Go Back   Freethought Forum > The Marketplace > Philosophy

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 10-18-2008, 06:24 PM
coberst coberst is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: DXXXVII
Default Sunday-School Morality

Sunday-School Morality

Where, in American culture, is the domain of knowledge that we would identify as morality studied and taught?

I suspect that if we do not quickly develop a science of morality that will make it possible for us to live together on this planet in a more harmonious manner our technology will help us to destroy the species and perhaps the planet soon.

It seems to me that we have given the subject matter of morality primarily over to religion. It also seems to me that if we ask the question ‘why do humans treat one another so terribly?’ we will find the answer in this moral aspect of human culture.

The ‘man of maxims’ “is the popular representative of the minds that are guided in their moral judgment solely by general rules, thinking that these will lead them to justice by a ready-made patent method, without the trouble of exerting patience, discrimination, impartiality—without any care to assure themselves whether they have the insight that comes from a hardly-earned estimate of temptation, or from a life vivid and intense enough to have created a wide fellow-feeling with all that is human.” George Eliot The Mill on the Floss

We can no longer leave this important matter in the hands of the Sunday-school. Morality must become a top priority for scientific study.
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 10-18-2008, 06:37 PM
Alex's Avatar
Alex Alex is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: CCCLXXXIII
Default Re: Sunday-School Morality

Quote:
Originally Posted by coberst View Post
Where, in American culture, is the domain of knowledge that we would identify as morality studied and taught?

We can no longer leave this important matter in the hands of the Sunday-school. Morality must become a top priority for scientific study.
Have you never heard of scientific moralism which arises from the search for a single point of view that will ultimately harmonize human relations?
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 10-18-2008, 11:38 PM
Doctor X Doctor X is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: XMVCCCIII
Default Re: Sunday-School Morality

Second.

--J.D.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 10-18-2008, 11:38 PM
Doctor X Doctor X is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: XMVCCCIII
Default Re: Sunday-School Morality

Second.

--J.D.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 10-18-2008, 11:42 PM
Doctor X Doctor X is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: XMVCCCIII
Default Re: Sunday-School Morality



--J.D.
Reply With Quote
Thanks, from:
Goliath (10-19-2008)
  #6  
Old 10-19-2008, 12:17 PM
coberst coberst is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: DXXXVII
Default Re: Sunday-School Morality

Quote:
Originally Posted by Alex View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by coberst View Post
Where, in American culture, is the domain of knowledge that we would identify as morality studied and taught?

We can no longer leave this important matter in the hands of the Sunday-school. Morality must become a top priority for scientific study.
Have you never heard of scientific moralism which arises from the search for a single point of view that will ultimately harmonize human relations?
No. Tell us about it.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 10-19-2008, 01:46 PM
Alex's Avatar
Alex Alex is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: CCCLXXXIII
Default Re: Sunday-School Morality

Quote:
Originally Posted by coberst View Post
No. Tell us about it.
You'll find a discussion of Scientific Moralism here.
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 10-19-2008, 03:08 PM
naturalist.atheist naturalist.atheist is offline
Reality Adventurer
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: VMMCXXX
Images: 7
Default Re: Sunday-School Morality

Quote:
Originally Posted by Alex View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by coberst View Post
No. Tell us about it.
You'll find a discussion of Scientific Moralism here.
That is more akin to scientology than it is to science. A better link would be The Economics of Fair Play

For it to be science it would have to have actual study of human social behavior in a moral context not more philosophical bullshit for which supplies are well stocked.
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 10-19-2008, 05:03 PM
Alex's Avatar
Alex Alex is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: CCCLXXXIII
Default Re: Sunday-School Morality

Quote:
Originally Posted by naturalist.atheist View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alex View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by coberst View Post
No. Tell us about it.
You'll find a discussion of Scientific Moralism here.
That is more akin to scientology than it is to science. A better link would be The Economics of Fair Play

For it to be science it would have to have actual study of human social behavior in a moral context not more philosophical bullshit for which supplies are well stocked.
Before giving your usual snappy and crass opinion, have you bothered to read Minogue's book and understood why his discussion of scientific moralism fits into his exploration of modern liberalism?
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 10-19-2008, 05:15 PM
naturalist.atheist naturalist.atheist is offline
Reality Adventurer
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: VMMCXXX
Images: 7
Default Re: Sunday-School Morality

Quote:
Originally Posted by Alex View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by naturalist.atheist View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alex View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by coberst View Post
No. Tell us about it.
You'll find a discussion of Scientific Moralism here.
That is more akin to scientology than it is to science. A better link would be The Economics of Fair Play

