The Shocking savagery of Spiritual beliefs. Widespread Child sacrifice in Uganda.

ℒℴѵℯJay ELECTUA

Return of the Khryst
Supporter
Joined
May 1, 2012
Messages
77,451
Reputation
9,299
Daps
119,079
Reppin
ℒℴѵℯJay ELECTUA
I am more offended that you seem to think Islam had some kind of cooling affect. Though i could have mis interpreted your intent but the thread stater is an unapologetic white man worshiping asian racist so I may be directing my anger unnecessarily at you.

I never indirectly or directly said that other faiths came in and disolved this and such behaviour. Lets just move on..
 

Dafunkdoc_Unlimited

Theological Noncognitivist Since Birth
Joined
Jul 25, 2012
Messages
44,680
Reputation
8,104
Daps
121,566
Reppin
The Wrong Side of the Tracks
The Real said:
I don't think this is actually absolute rationality at work. It seems like a clearly normative judgment. The meaningless of existence doesn't logically lead to the conclusion that you should just do whatever you want. It doesn't really lead to any normative conclusion.

You're thinking of 'absolute rationality' in a philosophic framework rather than socio-economic. The only criteria that ultimately matter are the cost/benefit to the individual when deciding a particular course of action.
 

The Real

Anti-Ignorance
Joined
May 8, 2012
Messages
6,353
Reputation
725
Daps
10,724
Reppin
NYC
You're thinking of 'absolute rationality' in a philosophic framework rather than socio-economic. The only criteria that ultimately matter are the cost/benefit to the individual when deciding a particular course of action.

How is what you're suggesting not philosophic, and secondly, eminently historical? It seems to me like you're advocating that there is a set structure of rationality and happens to be universal, this opening up the question of absolute rationality again.
 

Dafunkdoc_Unlimited

Theological Noncognitivist Since Birth
Joined
Jul 25, 2012
Messages
44,680
Reputation
8,104
Daps
121,566
Reppin
The Wrong Side of the Tracks
The Real said:
How is what you're suggesting not philosophic, and secondly, eminently historical? It seems to me like you're advocating that there is a set structure of rationality and happens to be universal, this opening up the question of absolute rationality again.

Rational Choice Theory.

My dad was a cop.​
 

Fillerguy

Veteran
Joined
May 5, 2012
Messages
18,530
Reputation
4,195
Daps
77,187
Reppin
North Jersey
If you're not 'accountable' for your actions, then, pretty much, anything you do is only justified by virtue of how much it benefits you versus the cost incurred.​

I dont understand how anyone but a sociopath could truly come to that conclusion. We're surrounded by institutions of socialization that give us ample justifications. One doesn't have believe in God to know that there are worldly forces that will hold us accountable for our actions.
 

The Real

Anti-Ignorance
Joined
May 8, 2012
Messages
6,353
Reputation
725
Daps
10,724
Reppin
NYC
Rational Choice Theory.

My dad was a cop.​

Sorry for taking so long to respond here. Aside from the problem that rational choice is an assumptive framework for predictive modeling as opposed to a robust ontology that fully explains human behavior, I see another problem with your explanation. Assuming rat choice is true, it still wouldn't explain the actions of a person who doesn't believe in an absolute morality.

You stated that "The only criteria that ultimately matter are the cost/benefit to the individual when deciding a particular course of action."

Rational choice theory doesn't assume individualism. The "Good" that is the object of the cost/benefit framework is empty of content. It could be an individual good, as you claim, or public Good that isn't consistent with the good of all individuals, or any other kind of Good. All that the theory states is that the actor will behave according to a rational cost/benefit analysis to achieve that goal. Someone like Milton Friedman may argue that the Good is inevitably going to be individualistic, but that itself is not part of rational choice theory, nor is it a fact. Anyway, to continue:

A person with absolute morality will consider the Good of that morality the object of their cost/benefit analysis.

A person without absolute morality has no Good to use as a goal for that cost/benefit framework. The injection of that Good is a purely contingent act. It could be that the person resorts to individualism, as you claim, but it could also be otherwise. Logically, there is no necessary connection between the loss of absolute morality and the adoption of individualism.

Thus, the absolute moralist and the person with no absolute morality are not necessarily the same.
 

GetInTheTruck

Member
Joined
May 1, 2012
Messages
15,661
Reputation
-741
Daps
27,699
Reppin
Queens
Wait, I thought this kind of stuff didn't happen in Africa though? I thought this only happened in those weird places, like India and the Middle East.
 
Top