Ethics

You both like philosophy.

Stranger: so philosophy

You: yes

Stranger: im going to be upfront, im not formally educated in philosphy and i am unfamilar with much of the field

Stranger: with that being said

Stranger: what philosophical topic has caught your interest as of late?

You: do you like ethics, epistemology, metaphysics? (three main branches of philo)

You: poverty philosophy

Stranger: epistemology is interesting

Stranger: though i have my own ideas of what can be known and how

Stranger: and im afraid it may be over simplified

Stranger: ethics

Stranger: on the other hand

Stranger: well

Stranger: what is ethics?

Stranger: if ethics is synonymous with morality

Stranger: which i doubt it is

Stranger: then i would say there is no point to discussing morality/ethics because there is no absolute morality

Stranger: there is only a goal

Stranger: and methods used to reach that goal

Stranger: sorry for my word vomit

Stranger: but what do you think?

You: well, more of just trying to understand

You: of course there's a point to discuss

You: even when there's not an absolute answer

You: it's like the whole point of philosophy itself

Stranger: of course, but i dont think anything is inherently right or wrong, it is only successful or unsuccessful in achieving a goal

You: as a tangent, you may find something interesting here:

You: http://philosophy.stackexchange.com/users/4506/adam-uraynar?tab=favorites

Stranger: k searching it up now

You: killing someone is wrong

Stranger: why?

You: why do you get to choose if they die?

You: you don't

Stranger: but why is that inherently wrong?

Stranger: other than an emotional feeling

You: because it's not you who get's to do that, you do not have the right to

Stranger: who decided wether or not i have that right?

You: I could also bring up the categorical imperative here, but I won't

You: the society you choose to be a part of

Stranger: yes, it is wrong because someone says it is wrong

You: not neccissarily

Stranger: or at least that is how it appears on the surface

You: you're committing a fallacy here

You: slippery slope

Stranger: how so?

You: or...

You: trying to think of the word

Stranger: strawman?

You: no, but it's similar to slippery slope

Stranger: show me where you think im wrong

Stranger: im curious

You: it's kind of like exaggerating something to the point it's not

You: I'd have to look at a list of fallacies, but I don't care to make that much effort

Stranger: but what did i exaggerate?

You: kind of...

You: similarity

Stranger: all i said is that killing is not inherently wrong, it is only wrong according to society

You: well, it'd only be you without society

You: well, let me say this: mutual understanding (in place of "someone says it's wrong")

Stranger: so if the majority of a society says something is morally acceptable or not, does that make it so/

Stranger: ?

You: no

Stranger: so how do you arrive at the idea that killing is inherently wrong?

You: you're using power to end someone who for you to decide to end is not right

Stranger: why not?

Stranger: you are just restating the statement

You: forcing power over someone

Stranger: but why is that wrong?

You: they don't want it

Stranger: and why should i care what they want?

You: it's not a matter if you should care, but I guess I will have to argue that point

You: so, we're back to "mutual understanding"

You: can I get off that easily?

Stranger: well, but then that shows my original point

You: ya know, you don't shit on my car, I don't shit on yours

Stranger: that things are only right or wrong in relation to a goal

Stranger: but, they are not inherently wrong

You: what goal does killing someone have?

Stranger: no, not killing someone has a goal

Stranger: which is

Stranger: to have society which can function

Stranger: and you will benefit from

Stranger: you said it yourself

Stranger: the goal

Stranger: is mutual understanding

You: hey, I don't have a lot of time. want to dialogue about robin hood ethics?

Stranger: sure

Stranger: im not familiar

Stranger: but

Stranger: id be glad to talk about it

You: pretty much what it sounds like

Stranger: steal form rich give to poor kinda hitng?

You: yep

Stranger: see, but my view of ethics is shaped by our previous convorsation

Stranger: its very hard to explain

Stranger: but, what it comes down to is that I am selfish

Stranger: so are you

Stranger: you dont do anything that doesnt benefit you

Stranger: honestly i havent thought about ethics much past that because it all because trivial

Stranger: if it serves my interests

Stranger: then i will consider it ethical

Stranger: otherwise i will consider it otherwise

You: is this similar to some kind of philosophical thought or school?

