It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

An Introduction to my Philosophy (Morals)

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 29 2012 @ 01:31 AM
link   
A lot of my beliefs are based on the idea that morals are cause-and-effect calculations, and good morals are healthy for the individual and society while bad morals are unhealthy. Healthy is defined as reaching its full potential, which is defined without taking into respect moral potential, as it has no place here.

In other words, discovering morals based on facts and intelligence instead of bias and preconceived beliefs that are not based in fact.

Religions are sets of preconceived beliefs that are not based in fact, but are simply accepted by the society they are in. Most of them will not have basis in fact (in other words, will actually be morally wrong) because the people who made them simply had no philosophical or scientific basis to create a healthy set of moral values.

Wrong morals will likely be enforced by force, because enforcing them by logic would be impossible, since they would be illogical. However, healthy morals would not need to be enforced by force, because once their reasoning would be explained to an individual, the individual would see why it is in his best interest to follow them.

Western religion places a set of moral codes in front of its attendees, and encourages them to follow them without thinking critically about why, or the cause-and-effect relationships that might be involved. This, in fact, actually gets in the way of finding healthy morals because unhealthy ones are enforced and intelligent, unbiased thought is restricted.

In addition, Western religion uses fear by creating a fabricated set of punishments like hell for individuals who do not follow the completely made-up code, that does not take into account available philosophy or intelligence from the current era to make itself more relevant.

There is, in a sense, heaven and hell because every choice we make is moral - and unhealthy morals result in a hellish lifestyle while healthy ones result in a heavenly lifestyle. Religions at their best make an attempt at creating a code to follow a healthy lifestyle, but can become outdated or might not be very enlightened.

Religions at their worst enforce unhealthy morals, such as prejudice and embracing scientifically false "facts."

Since I have seemed to attack religion, I must clarify my viewpoint. Religion is good because it attempts to give people a few hints on how to lead a healthy lifestyle. However, it can itself become a deterrent to healthy morals and reaching society's and an individual's full potential when it is not able to adapt to newly discovered reasoning or scientific data.
edit on 29-1-2012 by darkbake because: (no reason given)

edit on 29-1-2012 by darkbake because: (no reason given)

edit on 29-1-2012 by darkbake because: (no reason given)




posted on Jan, 29 2012 @ 01:45 AM
link   
we already have too much philosophy on this planet



posted on Jan, 29 2012 @ 01:47 AM
link   
reply to post by darkbake
 


what matter is the constant abstraction not healthy
healthy limit the fact value to source of living thing, which is evil reasons in oppositions to true values ends

as long as u mean what is right from what u expect being fed with, u cant say anything about right facts while being totally subjective

that is why in a sense right knowledge were forced from wrong facts realities, so meaning right could b true by clearly hating to b through wrong, as ur subjective choice



posted on Jan, 29 2012 @ 01:48 AM
link   

Originally posted by biggmoneyme
we already have too much philosophy on this planet


and do we use any of it? it takes up a lot of paper but never seems to cement into our minds as a way of life.



posted on Jan, 29 2012 @ 01:54 AM
link   

Originally posted by yourmaker
and do we use any of it? it takes up a lot of paper but never seems to cement into our minds as a way of life.


on the contrary philosophy is the only tool used for subjective existence to keep itself free as one

everything written to philosophy means is clearly how subjects work alone

being conscious of living realities is a matter that every individual is forced to b, and noone can invent it, reality is not only a fact forced on every conscious but it is a very complex one u cant be over it



posted on Jan, 29 2012 @ 02:06 AM
link   
reply to post by darkbake
 


I like where you are coming from and agree with for the most part... But I would like to focus on one aspect of your post for a moment and that is your general use of the term "healthy"... I think I see what you are getting at, but I think this bears fleshing out. What is "healthy"? You say it is defined as "reaching its full potential" .... but a potential for what? sitting at home posting on ATS? or navigating the globe researching the worlds cultures? or killing all the competitive males within a certain distance and claiming all the females of breeding age?

Lets reflect on the reason behind these morals and behavioral expectations... and why we think things are either good or bad... and in my opinion it boils down to the act of passing on genetic material.

