Orlion Blight
-
Posts
3828 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
1
Content Type
Profiles
News
Forums
Blogs
Gallery
Events
Everything posted by Orlion Blight
-
Won't stop me! I may just clog it with excerpts of the John Rawls book I'm reading now! Mwahaha! Incidentally, Kasmir, it does appear that Rawls is much more concerned with just societies, with much less focus on individual morality leading me to believe that you were correct in saying the Veil of Ignorance is misapplied when determining if one's individual action is moral.
-
You can't cage me!
-
And I am simply quite mad
-
What is actually good for characters? Is their eventual hypothetical fates what are important, their utility to non-hypothetical persons, or their ability to live on in the hearts of non-hypothetical persons? And does the hypothetical fates have to be "printed", or would the author's mere intent that they "hypothetically live in a state of hypothetical perpetual bliss" be enough? Would a reader's cynical view that "they are absorbed by the nothingness of the void" cancel out this intent? I'm a really just about to talk about "multi-universe theory"? (Hint: Not in this universe )
-
I might be guilty of playing semantics, but yes. So, going back to our Person A and B example: Person A I based on Kobold's argument, so that means we can say Person A is specifically concerned about preventing harm. Person B, based on a counter-point, is not concerned about preventing harm but rather preserving his concept of dignity/autonomy/whatever. His objections to rape are not based on preventing harm, so he does not fight against rape because of any sympathy he has for a victim's pain, but because the values of dignity/autonomy/whatever were violated. Person A and Person B are, of course, one-dimensional characters set to provide an example. I continue to use them in this fashion, namely that people can (and I believe do) hold wildly (and in Person B's case, impersonal) views on morality but can still act together as moral agents. And as Kobold said many posts ago regarding the Lord Ruler, results matter... a lot.... sometimes much more than intentions. Though even though Person B does not care to alleviate "harm", the results of his actions are the same as Person A's, and they would both be foolish to let mere disagreement of "why" fighting rape is important interfere with the actual action of fighting rape. In fact, they might teach each other somethings over coffee and become real people and not one-dimensional characters in a philosophical ponderance
-
Morzathoth can speak for himself, but in my case, Person B is not "considering the victim", he simply values some quality that he believes the action of rape violates. It could turn out that anything else about the "victim"-their hopes, dreams, interests, hobbies, etc- are completely irrelevant. I would use "inherently" opposed instead of "intrinsically", though I think both would be correct... I just add some other connotations to "intrinsically" that I do not to "inherently". And we are in complete agreement on the latter part.
-
No problem, it's good to recognize when a discussion is going in circles and has outlived any sort of usefulness. I have not yet, so here's a ponderance: Person A believes rape is intrinsically and objectively wrong and will fight against it in all circumstances. Person B believes rape is wrong because he values a person's autonomy/dignity/safety/whatever and will fight against it in all circumstances. The end result is the same: both Person A and Person B will fight against rape in all circumstances, even though they have different beliefs regarding the specific morality of the act. That is why tolerance is, at least practically in this case, important. Person A and B can join resources and experience to fight against rape and do a lot of what they both view as "good". Or they can waste their resources debating "why" rape is bad. I'm not condemning anyone, I just like discussions
-
We all have our individual-centered morality. For example, I believe if I eat out at a sit-down restaurant, I always ought to tip at least five dollars or twenty percent, whichever is higher...at the least! This is in no way a "universal value", even if I judge you based on whether or not you live up to my standards... but in these cases, it really does not matter and matters at the same time: does not matter to the conversationalist who wants to demand the stabbing of children to prove a point but matters to me and the waiters/waitresses. And that's what we use to deal with people a lot of times (though there are also group-centered, society-centered, world-center moralities as well) because we deal on an individual level, on what we need to do to "sleep at night". As a result, one might simultaneously hold conflicting views such as "stealing is wrong" and "stealing food to feed a starving kid is right". Rationally, the two statements can not both be correct, much like saying "Hurting someone is wrong" and "Hurting someone who hurts is right" is also conflicting. That means that Twidad pushing Twi to get A's would have probably been the right thing for him to do because he believed it was the most helpful thing for him to do, whereas Twi would posit that it was harmful... and a starving kid in Nicaragua would look at this "moral conundrum" and not give a damnation. So who out of the three is correct? Does Twidad's sense of duty and the Nicaraguan kid's malnutrition invalidate Twi's experience of hurt? On the individual level, the answer is no, we actually have a sort of parallel pluralism going going on in which each of the three individuals have arrived at different conclusions in a reasonably rational way. The reasonably rationalness of it all won't change anyone's mind, so in a societal way, an important value is tolerance. That does not mean that Twi "justifies" what Twidad did, nor that the Nicaraguan kid has to be sorry about caring about his own selfish motivations than a family dynamic going on hundreds of miles away. It just means each can hold a different view point and still participate in society. We've now reached the societal level, where a lot of rights and wrongs can be defined, and I've realized that I am mostly rambling... I don't really have a point here, except to post a Led Zeppelin song
-
Ah, but is it moral to profit off the moral quandaries of others?