Stranger: hmmm, im not sure

Stranger: im sure someone else put a name to it

Stranger: at some point in history

Stranger: but this is just my thoughts

You: I understand

You: pdx.edu/sysc/sites/www.pdx.edu.sysc/files/altruism_npc_0.pdf

Stranger: ahh yes

Stranger: i dont think alrtuism exists

You: exactly why there are levels of altruism

Stranger: ooh i see

You: with the first not being an actual form

Stranger: i just read that

You: of altruism

Stranger: so yeah, i think people do things that will benefit others more than it does themselves

Stranger: but they will ALWAYS only do things if the benefits to themself outweigh the cost to themself

You: I really want to read more into this, more about how we don't do it from self interest (because it seems that when we think about it, and philosophise, that's where we go wrong...or what I mean is, we don't all what's on the table)

Stranger: i think it is impossible to do things NOT out of self interest

Stranger: And i just had a thought

Stranger: perhaps

You: didn't you see the chart on page 2?

Stranger: the lack of pure altruism is related to how we define the self

Stranger: ill take a look

Stranger: one sec

Stranger: okay yeah i see it

You: but it seems to have a bias towards Buddhism ("Being Altruism")

Stranger: hmmmm

Stranger: Perhaps it is arrogant of me, but i really feel like the chart is an overcomplication of things

Stranger: for me

Stranger: the most important aspects are the binary ones

Stranger: the yes/no or black/white

Stranger: so when i think "is it possible to be altruistic?"

You: what?!

Stranger: i come to the conclusion that it is impossible to be truely altruistic

Stranger: then

You: it seems like you're saying it's best to do black and white thinking

Stranger: well, its actually kind of grey

Stranger: ahah

Stranger: but

You: I sort of get what you mean

Stranger: i mean to really dig deep into the structure of reality and the self, you have to think in terms of yes or no

Stranger: however

Stranger: there are many different colors of grey within those yes's and no's

Stranger: idk

Stranger: it is just something that i have noticed to be helpful when seeking knowledge

Stranger: and truth about anything

Stranger: because this way i can lay out a rudimentary structure

Stranger: and then once tht structure is laid, then i can worry about details

You: the truth is never pure and rarely simple --Wilde

Stranger: you know what i mean? like do the rough work first and then tune it into shape

Stranger: like if i were to sculpt a statue, i would first cut out the block that i want to work with

Stranger: so as to not overcomplicate things

Stranger: and then

Stranger: from that block

Stranger: i would chisel out the statue

You: yes, I suppose I understand better

Stranger: so the chart of altruism

Stranger: i see that as part of the rock that is outside the block that i am working with

Stranger: i can cut that out to really focus in on what matters

Stranger: anyway

Stranger: my brain hurts

Stranger: so ill let you talk to someone else now haha

Stranger: c ya later!

Christian who seeks truth - Crux of practicing philosophy

You: so why'd you put truth?

Stranger: Christian :)

You: what does that have to do with truth?

You: like the true word of God?

Stranger: I wouldn't be that stringent on that definition but the effective message yes

You: ah

Stranger: For example, the truth behind the physical realm we currently experience and perceive on a day-to-day basis

Stranger: I think the Bible has an accurate view on it

You: ok, I kind of try to avoid talking about religion

You: what are your other interests? most of mine are never matched

Stranger: fair enough, how about basic physics?

You: what about?

You: know anything interesting off the top of your head?

Stranger: how about the laws of physics?

Stranger: know anything about them?

You: 1st law, 2nd....they're vague

You: in my head

You: I mean Newton's

Stranger: how about the conservation of mass and energy?

Stranger: Einstein?

You: I know about them, but just the surface definition

You: I'm taking Physics I next semester (I'm kind of behind)

Stranger: No worries :)

You: electrical engineering major so I need to take all the physics up to modern

Stranger: nice, any goals behind that?

You: don't know what you mean

You: this made me laugh: http://joelvelasco.net/teaching/120/cartwright-How_the_Laws_of_Physics_Lie.pdf

Stranger: I meant dream/goal/vision-wiser

Stranger: wise*

You: ohhh

You: make a lot of money to give away, and develop the skill to know how to tinker with devices

Stranger: Why give it away?

You: I don't want to spend it on my self

You: Earning to Give

You: peter singer stuff

You: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Earning_to_give

Stranger: Sorry, not directly familiar

Stranger: hmm

You: wikipedia explains

You: tithing basically

You: & peter singer is a poverty philosopher

Stranger: Ah, very noble

You: well, it hasn't happened yet

Stranger: True; I myself am building my own business with people who are teaching me to duplicate their own results in order to achieve dreams and ambitions of my own (most of which are ministry oriented)

You: duplicate what?