For it to be science it would have to have actual study of human social behavior in a moral context not more philosophical bullshit for which supplies are well stocked.
Before giving your usual snappy and crass opinion, have you bothered to read Minogue's book and understood why his discussion of scientific moralism fits into his exploration of modern liberalism?
So how did he do this? Philosophical analysis?
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 10-21-2008, 02:57 PM
Alex's Avatar
Alex Alex is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: CCCLXXXIII
Default Re: Sunday-School Morality

Quote:
Originally Posted by naturalist.atheist View Post

So how did he do this? Philosophical analysis?
In The Liberal Mind, Kenneth Minogue sets himself the task of anatomizing secular liberalism. Among the assumptions that secular liberals make, according to Minogue, is that moral behaviour can be explained by scientific inquiry (physiology, biology, and psychology are the main sources of technical prescription). The label given to this particular theory is Scientific Moralism.

In other words, scientific moralism is the sum of understandings by which secular liberalism accounts for the foundation of morals: it rules out any "metaphysical" speculation about morality or attribution to a divine authority.

While Minogue sometimes uses philosophical analysis to criticize scientific moralism, it's only in the context of the entire book that his complex position on the relation between science and morality can be appreciated.

From what you've had to say on many occasions about the nature of moral imperatives, I would guess that scientific moralism describes a mind-set that is right up your alley.
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 10-21-2008, 06:11 PM
coberst coberst is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: DXXXVII
Default Re: Sunday-School Morality

Thus, aesthetics is “concerned with the perception of values”.

Self consciousness is the precursor of the possibility of worth. For the existence of ‘good’ in any form emotional consciousness is required. “Observation will not do, appreciation is required.”

From this we can assert an axiom that is important for all moral philosophy; and science of morality should it ever come to be. “There is no value apart from some appreciation of it.”


Spinoza informs us that we desire nothing because it is good but that it is good because we desire it. We can find value in that which is not instinctively good only because it is derivative of the instinctively appreciated. “The verbal and mechanical proposition, that passes for judgment of worth, is the great cloak of ineptitude in these matters…Verbal judgments are often instruments of thought but it is not by them that worth can ultimately be determined.”

Quotes from “The Sense of Beauty” by George Santayana
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 10-22-2008, 12:32 AM
naturalist.atheist naturalist.atheist is offline
Reality Adventurer
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: VMMCXXX
Images: 7
Default Re: Sunday-School Morality

Quote:
Originally Posted by Alex View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by naturalist.atheist View Post

So how did he do this? Philosophical analysis?
In The Liberal Mind, Kenneth Minogue sets himself the task of anatomizing secular liberalism. Among the assumptions that secular liberals make, according to Minogue, is that moral behaviour can be explained by scientific inquiry (physiology, biology, and psychology are the main sources of technical prescription). The label given to this particular theory is Scientific Moralism.
More philosophical bullshit, since all sorts of people think that social behavior including morals can be explained all naturally.

Quote:
In other words, scientific moralism is the sum of understandings by which secular liberalism accounts for the foundation of morals: it rules out any "metaphysical" speculation about morality or attribution to a divine authority.
Not exactly. There is a class of supernaturalist that claims that god made the universe so it would make itself. A handy catchall for anything that may be discovered by science as ultimately from god no matter what it is.

Quote:
While Minogue sometimes uses philosophical analysis to criticize scientific moralism, it's only in the context of the entire book that his complex position on the relation between science and morality can be appreciated.
I suspect that it is best appreciated by knee jerk conservatives who think that knee jerk liberals are jerky.

Quote:
From what you've had to say on many occasions about the nature of moral imperatives, I would guess that scientific moralism describes a mind-set that is right up your alley.
I suspect not. Since nature has no political agenda, unless of course you are a supernaturalist then nature is all about god's favorite critter, Christians.
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 10-22-2008, 09:05 AM
Alex's Avatar
Alex Alex is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: CCCLXXXIII
Default Re: Sunday-School Morality

Quote:
Originally Posted by naturalist.atheist View Post

More philosophical bullshit, since all sorts of people think that social behavior including morals can be explained all naturally.

There is a class of supernaturalist that claims that god made the universe so it would make itself. A handy catchall for anything that may be discovered by science as ultimately from god no matter what it is.

I suspect that it is best appreciated by knee jerk conservatives who think that knee jerk liberals are jerky.
Since the book is concerned with the analysis of a political persuasion, none of your facile observations has any relevance.