I cant kill another man because that is bad. School says its bad, church says its bad, my parents says its bad, etc... But why? I know you are probably thinking I am crazy, but hear me out. Its only bad if you aren't the Alpha male. If you are the Alpha then you dominate your territory and claim all reproductive rights within that territory for as long as you can effectively defend said rights. Now if you aren't an alpha male then you either get killed or at least spend you life fighting, hiding and/or scheming of ways to get the chance to win the females favor and pass on your genetic material...

So perhaps a portion of these socials morays and norms have their roots in Beta or lower males trying to level the playing field to avoid having to physically compete with the Alpha males?

I am in no way an Alpha male and so I benefit from all these rules the churches and schools have placed around me ... this way I don't have to literally fight to the death for the chance to procreate, rather I can impress a female with my ability to bring in a secure income - which can pay for the big house in the nicer neighborhood and keeps threatening males from violating my territory and potentially stealing my mate and killing my offspring.

I think the creation of what we might call a modern society was and is still being developed as a way to ease the act of genetic competition. Whether a church forces these beliefs on you or your tribe or family ... it all comes down to DNA. No heaven or hell, just sex and death - you either pass some on or you don't and these systems seem to me at least to be partially composed of rules to make the competition less life threatening for all involved.

Sorry if I derailed your thread here, but this has been rolling around in my head all day and this seemed like the perfect place to share... star for you and thanks for sharing!



posted on Jan, 29 2012 @ 02:32 AM
link   
reply to post by darkbake
 


Wow.....just wow,



posted on Jan, 29 2012 @ 03:37 AM
link   
reply to post by henryleo
 


henry ur thread is interesting to read as showing urself conscious being intelligent but it is not logical at all in truth

u r advocating that existing man sense is from being constant dominant wether on relative ground or on absolute one if he is alpha, and that this is from genetics background truth so there cant b any other existing sense for a man to claim existing through

lets accept it as a fact as i just stated it, once u realize it fully objectively since obviously u r conscious absolutely about it when it is u that brought it out not me

once realized existence start to b not before

u have conscious results realizations infront of u and u have u that put all u know out so fresh there constant

u cant advocate it anymore, the results become it and u cant keep claiming being through since u proved being able to act as conscious freedom alone out of genetics knowledge conditions, which entre parenthese is clearly for animals unconscious beings

so let me prove then how it is not logical from where u r not that anymore

when u r conscious free even if relatively but since u realized smthg out of urself conscious absolute existence, attacking or meaning another free sense negatively is impossible in truth, when u r truly that relative free sense u cant mean any other free sense
while meaning ur territory possession is from meaning ur freedom rights, but as conscious realizations results the sense of freedom stop being a concept so it became a true right existing that cant mean else nor other

that is why when any other is hurt or killed any true free sense is suffering for its fact right

being conscious put u in totally another reference dimension that prove logics being free so how truth is any and all

only evil life that mean profiting from existence as if it is to truth possible abuse for absolute gains as the base of else freedom never true, will keep advocating what is not existing as a fact source to exist by profiting from

and here too it is not logical, u cant exist from profiting of existence base

existence base are the fundament of what exist so always more attached to existence facts, isolating it to exist urself is killing existence then u cant claim existing while u clearly kill existence



posted on Jan, 29 2012 @ 03:42 AM
link   
reply to post by darkbake
 


In a perfect world...you would be right. Unfortunatly...It is not a perfect world. Depending on what part of the world you come from...what for you and I seems an attrocity...to others is a celebration of passing. We cannot have one simple standard of right and wrong on a Planet with so many different cultures. Split Infinity



posted on Jan, 29 2012 @ 10:24 AM
link   
OP, those are good ideas. I've been thinking about these things too, so I'll give some comments.

You mention that only Western religions have the future spiritual punishment beliefs to enforce the moral code, but I think Eastern religions do also. The Buddhist ideas about karma and reincarnation serve that same purpose.

Animals have moral codes - especially social animals, because morality integrates the individual into society.