Stranger: Their income mostly

Stranger: but also their quality of life and relationships with family, spouse, and children

Stranger: The are currently earning between 60 and 120k / year part time and are effectively semi-retired

You: wow

Stranger: yea, it's pretty intense; their mentors are actually earning about triple and are currently retired and do a lot of charity work

Stranger: The one guy is an ex-NHL player and his wife was a nurse

You: what kind of charity work?

Stranger: The nurse is involved in work overseas trying stop the slave trade, specifically the sex-trade of young girls if I recall

Stranger: I'm not that up-to-date on them to be honest

Stranger: I'm not sure what the NHL-guy is doing; he may just be doing some training camp thing for kids and hockey

Stranger: I'm not a big hockey guy so I'm not really interested :P\

You: ok

Stranger: Anyway, my dream is to save the world (naive as that may sound)

Stranger: I've had a pretty rough past and managed to escape some crazy things (including death) so I just want to give back

You: have you read philosophy before?

Stranger: some, Aristotle, plato, etc.

Stranger: I started with psychology since that's where I wound up (mental hospital)

Stranger: then philosophy, then buddhist philosophy, and finally Christian apologetics vs Buddhist theology

You: do you think altruism is possible?

Stranger: well I think it is more than possible; but on it's own without a foundation in WHY to be altruistic, it is little more than a subjectively nice thing to do

You: www.pdx.edu/sysc/sites/www.pdx.edu.sysc/files/altruism_npc_0.pdf#page=2

You: the chart at the bottom of the page gives an idea

You: it's bias towards Buddhism though it seems ("Being")

Stranger: well, from my skimming, I can agree with the principle, but when you use a statement such as "universal ethics calls for ... altruism," what do you mean by that?

Stranger: Universal as in naturally occurring, or universal as in probable evolutionary path, or universal as in cemented law?

You: I guess, i haven't read it for a while

Stranger: I also have a slight qualm with evolutionary theory so, lol

Stranger: for example, when evolutionists bring up the fact that we have 98% DNA commonality with lower primates

Stranger: We also have 50% commonality in DNA with a banana; does that make me part fruit?

You: I'm not a biologist...but if a million monkeys banged a million monkeys eventually they would produce a Shakespeare

Stranger: Well, no offense, but that would just mean a probability of another million monkey's in my mind

You: just a joke I heard

Stranger: Hehe, nice

You: ya know, monkeys typewriting to infinity

Stranger: Oh yes, I remember that one

You: twas a tasteful spin

Stranger: But that doesn't mean it would have the expression of a human mind's creative force

Stranger: it would be as amazing as rewriting a phone book by accident

Stranger: and that's really my contention here

Stranger: are we just accidents waiting to be accidental whatever the heck we become

Stranger: or are we a guided, created thing, made for a purpose?

NRS 100 - People are really much more interested in human nature than Mother Nature

http://logs.omegle.com/6c6a996

You both like books.

You: Hello

Stranger: hi

You: pair up; work at a job; raise or hope to raise a family; try to do good; live an enjoyable life; die.

Stranger: that's your plan?

You: that's my perspective on almost everyone else

Stranger: Well, if it works for people, then it's fine by me.

You: Do you know of sisyphus?

Stranger: That's ancient folklore, right?

Stranger: The guy who, as punishment for lying, was forced to push a boulder up a hill over and over, only to let it rill back down.

You: Correct

You: Is that what you want to do?

You: pair up and whatnot

Stranger: hmm..I think it would be nice to find a good mate.

Stranger: have some kids

Stranger: why not?

You: I don't want one of the major focal points of my life to be like that

Stranger: you don't have to if you don't want to.

You: I sort of know

You: Mainly, I don't get how everyone else is so willing for that to be their Purpose

Stranger: It is just something people do. There's nothing wrong with wanting to raise a family.

Stranger: But look at celebrities and actors and such. You don't remember them for their personal life

Stranger: If you want to be remembered for something else, then do that.

Stranger: just because a person has a family, does not mean they do not have other ambitions.

You: I agree, but it is a pretty big (and good) excuse not to have other ambitions

You: bigger ambitions--not talking about just hobbies here

Stranger: family means a lot to some people. you talk about it like it is imprisoning. people with families can still DO things.

Stranger: All the researchers at my college, they enjoy their job, but they are people, they have a family and friend life too.

You: Of course, CEOs can still /do/ things too

You: but they are limited in extent to what they can do

Stranger: that's fine. the sacrifices we make in life show us what our priorities are.

