
Jakob
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 5903
Joined: Sun Sep 03, 2006 9:23 pm
Location: look at my suit

Re: Morality is fake and doesn’t exist

Postby Prismatic567 » Sun May 13, 2018 3:00 am

Karpel Tunnel wrote:
- James' central tenet, which I've struggled to find exception to and yet have not, says that nothing exists unless it can affect something.
James idea is not falsifiable, so it is a safe assertion. This does not mean if is false, however it seems to me it is either tautological or speculation.
"nothing exists unless it can affect something" is no different from 'no human can exists unless it breathes' i.e. stating the obvious within a 'common sense' framework.
That is a truism and tautology.
I am a progressive human being, a World Citizen, NOT-a-theist and not religious.
Prismatic567
Philosopher
 
Posts: 1907
Joined: Sun Nov 02, 2014 4:35 am

Re: Morality is fake and doesn’t exist

Postby Ecmandu » Wed May 16, 2018 12:06 am

Nothing exists unless it CAN affect something, makes the possibility that many things exist which never affect something. The CAN part does make it unfalsifiable.
Ecmandu
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 6998
Joined: Thu Dec 11, 2014 1:22 am

Re: Morality is fake and doesn’t exist

Postby Mithus » Wed May 16, 2018 1:43 am

Ecmandu wrote:Nothing exists unless it CAN affect something, makes the possibility that many things exist which never affect something. The CAN part does make it unfalsifiable.

... and it's certainly something James never said.
Instead:
"Existence is that which has affect".
..... panta rhei .............................................
User avatar
Mithus
 
Posts: 197
Joined: Sun Mar 02, 2014 10:05 pm

Re: Morality is fake and doesn’t exist

Postby Ecmandu » Wed May 16, 2018 1:48 am

Mithus wrote:
Ecmandu wrote:Nothing exists unless it CAN affect something, makes the possibility that many things exist which never affect something. The CAN part does make it unfalsifiable.

... and it's certainly something James never said.
Instead:
"Existence is that which has affect".


Well, then we run into this again...

So hypothetically, every existent has an affect, however, nothing has to be affected ?!?!
Ecmandu
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 6998
Joined: Thu Dec 11, 2014 1:22 am

Re: Morality is fake and doesn’t exist

Postby URUZ » Wed May 16, 2018 1:38 pm

Please keep this nonsensical cult of “RM” out of my topic. It has nothing to do with my topic.
EIHWAZ PERTHO NAUTHIZ

ANSUZ
User avatar
URUZ
Philosopher
 
Posts: 2049
Joined: Tue Nov 10, 2015 12:14 am
Location: The topoi

Re: Morality is fake and doesn’t exist

Postby Arcturus Descending » Wed May 16, 2018 3:18 pm

Serendipper,


This may be a silly question but can there not be an objective interpretation?

No because that's essentially an observer-less observation and quantum physicists would love to get a hold of that in order to look without looking, but there is no such thing.


I do not understand this. Can you elaborate a bit more on it. For an observation to be made, must there not be an observer ~~ unless you are using the term *observer-less to mean something different?


There are no silly questions concerning objectivity since it's very difficult to get one's head around.


Graciousness.

You may ask other people for an objective view of a personal situation you may have and it will be more objective than your own assessment, but it's still subject to the limitation of the other person's ability to relate to you and your problem (among other things). The degree of objectivity is subject to the subject's tools of perception and internal biases.


Yes, this I can see and agree with but I am not understanding the connection between the above and an observer-less observation.

Does interpretation deal only with personal perception on our part?

A subject can only observe with the tools it has to observe (be affected by something). A photon, for instance, can only observe that which contains charge because that is the only means of affecting electromagnetic radiation. Dark matter has no effect on photons since dark matter contains no charge. However, dark matter does affect space which affects the path of light, but it doesn't affect the light directly.


I get this too. We can only work with who or what we are and how things affect us/our relationship to them.
One may say that human nature is also composed of dark matter (the unknown negative [not negative charge]) and dark energy which also affects *the path of light* (enlightenment/goodness) coming through us and into us. Dorky?
It is kind of like the human brain in a way. More is not known about it than is known about it.


Dark matter is only real to us in terms of gravity and, although we can learn more about dark matter by studying the interactions it may have on other elements, there is no way for us to objectively observe the dark matter because we do not possess the tools necessary to "see" it.


I understand this too. lol Perhaps my first question had more to do with facts/evidence, what we do know, when we observe something. So the term "interpretation" might not have anything to do with objectivity but with subjectivity or our own perception. Did that make sense to you?

