Transcript
A crudely drawn ms-paint-style comic. The first panel depicts a person with an ancap (anarcho capitalist) mask. The mask is black and yellow, the colors are divided diagonally. The person is saying “statist bootlickers fuck off!” to a boot. In the next panel, they are staring at the boot draw an amazon logo on it with a marker. The last panel shows the person deepthroathing the boot, saying “At least it’s not the gubermint [government”.
I’m not gonna read whatever weird BS that came from, but I do think its entirely possible to have a coherent and attractive worldview without morality. If you want to make any sense to normal people, you have to replace it with a belief system that emphasizes community service and the common good. In the end, if it works, it winds up looking just like morality with objective foundations.
Like… Like they make you do when you did a misdemeanor?
Filthy commie!
I feel likeeither we’re not working with the same people, or youre working with entirely hypothetical people.
Community service as punishment is meant to link you back to your community. Where you live. Where you presumably shat. Go clean that up. We live here.
The common good includes oneself. The tragedy of the commons is only possible when its “somebody else’s problem”. When that’s “my park”, you clean up the shit.
Yes, people are problematic and largely prone to shitting in the park. They have to be taught. It’s not easy.
I find, when you deny people bathrooms, they shit in the street. Or park.
When you don’t do that, they’re a lot more civic minded about things.
Yes, everything youre saying is rational and i see no faults.
But that’s the problem. It’s rational. Have you ever met a people? They’re largely petty bundles of excuses and tribal loyalty buffeted by winds of propaganda enforced myopia and delusional coping mechanisms. Rational self interest isn’t a huge factor in how most people live or behave. It is, in fact, vanishingly fucking rare.
I know. I used to shit in the park. Nice to meet you, friend.
Don’t shit in the park when there’s a perfectly good wal-mart around.
Hey, there’s a place for a bit of anarchy in any society. Grease the wheels of change.
I’m discussing shitting in the park with the perilous out-house
guy(lol. person.). Lemmy moment.Not a guy, and outhouse perilous is a philosophical concept.
:]
Never heard of it. My name has a meaning too. Won’t bother to explain.
but morality is a fundamental part of getting along with others, it’s necessitated by the fact that you don’t want to be stabbed in the gut, thus gut-stabbing is bad.
if someone doesn’t agree that gut-stabbing is reprehensible, then you know they might stab you in the gut, thus you have a very big incentive to tell them to eat shit and stay the fuck away from you.
But that’s not morality, that’s self-preservation. It’s morality if you don’t do it because it affects others in a negative way, it’s self-preservation if you don’t do it because you don’t want negative consequences for yourself.
I guess we can only truly measure morality where there are no consequences for one’s actions. That’s why it usually goes out the window for rich people.
I don’t think this is real or helpful towards understanding the world. The measure of morality is the shape of your life after you practice it. Your impact on others. Morals are about things that matter. You’ve come quite near to postulating that they don’t matter. I cannot support this view.
I’m more postulating that to actually be moral, you’d need to still be moral when it’s not about being liked or having a better chance of survival. Do good because you want to do good. A system of morality based on “if you don’t act nice, you’ll have a more difficult life” is more of a set of rules being imposed on a person than morality on that person’s part.
Your point is cogent enough and well explained. It seems diconnected tho.
Try building your own rules. The pieces you seem to think don’t matter are actually where one starts in that project. The gritty business of morality is its foundation.
I learned my own code of behavior by making a lot of mistakes. I did things I’m not proud of. The things I believe in today had to be slapped into my skull.
There you go, starting to establish a new system of beliefs from first principles. You don’t have to call it morality, if you don’t start from some existing authority. In the end, if whatever belief system you build actually works, it winds up looking very like our existing moral code.
Well, no, because thats mostly fucked up and awful and nonsense and made for oppression.
But it would totally include like ‘dont kill people or fuck shit up for no reason.’
I unfortunately agree that people largely do not adhere to what one might regard as the normal moral code. In fact there are loud voices saying it is defunct. But its still there. We still use it to judge.
These are some of the reasons that I feel one should be open to rebuilding the squishy biz that is morals into something based on objective values. This project has been tackled by much better men, and I have nothing to add. Rene Descartes. Immanuel Kant. Even Friedrich Nietzsche had powerful things to say about reworking morals into something that actually works.
And
So who is we?
Okay. I even like some of it. Not the basis of anything we have, which amounts to a tangled shit show of messy tribal loyalties and group membership signifiers. Most people are not moral actors. They have none, they believe in less than that.
We’d need to start from scratch.
I find no argument. It’s a big project. Much bigger than me.
I mean, I have no morals. I do things my way, because its best for me and everyone else.
I’m a self-serving rationalist that’s realized that society and my place in it are of great personal benefit and it behooves me to support them in all ways.