Stranger: some people sacrifice a little family time for work, vice versa

Stranger: they balance their goals and make it work for themself

Stranger: nothing at all to be ashamed or hung up over

Stranger: some people even incorporate their families and passions together.

Stranger: why do you think families take vacations so much?

Stranger: parents like to travel, so they share it with their kids.

Stranger: two eggs one stone

You: what is your passion(s)?

Stranger: so many to mention. I am passionate about learning and art and movies and reading and women's gymnastics. I LOVE adventure and trying new things. I love fashion and innovation.

Stranger: I am a huge environmental fan, I want this world to start going greener and stop defecating itself.

Stranger: movies is also a huge interest of mine

You: nicely said

You: What I'm trying to get at ties in with your interest in the envornment

You: when people have a family to support, when they come home from work, and after 'taking care of the kids'

You: they don't care about much else--bigger picture things

You: like carpooling to work

You: or the many other things

Stranger: I understand, but I think these people just lack education

Stranger: I did not realize how bad it was until i took a course this year

Stranger: it was basically an "oh shit" class.

You: ha

Stranger: It has to start big. screw "every bit helps" that's the excuse people have used since the dawn of time when they did not put in full effort

Stranger: put rations on gasoline. put rations on freshwater. make properties smaller

Stranger: this earth can't hold infinite people

You: I think it's more ingrained than what education can do; this modern lifestyle we're discussing.

Stranger: a lifestyle that we do. But I think if everyone took the course I took, we would be a lot different

Stranger: and a lot of it has to do with the ideas of conveniences and what is practical

Stranger: I think the goal is to MAKE going green convenient and practical

Stranger: think about it, if every car was energy efficient automatically, would that hurt anyone?

Stranger: people would be more green without realizing it

Stranger: on the other hand, maybe people need to WANT the change first.

You: true

You: What is the name of this course?

You: 'oh shit' course

Stranger: It was NRS 100. Intro to Natural Resources Science.

You: Your major?

Stranger: Double major. Biology, and Wildlife & Conservation Science. I am also working on a Film degree.

You: Interesting

You: I think something will have to shock people from this comfy lifestyle we've nurtured. Most everyone values their time, and taking a NRS really wouldn't cut it; most--even those in college--wouldn't care to sway too far from what they know.

Stranger: oh yeah, shock value. That's what I'm saying, some people just are so mentally distant from it.

Stranger: we have to teach them how.

You: Can you divulge a little on what you mean by teach?

Stranger: impart the needed knowledge

You: impart it on me then

You: because I'm not really (explicitly) for the environment anyhow

Stranger: I'm no expert on education

Stranger: but let me just put it this way.

Stranger: the earth has many resources, and it has a diverse ecosystem. mankind has royally fucked it up. Have you ever see the movie Mad Max? The Lorax? Wall-E? Those are science fiction stories about this kind of stuff. But I'm here to tell you right now, they are no longer fiction at all. At the rate we are going, it will literally look like that. we are going downhill fast. Experts say that if we do not clean up our act, we will likely be dead in 3 centuries.

Stranger: the population is expected to reach 100 billion in the next 100 years

Stranger: that;s more then 10x what we have now

Stranger: it's not matter of being green. it is a matter of survival.

Stranger: that;s my point

You: I read up a little on population. Just to be healthily skeptical for you, the sources said it's not an issue (in a nutshell).

You: And I partially agree

Stranger: it depends on who you ask, and what you look at

You: skycrapers

Stranger: I love skyscraper

You: I mean doesn't that kind of defeat your point?

Stranger: what point?

You: 'survival'

Stranger: how does skyscraper defy survival?

You: Are you talking about overpopulation?

Stranger: well, let me put it this way, I don';t think population would be an issue if we used out resources effectively. Right now we are not. You;ve seen Over the Hedge, right?

You: Yes, but I know (reality) just in general about our poor distribution (distribution also being the issue) of fresh water

You: after all I live off the coast of Lake Michigan

Stranger: what's the situation there?

Stranger: I think skyscrapers are good, because a huge issue is the amount of space populations take up. All these suburban properties being built, all this consumerism. If you ever get the chance too look up a before and after picture of human/wildlife land, you'd shit yourself.

Stranger: I sure did

Stranger: skyscrapers and cities are condensed spance

Stranger: space, so better for everyone.

You: Hummmm

You: I'm kind of tired

Stranger: ok, take care!