Can there not be any real evidence or facts involved or seen in interpretation - meaning objectivity? I may not have expressed that well.

I suppose we can extrapolate and surmise what something may look like if we weren't there to look, but it's not real observation.


So what would You call it if not observation? You are sitting on a park bench, looking up at the sky, wondering if there could actually be Something called God. You are observing everything which brings you to this Question. Could you not then say that the question of God's reality becomes an observation, something to be looked at and observed? :-k
I am not saying that I am right. I am just questioning.



Goethe said, and I agree, that thinking (deduction) is a tool of perception just like vision, smell, etc, so we may be able to piece together objective views by "virtual observation" (for instance, what the universe looked like at the moment of the big bang when viewed from outside the universe, whatever that means), but we can never be assured that we've considered all the information (in other words, we can't know what we don't know.)


I understand this. So what is it that my agnostic self is in actuality doing above from your point of view?



When you look at a cup, all you can perceive is a rather thin band of electromagnetic radiation emanating from it;

Wow! Can you teach me how to do this? I am not capable of perceiving that.
That would be quite awesome.



Image

Light is just a higher-frequency radio wave or a lower-frequency xray and visible light is a sliver of the radiation that exists.

What you commonly call "heat" is really infrared radiation. What physicists call "heat" is all EM radiation since heat is energy in transport.

Birds can see tetrachromatically via a 4th cone that allows perception of ultraviolet radiation and, presumably, they have a neural network that allows conceptualization of a color such as ultra-orange, which does not exist to us. People wearing sunblock at the beach probably appear like they're wearing aluminum foil to birds due to the intense reflection of UV light.

Deer hunters should also be aware that deer can see UV light (blue and up) very well and although some pee dribble may not seem very real to us, it's like a light bulb to the deer. Deer are crepuscular, meaning they're most active at dawn and dusk in order to take advantage of the remaining UV light from the sun to pinpoint predator urine while also having the ambiance dark enough for predators to be at a relative disadvantage.


I did not know that. It is very interesting actually. I went deer hunting a few times with a boyfriend and I am so glad that he never found one to kill. But perhaps we honor the deer who's meat is at least eaten ~ better than to die of hunger and cold.

I suppose though that I was being a bit naive to think that I could actually SEE ~ When you look at a cup, all you can perceive is a rather [color=#400080]thin band of electromagnetic radiation emanating from it

I want to see that. How is it done? There is so much of THAT kind of magic in the universe. I would like to be able to experience more of it.


therefore, you cannot say you know everything about the cup, but only what you're "subjugated"/relegated to realize by virtue of your humble abilities as a human.


...or the humble but wonderful abilities of other humans such as archaeologists, historians, et cetera. On second thought, nothing so humble about those people ~ simply awesome!

Kind of like seeking out your ancestry. I suppose this is why we also have the Antique Roadshow. :evilfun:

I like that show :)

If only we could go back in time ~ I mean really back in time. I wonder where I would go first.
Joseph Joubert ~~

It is better to debate a question without settling it than to settle a question without debating it.


The aim of an argument or discussion should not be victory but progress.


“We love repose of mind so well, that we are arrested by anything which has even the appearance of truth; and so we fall asleep on clouds.”


You have to be like the pebble in the stream, keeping the grain and rolling along without being dissolved or dissolving anything else.
User avatar
Arcturus Descending
Consciousness Seeker
 
Posts: 15196
Joined: Sat Sep 06, 2008 5:15 pm
Location: A state of unknowing

Re: Morality is fake and doesn’t exist

Postby Jakob » Wed May 16, 2018 3:34 pm

Arcturus Descending wrote:
Image



Here we see how valuing works.
The human brain values a specific range in the value-continuum, and only this valuing "affects" the human.
Thus, valuing is prior to "affectance";
back to you, Houston.
Image
For behold, all acts of love and pleasure are my rituals
User avatar
Jakob
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 5903
Joined: Sun Sep 03, 2006 9:23 pm
Location: look at my suit

Re: Morality is fake and doesn’t exist

Postby Arcturus Descending » Fri May 18, 2018 2:35 pm

Jakob wrote:
Arcturus Descending wrote:
Image



Here we see how valuing works.
The human brain values a specific range in the value-continuum, and only this valuing "affects" the human.
Thus, valuing is prior to "affectance";
back to you, Houston.


Jakob,

Serendipper said: When you look at a cup, all you can perceive is a rather thin band of electromagnetic radiation emanating from it;

So please tell me where on the above graph does that lie? I am looking to actually see it on the cup.
Do we see it everyday and not think of it as the above? Is it called by another name? I am no scientist.