Minogue has nothing whatever to say about supernaturalist claims. He doesn't characterize any political outlook in "knee jerk" terms. He does not say that scientific moralism is restricted to a singular political point of view. His argument that a "naturalist" explanation for the foundation of morals is more usually associated with liberal thinking than with the conservative disposition is sound. He explains why this is generally the case. (There aren't many atheists on what is popularly known as "the far right").

Your juvenile opinion about the value of philosophical inquiry is too preposterous and warrants no further discussion.

Last edited by Alex; 10-22-2008 at 09:09 AM. Reason: word missing
Reply With Quote
Thanks, from:
Iacchus (10-22-2008)
  #15  
Old 10-22-2008, 02:44 PM
naturalist.atheist naturalist.atheist is offline
Reality Adventurer
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: VMMCXXX
Images: 7
Default Re: Sunday-School Morality

Quote:
Originally Posted by Alex View Post
Since the book is concerned with the analysis of a political persuasion, none of your facile observations has any relevance.
My bad. I thought philosophy was as ridiculous as you could get, I didn't stop to consider that you could make it political philosophy.

Quote:
Minogue has nothing whatever to say about supernaturalist claims. He doesn't characterize any political outlook in "knee jerk" terms. He does not say that scientific moralism is restricted to a singular political point of view. His argument that a "naturalist" explanation for the foundation of morals is more usually associated with liberal thinking than with the conservative disposition is sound. He explains why this is generally the case. (There aren't many atheists on what is popularly known as "the far right").
Of course you are right. How could one think that knee jerk conservatives are fond of characterizing "liberals" in general terms. Everyone knows "liberals" are all alike. (Everyone that watches Fox News of course.)

Quote:
Your juvenile opinion about the value of philosophical inquiry is too preposterous and warrants no further discussion.
I think you are mixed up here. When I was a juvenile I thought well enough of philosophy to read it. However I now know better.
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 10-22-2008, 07:22 PM
1Samuel8's Avatar
1Samuel8 1Samuel8 is offline
A3 - authentic anarchist asshole
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: MCXIX
Default Re: Sunday-School Morality

Quote:
Originally Posted by Alex View Post
You'll find a discussion of Scientific Moralism here.
Careful, now. Libtards can get tarred, feathered and chased out of town for referencing shit like that around these parts.
__________________
Fight cyber with cyber and initiate no aggression.
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 10-22-2008, 11:19 PM
davidm's Avatar
davidm davidm is offline
Spiffiest wanger
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: MXCXIV
Blog Entries: 3
Default Re: Sunday-School Morality

Quote:
Originally Posted by Alex View Post
Your juvenile opinion about the value of philosophical inquiry is too preposterous and warrants no further discussion.
Bear in mind that it's always amusing to watch naturalist.atheist make an ass of himself. On that ground alone -- the amusement value -- it's always nice to tease out his juvenile opinion about the value of philosphical inquiry, preposterous though it is. Its very preposterousness is what makes his comments so worthy of laughing at, and laughter is good medicine. :laugh:
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 10-23-2008, 02:15 AM
Doctor X Doctor X is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: XMVCCCIII
Default Re: Sunday-School Morality

Meh . . . he is boring.

--J.D.
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 10-23-2008, 03:06 AM
Kael's Avatar
Kael Kael is offline
the internet says I'm right
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Western U.S.
Gender: Male
Posts: VMCDXLV
Blog Entries: 11
Images: 23
Default Re: Sunday-School Morality

The thing I don't get is, if he hates, despises, and loathes (yes, all three at once) philosophy as much as he says... Why the hell is he always hanging around the philosophy forum? What does he think people talk about here?
__________________
For Science!
Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum videtur.
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 10-23-2008, 09:02 AM
Doctor X Doctor X is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: XMVCCCIII
Default Re: Sunday-School Morality

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kael View Post
Why the hell is he always hanging around the philosophy forum?
  • 1. Required to Remain 1,000 Feet from Any YMCA, School, or Boy's Club?
    2. Mummy Would Force Him to Get a Job Else?
    3. They Stopped Making Star Trek Shows?
    4. Doth Protest Too Much, Methinks?

Quote:
What does he think people talk about here?
NBLs.







Silly.