The belief in a metaphysical self with free will is a requirement for moral codes. How can society punish an individual for violating the moral code if there is no such thing as a metaphysical self with free will? Furthermore an individual who lacks faith in free will becomes more passive and apathetic about morality. But once you believe in a metaphysical self then you need religion to tell you what happens to that metaphysical self after the physical self dies. As social animals our brains are hard-wired to believe in a metaphysical self with free will; it is almost impossible to think without these concepts. And that means our brains are also hard-wired to need religion. Unfortunately our religions seem to be imaginary nonsense designed to fill this gap. Our religions are constantly challenged by science and common sense making it difficult for modern people to accept them.

I'm convinced that the solution to this mess is somewhere in quantum mechanics. I think quantum mechanics is mysterious because we are thinking about reality wrong. If we can find a way of thinking where quantum mechanics makes sense, then we can apply this thinking to religion and philosophy to harmonize them with science. Hopefully the whole concept of metaphysical will go away and then religion will go away.

(Sorry, I know this is rambling and maybe nobody cares about it.)
edit on 29-1-2012 by cloudyday because: (no reason given)

edit on 29-1-2012 by cloudyday because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 29 2012 @ 03:31 PM
link   
reply to post by absolutely
 


No offense but I had a hard time digesting what you wrote.

Could you please elaborate, but slower for me cause its been a long week for me...

Also I would like to perhaps dig deeper in the OP and the idea of a hellish and heavenly lifestyle - maybe hellish being that your genetic line dies off? Or heavenly in that you live forever in your offspring?

I am just throwing it out there in the conversation because it has been on my mind for some time - the inherit nature in all things to replicate themselves....and the systems that arise from their interactions ... like Religion, or Education, or Law.

I have come to a fairly solid conclusion that a huge portion of our behavioral traits come from the need to pass on our DNA - this is regardless of whether we think of ourselves as conscious beings separate from animals and frankly has nothing to do with a human's definition of "logic" ... it is only logically to do whatever possible to pass on your genetic material and perhaps widen the time with which you have to pass on that material. This is "beast" logic ... the Law of the Jungle, right?

Now we may fancy that we have moved past all this after we developed Language or Religion or any number of social constructs, but the fact remains that we operate on this "beast" level of logic on a daily basis ...

For example we as a society go to war for any number of reasons, but isn't this just the same "beast" logic operating on a larger scale?

War is just a bunch of our tribe's Alpha male politicians getting together and ordering of bunch of poorer, but still eager to be Alpha male soldiers off to kill some other tribe's Alpha male soldiers .... but why?

Oil? Money? Power? ... oh maybe that last one.
You see in America we want to live free and happy with a house and wife and 2.5 kids, but you can't do that if you think someone is gonna come by and threaten your territory regularly, thus any external threats to our tribe's social constructs are indirect threats to our ability to procreate.... so we pay bigger males to patrol the streets keeping us safe to procreate with as many females as we can.

Am I making sense? maybe I am out on a limb here, but this whole "DNA is really in charge" thing has been bouncing around in my head lately - there was a quote I heard a while back and I know I am paraphrasing, but here it goes:

"Sometimes a body is just DNA's way of making more copies of itself"

If anyone knows who said this please let me know - thank you!



posted on Jan, 29 2012 @ 04:01 PM
link   
reply to post by henryleo
 


i dont believe what u said being intellectually honest from u, sorry it doesnt make sense to me it is obvious invention

i guess u had an interesting track of thoughts about smthg as everything but that prove how it is not truly of u
nor what u exist through

people go to war?? so everyday someone wake up and live by deciding to make wars for dna copies?

yes war and soldiers exist but as u mentioned it, a conscious reactions from threats sense coming out of their borders what they cant see and cant predict to know, not bc of dna

and when countries are in wars it is clear with all the folklor dresses and tambours orders that there are a condition for which make the situation look alive in absolute ways, while when someone want to destroy another it is total different scenario that apply, where it is true it is mutually destructive



posted on Jan, 29 2012 @ 04:17 PM
link   
reply to post by absolutely
 


anyway even u admitted it when u meant honestly to say the motifs of wars, money oil or powers is all to conscious free wills no bodies dna could be the source of those terms means

even powers is clearly meaning the possession of others rights, only who know all existence conditions is what could choose to abuse that knowledge from a conscious free stand move



new topics

top topics



 
0

log in

join