Originally posted by Kuciwalker
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
I have officially changed my position on the liberal arts in universities
Collapse
X
-
"The issue is there are still many people out there that use religion as a crutch for bigotry and hate. Like Ben."
Ben Kenobi: "That means I'm doing something right. "
-
Originally posted by Asher View PostIt's almost like you just realized there is no absolute morality.
I'm so pleased you finally understand the simple concept I've been arguing all night. Morality is a question that can only be answered by people, which reflects their upbringing, religion, philosophy, and general levels of empathy. That you like to use economics to define morality is your own philosophy -- one I find to be disturbing.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Elok View PostDid their liberal arts degrees actually help them to obtain their jobs, and if so, were said jobs outside of academia?
At the very least, if you are not adverse to travel, you could make money going overseas to teach English, given that your command of the language is better than most peoples, and knowing English well is certainly a marketable skill.If you don't like reality, change it! me
"Oh no! I am bested!" Drake
"it is dangerous to be right when the government is wrong" Voltaire
"Patriotism is a pernecious, psychopathic form of idiocy" George Bernard Shaw
Comment
-
Originally posted by Kuciwalker View PostKolmogorov did tons of important work in statistics, and Albie was a finance major. I've run into his stuff on actuarial exams. It was a decent bet at him having run into it.12-17-10 Mohamed Bouazizi NEVER FORGET
Stadtluft Macht Frei
Killing it is the new killing it
Ultima Ratio Regum
Comment
-
Originally posted by Al B. Sure! View PostThere's just no way you can objectively and categorically make ethical determinations especially as there are no objective value judgments. Who is to say that Kuci's economic welfare is any more an appropriate goal and basis for morality than Nietzsche's Will to Power?If you don't like reality, change it! me
"Oh no! I am bested!" Drake
"it is dangerous to be right when the government is wrong" Voltaire
"Patriotism is a pernecious, psychopathic form of idiocy" George Bernard Shaw
Comment
-
Originally posted by Kuciwalker View PostConcisely: no, it's not arbitary. If you approach ethics scientifically as the question of finding the smallest set of axioms that best explains our moral sentiments (with the tradeoff between simplicity and accuracy being handled in the usual Kolmogorov sense) then you should conclude that rule consequentialism (and, particularly, maximizing the happiness of a certain group of people) thoroughly explains almost all of our sentiments.If you don't like reality, change it! me
"Oh no! I am bested!" Drake
"it is dangerous to be right when the government is wrong" Voltaire
"Patriotism is a pernecious, psychopathic form of idiocy" George Bernard Shaw
Comment
-
Why wouldn't an empirical examination of our moral senses be best carried out not through mathematical modelling but instead by observation of human beings and our evolutionary kin, since our moral senses are not derived logically, but emotionally?
1) In practice, it is.
2) Our emotions are the object of study; more precisely, our moral sentiments. We're trying to find the simplest set of rules that explains them best. Hell, look at the practice of conducting thought experiments: these are genuine experiments! We hypothesize a rule determining "what we ought to do", then come up with a situation and ask if that rule produces something that agrees with our sentiments or disagrees with them. If a rule says we should do something that we feel strongly is wrong, then that is evidence against the rule.
Comment
-
And yet the concept of ends justifying the means bothers a lot of people in many cases."Flutie was better than Kelly, Elway, Esiason and Cunningham." - Ben Kenobi
"I have nothing against Wilson, but he's nowhere near the same calibre of QB as Flutie. Flutie threw for 5k+ yards in the CFL." -Ben Kenobi
Comment
-
Solely because they're retards.12-17-10 Mohamed Bouazizi NEVER FORGET
Stadtluft Macht Frei
Killing it is the new killing it
Ultima Ratio Regum
Comment
-
Originally posted by Kuciwalker View PostWhy wouldn't an empirical examination of our moral senses be best carried out not through mathematical modelling but instead by observation of human beings and our evolutionary kin, since our moral senses are not derived logically, but emotionally?
1) In practice, it is.
2) Our emotions are the object of study; more precisely, our moral sentiments. We're trying to find the simplest set of rules that explains them best. Hell, look at the practice of conducting thought experiments: these are genuine experiments! We hypothesize a rule determining "what we ought to do", then come up with a situation and ask if that rule produces something that agrees with our sentiments or disagrees with them. If a rule says we should do something that we feel strongly is wrong, then that is evidence against the rule.If you don't like reality, change it! me
"Oh no! I am bested!" Drake
"it is dangerous to be right when the government is wrong" Voltaire
"Patriotism is a pernecious, psychopathic form of idiocy" George Bernard Shaw
Comment
-
Originally posted by KrazyHorse View PostSolely because they're retards.If you don't like reality, change it! me
"Oh no! I am bested!" Drake
"it is dangerous to be right when the government is wrong" Voltaire
"Patriotism is a pernecious, psychopathic form of idiocy" George Bernard Shaw
Comment
-
Because when it comes to making decisions about their own lives average people manage to do surprisingly well, while the far more intelligent people in government manage to make surprisingly bad decisions about other people's lives.12-17-10 Mohamed Bouazizi NEVER FORGET
Stadtluft Macht Frei
Killing it is the new killing it
Ultima Ratio Regum
Comment
-
far more intelligent people in government
You have to be remarkably stupid to go into the government."The issue is there are still many people out there that use religion as a crutch for bigotry and hate. Like Ben."
Ben Kenobi: "That means I'm doing something right. "
Comment
-
By any objective standard they're smarter than the people they govern.12-17-10 Mohamed Bouazizi NEVER FORGET
Stadtluft Macht Frei
Killing it is the new killing it
Ultima Ratio Regum
Comment
-
Originally posted by KrazyHorse View PostBecause when it comes to making decisions about their own lives average people manage to do surprisingly well, while the far more intelligent people in government manage to make surprisingly bad decisions about other people's lives.
I would posit that the more ability individuals have, the more their decisions about their own lives create issues for other people's lives, forcing the public sphere to play referee. People in "nanny states" are better off than people in less governed places of the world.If you don't like reality, change it! me
"Oh no! I am bested!" Drake
"it is dangerous to be right when the government is wrong" Voltaire
"Patriotism is a pernecious, psychopathic form of idiocy" George Bernard Shaw
Comment
Comment