Angst & Frustrations Galore

[Mad Dr Jeffe]

Wow you missed a lot in a very short post. No it doesnt. To paraphrase so you understand it Ethics are a personal code (hence the part about

A  personal system of fundamental principles that define values and determine duties and obligation.

).  While morals are traits learned from the moral community. Ethics can't define morals because morals come from outside a person from the teaching of others. Morals can sometimes define ethics they dont have to.

[Morik]

Hey how about more synonyms!!!
peronal and individual

Ethics is a personal code that define values
morals are the values held by an individual
as well as the community - but for the point lets just say, ethics defines personal morals - okay. screw the community.


ooh by the way saint, you hd to use that mighty word again.
and by the way again - I never said anyone couldn't state something.

I have an if

what if god was real, and what if you were never informed  in anyway upon his being, then what? just curious.

[Master Xaio]

Here's a theoretical situation for you:

Where two groups are pointlessly arguing a concept and ideas which have annoyed philosophers for centuries.  With no resolution in sight.

*innocent whistle*

[JP Dogberry]

Ok, a lot of people here need to read Paul Graham's article "What you Can't Say" since it says it better than I can:

http://www.paulgraham.com/say.html

In short, you can believe that morals and ethics come from God and are Black and White all you want, it's your opinion, and can be argued, but if that's what you believe, you can believe it. But apart from some universal morals, the vast majority of what is considered "morality" is a fashion of sorts, and changes in different societies and such, and ISN'T Black and White.

[Morik]

nicely put
good article

You see, its one of my favorite topics though.

[The Holy Saint, Grand High Poobah, Master of Monkeys, Ehlers]

actually, you CAN state your opinion as fact, and there's nothing wrong with it. It's an obvious opinion, just deal with it. There's nothing offensive about it unless you're insistant upon taking offense. Please stop telling people what they can or cannot do. You are neither moderator, nor right on this subject.

and uhm.. using a word does not making it mighty. I use it purely as a semantic to get you to realize that your attack on the structure of an argument was misdirected and doomed to failure.

also, synonyms are not the same. Because words are synonyms do not mean their denotation or connotation are exact.

I'm not sure what that article is supposed to convince me of. I am unconvinced that because individual ethics and a society's opinions change that the moral is anything other than absolute. At least by the "evidence" that has heretofore been presented.

[Morik]

Your right. You CAN state an opinion as fact - though that doesnt make it a fact - but since it is an opinion it then is a fact to you. and you can do it.

if to me is a mighty word - my opinion.
synonyms are not the same - but are related

[Morik]

oh just something on synonyms for clarification

synonym - # A word having the same or nearly the same meaning as another word or other words in a language.
# A word or an expression that serves as a figurative or symbolic substitute for another.

personal and individual come up as synonyms.

[GorgonlaVacaTremendo]

SE - I'm curious.  How can something be absolute if it changes with the seasons?  That article is saying that poeples' ethical codes change, and (even according to Jeffe's definition) that means morals change.  The group, as a whole, sees things as right and wrong differently during different times.  Therefor, they can't be black and white, simply because if they were they would not change.  It's just like if one fashion was right, it would stay in style forever.

Example - it used to be thought rightous to torture a criminal until death.

The 'fact' that morals are dictated by a group seems only partially correct to me.  Yes, morals are taught to most people by other people, who learned it from somebody else.  Yes, people generally mold their moral system to the rest of the people around them, so their morals are similar or even identical.  No, you don't have to do that.  My morals, which are what defines my ethical code, do not have to be your morals, or the group's morals, or anybody's morals but my own.

So, no, morals don't have to be a group project.  Your own experiences, religions, surroundings and thought processes.  And, back to the actual point of this whole discussion, as long as you can rationally justify your morals, nobody should have the right to tell you that you are wrong.  Same idea as religion or any other matter of belief.

[Morik]

shhh its the other way around (by those pevious definitions) Ethical code defines morals - yeah..

[GorgonlaVacaTremendo]

Not by the definition I was given, which is

Ethics: a set of moral principles or values

[Morik]

That must mean that they are -gasp- interrelated!

[GorgonlaVacaTremendo]

I already said that.  I think everybody talking about the subject already ackknowledged that, too.  Whether or not they are related enough to be used interchangably is what Jeffe was sparking up.

[Archon]

SE, by that logic, there is nothing wrong with what I said. I am stating my opinion, and even if I am stating it as fact, it is alright to do so. There is nothing to get offended about unless you choose to take offense. Please stop telling me what to do. In short, anything you told me can be used against your post as well, so your statement and mine should either both be ignored, or both be acknowledged in which case they are still voided. I am sorry if this post seems sarcastic, but I am being absolutely serious, and as polite about it as I can.

[GorgonlaVacaTremendo]

There is no god.  Your relgion is a waste of your time and you are very gullible to even concider following it without the slightest bit of proof that it is correct in any way.  None of you are worth any respect and should all be shot in the face at least a dozen times.

Now, I have stated what could be somebody's opinion as a fact (this is not necissarily my opinion). I garuntee that many people on the board were offended when they read that.  Sure, stating your opinion as it were a fact strengthens your argument, and it shows that you have faith in it - it shows that it is fact to you.  But always going around not acknowledging that things are your opinions, and saying they are facts, is ridiculous and offensive.  

There are places and times, and touchy subjects that require a civil touch; mainly, they require that you acknowledge that other people believe other things and neither of you can prove you are any more correct than the other person.  Whether or not you think it is a fact, you need to have some proof to back it up before you tell me I am wrong, you are right, or anything that could be concidered such.  Just because you don't think your being offensive by telling me that I will believe what you believe one day doesn't mean you aren't.