A challenge

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

A challenge

Postby Dan~ » Sat Dec 21, 2019 1:59 am

The challenge:
Figure out what is best.
Figure out what is worst.

This is the foundation of certain philosophical work.

I think growth in general has certain growths which are the best growths.
Evolution in a good form is a form of growth.

The worst thing for life is death because many forms of life are fragile.
I like http://www.accuradio.com , internet radio.
https://dannerz.itch.io/ -- a new and minimal webside now hosting my free game projects.
Truth is based in sensing, in vision. And we can only see when we are alive.
User avatar
ILP Legend
Posts: 10486
Joined: Thu Nov 24, 2005 8:14 am
Location: Canada Alberta

Re: A challenge

Postby Mackerni » Sat Dec 21, 2019 2:43 am

I believe this task is ultimately futile.


What is good and what is evil is ultimately a subjective parameter to which none can give an ultimate answer to. For one human to exist, means the death of many plants and animals to sustain life. In one person. You could rule the idea that sentience is the most important key to life, that humans have more sentience, therefore, they ultimately get the choice to eat whatever other animal they choose to feast on. I am no vegetarian, or vegan - in fact because I view what is good and evil to be subjective that I do not care what I eat, so long as it doesn't harm me. Besides, the soil in the ground needs our feces to be rich full of soil-nutrients. And on the plus, humans don't eat soil at all.

Imagine if there was a species in the Universe who were trying to achieve the same thing we're doing: divine selection, or ultimate survival of the species. But they were closer to achieving this goal than we were. Imagine if we spread our sentience towards a few planets, but a species far intelligent had 1/8 of the galaxy. And, as humans, we started to find their presence cumbersome to our own survival. What do we do than? What if this alien life form was civilized in the way that dictatorships were? What if they unlocked the key to immortality, but the only way to find it was to kill and sabotage their scientists into telling us their secrets?

What we are doing as a species is trying to maximize sentience throughout the planet. It's the goal of life to know itself and being able to do so means that oneself acknowledges his or her own existence. But it goes further than that: what I believe to be what is ultimately good will be different for different people. I will give you examples of what I think is divine. Eternity, ubiquity, potency, utility, generosity, sagacity and sovereignty. All of these have places within divine realms. However, one can have too much time with nothing to do, one can have all the space he needs but nothing to fill it, too much energy can make batteries melt or explode. If utility, generosity and sagacity fall into the hands of a sovereign dictator those can prove to be disastrous if not applied correctly. You can give certain people utility, generosity and sagacity and exclude other people from that, causing division within societies.

Now I'm not saying that societies should be equal, or egalitarian - in fact, I don't even think people are born equal. But almost everybody agrees on the concept of equal opportunity to do what they want. And I think as a society most of us strive for that perfection - for that goal. So, maybe, if there is one ultimate good that exists in our species, it may be equal opportunity. That doesn't mean unfit people get ahead, only that they are given the opportunity to strive for perfection, like all human beings should be allowed to do. Equal opportunity is not equal outcome, and should never be viewed as such.

I like to think that utility itself is good - but look at guns.
I like to think that generosity itself is good - but too much leads to enabling people.
I like to think that sagacity itself is good - but it can make people cynical.

Things are simply too complicated to ever have a definite "this is good, this is evil" column. Even life. Life that destroys sentience life forms is typically viewed as bad. Some people even go so far to not eat meat, Dan. And death is often a good thing for our environment. Your insides are eaten by micro-organisms. People who are dying often donate their organs to save other people's lives. So even death has its perks.

What I think we need to do is realize that all cases are different depending on the people involved. Religion will teach us that there are universal wrongs and rights. Science will teach of relativity between things. What we need to realize is that there are things that are often right, and things that are often wrong. If you throw any situation at me, Dan, that you think it completely right or completely wrong I will debate with you how it could be viewed as the opposite.

There are no words to describe true perfection. I'll give you an example. Imagine the perfect island. What would this island have? What would it look like? The description of perfect is like good and evil. Why do you think we have so many religions that focus on the same core message: "Treat others the way you want to be treated"? And even then, there are masochists. There are people who are psychopaths, sociopaths, people with antisocial personality disorder and conduct disorder.

Personally, I prefer to see it like this: People do the best that they can do, and what their best is usually involves things that other people deemed to be the best too. That is as close as we will ever come to perfect, or knowing the true state of good and evil.
Posts: 147
Joined: Tue Jan 03, 2017 12:11 am
Location: Milwaukee, WI, United States

Re: A challenge

Postby Mackerni » Sat Dec 21, 2019 3:39 am

I would like to reply to your Facebook message you sent me tonight, regarding this thread.

You mentioned how something that is truth is always true. Okay. So, ice cream is always ice cream. Perfect is always perfect, evil is always evil. It doesn't really mean anything until it's compared to something else.

Similarly, this can be reflected to things that are the best, or the worst. They are the best because you assigned that definition of that thing as the best, therefore, they are the best. Same goes with worse.

Dan, I've known you for a long time now - it's peaking four years now, and I have come to bare witness of your philosophy. Much is it is very simple and doesn't take much thought to articulate. I love talking to you, and challenging your beliefs, but I have yet heard you really challenge mine. For example, in this thread you have decided not to give a detailed reply to my arguments and claims.

Still, I do enjoy being able to reflect schools of philosophy with you. The Problem of Evil is something that many philosophers and theologians have been trying to understand more. I thank you for your time.
Posts: 147
Joined: Tue Jan 03, 2017 12:11 am
Location: Milwaukee, WI, United States

Return to Philosophy

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users