--J.D.
Reply With Quote
  #21  
Old 10-23-2008, 01:33 PM
naturalist.atheist naturalist.atheist is offline
Reality Adventurer
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: VMMCXXX
Images: 7
Default Re: Sunday-School Morality

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kael View Post
The thing I don't get is, if he hates, despises, and loathes (yes, all three at once) philosophy as much as he says... Why the hell is he always hanging around the philosophy forum? What does he think people talk about here?
If you want to present another way of looking at something you do not avoid the people who think there is no such thing.
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 10-23-2008, 05:38 PM
Kael's Avatar
Kael Kael is offline
the internet says I'm right
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Western U.S.
Gender: Male
Posts: VMCDXLV
Blog Entries: 11
Images: 23
Default Re: Sunday-School Morality

Quote:
Originally Posted by naturalist.atheist
If you want to present another way of looking at something you do not avoid the people who think there is no such thing.
But that's just what I was saying earlier about philosophy. That's what it is, the practice of finding new ways to look at things. I mean, you get a wide variety of viewpoints among both historical philosophers and modern ones. That's because that what the whole point of philosophy is, to take what is currently known and speculate about what it might mean. I don't know anyone who actually studies philosophy that doesn't aknowledge other ways of looking at things. You'd have to be pretty dense to discuss philosophy and claim that your way is The Only Way, since multiple viewpoints are not only inevitable, but intrinsic to the very idea of philosophy.

Both naturalism and aetheism, for example, are philosophies, taking what we currently know and postulating that there is no such thing as the supernatural and there is no such thing as god in any form, respectively. They are certainly very rational philosophies, which not all are, but they remain philosophies. BTW, rationalism itself is also a philosophy.
__________________
For Science!
Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum videtur.
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 10-23-2008, 06:12 PM
naturalist.atheist naturalist.atheist is offline
Reality Adventurer
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: VMMCXXX
Images: 7
Default Re: Sunday-School Morality

Quote:
Originally Posted by davidm View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alex View Post
Your juvenile opinion about the value of philosophical inquiry is too preposterous and warrants no further discussion.
Bear in mind that it's always amusing to watch naturalist.atheist make an ass of himself. On that ground alone -- the amusement value -- it's always nice to tease out his juvenile opinion about the value of philosphical inquiry, preposterous though it is. Its very preposterousness is what makes his comments so worthy of laughing at, and laughter is good medicine. :laugh:
Fly the flag, its all you got.
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 10-23-2008, 06:24 PM
naturalist.atheist naturalist.atheist is offline
Reality Adventurer
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: VMMCXXX
Images: 7
Default Re: Sunday-School Morality

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kael View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by naturalist.atheist
If you want to present another way of looking at something you do not avoid the people who think there is no such thing.
But that's just what I was saying earlier about philosophy. That's what it is, the practice of finding new ways to look at things. I mean, you get a wide variety of viewpoints among both historical philosophers and modern ones. That's because that what the whole point of philosophy is, to take what is currently known and speculate about what it might mean. I don't know anyone who actually studies philosophy that doesn't aknowledge other ways of looking at things. You'd have to be pretty dense to discuss philosophy and claim that your way is The Only Way, since multiple viewpoints are not only inevitable, but intrinsic to the very idea of philosophy.
I have said it before and I'll say it again. If it were understood by all those that advocate philosophy for its own sake that is was only some kind of an attempt to survey the possible view points then you would have a point.

But it is seldom if ever used that way. And I suspect that is because the implicit intent of philosophy has nothing to do with such a program. In fact most advocates of philosophy can't even agree on what it actually is. But even that would not be so bad if philosophy didn't suffer from one fatal flaw. And that would be that there is no criterion of preference posited by philosophy as a human endeavor for preferring one philosophy over another other than personal preference. And that is fine but there is no point in arguing a personal preference even though that seems to be the most common use of so-called philosophy.

Quote:
Both naturalism and aetheism, for example, are philosophies, taking what we currently know and postulating that there is no such thing as the supernatural and there is no such thing as god in any form, respectively. They are certainly very rational philosophies, which not all are, but they remain philosophies. BTW, rationalism itself is also a philosophy.
Of course they are. Because any philosopher will tell you that everything is philosophy. But call it what you like, I didn't use philosophy to figure out that I am best described as a naturalist.atheist.
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 10-23-2008, 08:37 PM
1Samuel8's Avatar
1Samuel8 1Samuel8 is offline
A3 - authentic anarchist asshole
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: MCXIX
Default Re: Sunday-School Morality

Quote:
Originally Posted by naturalist.atheist View Post
But call it what you like, I didn't use philosophy to figure out that I am best described as a naturalist.atheist.
So? What does that have to do with Sunday-School Morality anyway?
Stop cluttering Coberst's otherwise interesting thread.
__________________
Fight cyber with cyber and initiate no aggression.
Reply With Quote
Reply

  Freethought Forum > The Marketplace > Philosophy


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

 

All times are GMT +1. The time now is 11:25 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Page generated in 0.96451 seconds with 13 queries