-
I understand that. Further, as a middle child, I was forbidden to do a lot of things because my older brother screwed up so much. And then because I was a good kid, my younger sister was allowed more freedom than either me or my brother.
-
Gasp! Such language! -
Ah, dengue clasíco...the "break bone fever"... I'm glad I never got any of it's variations. Even though it seems that survival rate is high if you are treated at a hospital, it always sounded like an incredibly painful condition.I knew someone who caught malaria and dengue within the year. I asked him which one was worse, and he said malaria was, for him, worse. An interesting factoid: malaria and dengue are carried by different mosquitoes. The dengue mosquitoes are mostly found in a city landscape whereas malaria mosquitoes tend to be found in the country.
-
Yeah, the Borg are a lot closer to Cybermen than Daleks
-
A lot of them are from the Silmarillion, though many are briefly mentioned in the Lord of the Rings.
-
All right, I'm on a computer! This site has some "guided meditations". Aside from the calming sounds which seem cliched, it also will have you do various light exercises (such as breathing in, hold, breathing out, and so forth). When the world fell apart around me, I was able to see a psychologist at my university (which you can probably guess the name of now) and aside from other coping techniques, he guided me to this site. They helped me a lot, and I'm presenting them to you (and I guess everyone else ) on the off-chance that they will be helpful to you as well. It took a while, but I was able to get out of the terrible situation I was in eventually, and this stuff helped me out until then. Good luck, and remember you are awesome! And if you feel you are not, that just means you are hungry and need to eat something https://www.ohio.edu/counseling/meditations.cfm
-
In my experience, you can be upfront about such things with a competent professional. You can also frame the conversation so that it is: "how can I maintain my composure and deal with my frustration in a healthy way." Don't worry about patching things up, that's further down the road if out is even ever a destination you want to reach.I hope the situation improves soon (namely that you get a job soon and can get out of there). In the meantime, when I get to a computer, I'll post some meditative techniques you can use (or not, you'll know I'd it is something you want to try:)) And remember: with regards to your own feelings, you are the expert. If someone else says otherwise, they are fundamentally wrong.
-
Got some paid-time off, so it's time to rock... 80s style!
-
Vending Machine: Sanderson edition (game)
Orlion Blight replied to RippleGylf's topic in Forum Games & Random Stuff
*Inserts can of Diet Coke* -
Wow, looks like it's been a rough couple of days for quite a few people. Here's an old-timey, upbeat song that might put a skip in your step: https://youtu.be/DvoYB1U1Wq4?t=30
-
Up the Irons! I was going to say something about multi-verses and the idea that "infinite timelines mean infinite realities", but it appears that this is not the universe where I do so
-
I hear yeah, but since such a thread does not exist, I'll be the crass one, and everyone else after me will be fine, since I was first and crass. I'm a true American hero So I was wanting to play Smash Bros, but it wasn't in it's box. My desires have been frustrated, and I don't know what choices I made in the past that set me on this dire path.
-
Well, if it's in honor of Peter, I can get behind that!
-
Because you're an air-sick lowlander
-
Yeah, seems fairly extensive and organized
-
Come on, let children be children!