Aside from that, I am not so sure that "valuing is necessarily prior to affectance though it may be true that what we value does affect us - obviously.

I think that it can also be true that what affects or has an effect on us greatly can ALSO come to lead us to value something afterwards...at least when we have come to ultimately pay attention to IT.

Perhaps the Jury is still out about this though considering how little we know about the human psyche.

Show me the Light!
Joseph Joubert ~~

It is better to debate a question without settling it than to settle a question without debating it.


The aim of an argument or discussion should not be victory but progress.


“We love repose of mind so well, that we are arrested by anything which has even the appearance of truth; and so we fall asleep on clouds.”


You have to be like the pebble in the stream, keeping the grain and rolling along without being dissolved or dissolving anything else.
User avatar
Arcturus Descending
Consciousness Seeker
 
Posts: 15196
Joined: Sat Sep 06, 2008 5:15 pm
Location: A state of unknowing

Re: Morality is fake and doesn’t exist

Postby Arcturus Descending » Fri May 25, 2018 3:27 pm

encode_decode,

The observer becomes affected by what the observer sees - the act of observing has no affect on the observed << Is this more or less what you are saying?


So are you saying that that IS the case or are you just trying to mirror back his thought? :evilfun:
Joseph Joubert ~~

It is better to debate a question without settling it than to settle a question without debating it.


The aim of an argument or discussion should not be victory but progress.


“We love repose of mind so well, that we are arrested by anything which has even the appearance of truth; and so we fall asleep on clouds.”


You have to be like the pebble in the stream, keeping the grain and rolling along without being dissolved or dissolving anything else.
User avatar
Arcturus Descending
Consciousness Seeker
 
Posts: 15196
Joined: Sat Sep 06, 2008 5:15 pm
Location: A state of unknowing

Re: Morality is fake and doesn’t exist

Postby Fixed Cross » Fri May 25, 2018 4:30 pm

Arcturus Descending wrote:Jakob,

Serendipper said: When you look at a cup, all you can perceive is a rather thin band of electromagnetic radiation emanating from it;

So please tell me where on the above graph does that lie? I am looking to actually see it on the cup.
Do we see it everyday and not think of it as the above? Is it called by another name? I am no scientist.

What do you mean? Dipsh was just pointing to the fact that most radiation isn't what we call "light". Light ranges from Red to Violet.
Infrared and Ultraviolet aren't nominally light anymore, just radiation, even though they move with the speed of light just as this select group of wavelengths that we can perceive using our visual sense.

Aside from that, I am not so sure that "valuing is necessarily prior to affectance though it may be true that what we value does affect us - obviously.

As Ive learned, our understandings of the term "valuing" are different.
You've never really looked into VO, which is totally okay, but as long as you know that when I say "valuing" I don't mean a conscious process.

(Ive always been evidencing that consciousness is a specific type of valuing. We can't be conscious without this consciousness revolving around and orienting on our specific objects of valuing - as Jung also said)

I think that it can also be true that what affects or has an effect on us greatly can ALSO come to lead us to value something afterwards...at least when we have come to ultimately pay attention to IT.

As I understand us, something can only affect us as a value.
Whenever we are affected, we are partial vs this being affected - this being partial is precisely what the being-affected is.

Perhaps the Jury is still out about this though considering how little we know about the human psyche.

Show me the Light!

"Take it slow...
It is what it is cause we make it so...
go on break it
it aint sacred
its not holy
squeeze in it until it turns to guacamole"

Saying, all in time. You are well on course as far as I can tell.

The big question is: for what do we require the truth? Why are we worthy of it? Why would truth not be wasted on us? How can truth affect us?

We can receive truth when we are fully ready to put ourselves on the line for it, when we are capable of fully valuing it. Therefore "truth is a woman".

Not just any woman though.
Thunderbolt steers all things.
http://beforethelight.forumotion.com - Tree of Life Academy
Image
The strong do what they can, the weak accept what they must.
- Thucydides
User avatar
Fixed Cross
Doric Usurper
 
Posts: 7516
Joined: Fri Jul 15, 2011 12:53 am
Location: the black ships

Re: Morality is fake and doesn’t exist

Postby URUZ » Mon Jun 18, 2018 12:44 pm

Image
EIHWAZ PERTHO NAUTHIZ

ANSUZ
User avatar
URUZ
Philosopher
 
Posts: 2049
Joined: Tue Nov 10, 2015 12:14 am
Location: The topoi

Previous

Return to Philosophy



Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot]