-
Israel killing civilians in Gaza and the West Bank
Yes, that's why i linked you and others to this video on 'the history' of Israeli oppression of Gazans et al.I don't know enough ... — tim wood
Also this (in case you missed or willfully ignored @Tzeentch's) post ...
https://thephilosophyforum.com/discussion/comment/898196
Strawman, of course. 'Collective punishment' (e.g. domicide¹) and 'disproportionate retaliatory slaughter' of a several decades-long captive population for "October 7th" by (US client-state) Israel are, at least, ongoing war crimes.... representation that Gazans are simply innocent victims and responsibility-free.
https://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/2024-01-04/ty-article-magazine/.highlight/amid-israeli-destruction-in-gaza-a-new-crime-against-humanity-emerges-domicide/0000018c-d585-d751-ad8d-ffa5965e0000 [1]
https://fnl.mit.edu/january-march-2024/domicide-the-mass-destruction-of-homes-should-be-a-crime-against-humanity/ [1] -
Israel killing civilians in Gaza and the West BankCeasefire NOW. Free Palestine!
Depose, Arrest, Prosecute & Punish the war criminals Netanyahu & his regime's leaders!
@BitconnectCarlos @tim wood @RogueAI & other zionfascist apologists ... -
Israel killing civilians in Gaza and the West Bank
:100: :up:Palestinian [oppressed] kills Jew = Resistance. Jew [oppressor] kills Palestinian = war crime.
— BitconnectCarlos
That's how it works when one party is oppressed and the other is oppressed. That has nothing to do with identity. — Benkei -
RIP Daniel DennettIf you believe Daniel Dennett was "the most consistent representative of scientism" (which he wasn't), Wayf, then it's quite likely you haven't studied Dennett's work or read the philosopher Alex Rosenberg's pro-scientism work e.g. The Atheist's Guide to Reality.
https://thephilosophyforum.com/discussion/comment/898001 -
The Breadth of the Moral Sphere
No. However, injustice is a kind of harm perpetrated by a group (i.e. its institutional functionaries) against individuals.Is harm thought to be synonymous with justice? — Leontiskos
Not if "incapacitating" the gunman is the only or least harmful way to prevent the gunman from doing greater, perhaps lethal, harm (e.g. like surgically removing a malignant tumor or severing a foot caught in a bear trap or terminating an unwanted pregnancy before viability (or an unviable pregnancy that is more likely than not to kill the pregnant woman)).For example, if someone enters your house with a gun and you sneak up behind them and knock them unconscious in order to incapacitate them, would the negative utilitarian say that you have harmed them? If this does not count as harm ... -
The Breadth of the Moral Sphere
What I mean is this: to say that "all human actions are moral actions" (dogma) in effect negates itself (dialectically) by entailing that there are no non-moral actions to distinguish from, and thereby identify, "moral actions". Thus, for me at least, your OP's premises are incoherent.I don’t follow your objection. — Leontiskos
Also this, Leontiskos ...
:fire:The desire for what is good does not mean that the good will be found in our practices. What the good is remains highly problematic.
Reading Aristotle as if his work is not dialectical makes it hard to see that he is guided by unanswered questions rather than dogmatic answers. — Fooloso4 -
Currently Reading
:up:Revolutionary Jews From Spinoza to Marx: The Fight for A Secular World of Universal and Equal Rights by Jonathan Israel — Maw -
RIP Daniel Dennett
A post from yesterday ...I am surprised no one has started a thread on this — Manuel
He just died. Surprised there was no mention here.
https://www.nytimes.com/2024/04/19/books/daniel-dennett-dead.html
RIP — fishfry -
Ukraine CrisisSlava Ukraini :fire:
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2024/apr/20/us-house-approves-61bn-aid-ukraine
Fuck the GOP (Gimps Of Putin)! -
Daniel Dennett interviewFrom this morning ...
https://thephilosophyforum.com/discussion/comment/898001
Ergo ... :death: :flower:No more 'resting in peace' than there would be for cars cut up for scrap. — Wayfarer -
The Mind-Created World
-
Currently Readinghttps://thephilosophyforum.com/discussion/comment/897768
Remembering Daniel Dennett 1942-2024 (whom I had the honor of meeting after public lectures in 1987 (Boston) and 1994 (Minneapolis)), I'm rereading ...
• Darwin's Dangerous Idea
• Mind's I (w/ D. Hofstadter)
• Breaking the Spell: Religion as a Natural Phenomenon
• Inside Jokes: Using Humor to Reverse Engineer the Mind
... for now. -
TPF Quote CabinetOne of the surprising discoveries of modern psychology is how easy it is to be ignorant of your own ignorance.
Like many other natural wonders, the human mind is something of a bag of tricks, cobbled together over the eons by the foresightless process of evolution by natural selection.
Philosophy is to science what pigeons are to statues.
There’s simply no polite way to tell people they’ve dedicated their lives to an illusion.
The task of the mind is to produce future, as the poet Paul Valéry once put it. A mind is fundamentally an anticipator, an expectation-generator. It mines the present for clues, which it refines with the help of the materials it has saved from the past, turning them into anticipations of the future. And then it acts, rationally, on the basis of those hard-won anticipations.
The mind is the effect, not the cause. — Daniel Dennett, d. 2024 -
Israel killing civilians in Gaza and the West Bank
Of course you would ... just like any other deluded holocaust denier.I'd wager less than 10k civilians killed. — BitconnectCarlos -
Israel killing civilians in Gaza and the West Bank
like you, BitC, et al (re: Netanyahu's 'mass murdering + mass starvation strategy for settlers lebensraum' regime).open supporters of terrorist groups — BitconnectCarlos -
Israel killing civilians in Gaza and the West BankFOX Noise and other right wing propaganda media are disinforming you, BitC. :mask:
-
Israel killing civilians in Gaza and the West Bank
:roll: C'mon, dude, for fuck's sake. Atheism =/= nihilism. Materialism =/= nihilism. Anti-zionism (i.e. anti-greater israel fascism) =/= nihilism. Anti-oppressors =/= nihilism. Anti-Netanyahu's regime =/= nihilism.You're an atheistic materialist. No? The universe has no real meaning/value save what we choose to impose? — BitconnectCarlos
Opposing systematic military slaughter of an apartheid-corraled, ethnically cleansed civilian population without any Bronze Age religious cult's "promise of eternal reward" (or "promised land"-grab!) exemplifies historically-situated moral goodness (and courage) in contrast to theo-fascist apologia like post-1967 zionism-über-alles. After all, "faith" has always been a blanket rationalization for moral cretinism – in effect, nihilism. :shade: -
The Breadth of the Moral Sphere
:up:I am a moralrealist[naturalist] who disagrees with both theses — Leontiskos
I don't think these statements make sense or are useful (re: if "all" x = y, then ~x = y).Thesis 1 and thesis 2 represent two categorical claims:
All human acts are moral acts
All interpersonal acts are justice acts
In the metaethical framework of moral naturalism, I think "the moral sphere" consists of natural creatures (i.e. any sentient species) which can suffer from – fears of – arbitrary harm (or injustice), especially, though not exclusively, moral agents who are also moral patients.What is the breadth of the moral sphere?
Anyway, my objections:
In the normative framework of negative utilitarianism, I think only judgments/conduct which (actively or passively) (a) prevents or reduces harm or (b) inflicts or increases harm are moral; however, those activities which are neither (a) nor (b) are non-moral (e.g. phatic, instrumental, involuntary) so that most "human acts", in fact, are non-moral.Some human acts are not moral acts
In the applied framework of negative consequentialism, I do not think "interpersonal acts are justice acts" because "justice" pertains to impacts on individuals by institutional or group practices (i.e. policies) and not "interpersonal" – what happens between individuals.Some interpersonal acts are not justice acts -
What Might an Afterlife be Like?
:roll: This ...What are your thoughts on self-sacrifice in this instance? — BitconnectCarlos
I do not see how "the afterlife" is a primary motivating factor. — 180 Proof -
What Might an Afterlife be Like?
Yes. Do you? Apparently you don't understand this dispute.Do you understand the scenario? — BitconnectCarlos -
What is the true nature of the self?"Consciousness is the capacity" =
"to feel" ... so you're contradicting yourself :confused:structure and function — bert1 -
What is the true nature of the self?
Okay, so then what is "consciousness"?Consciousness is not structure and function. — bert1 -
What is the true nature of the self?
Ergo the implication is that subjects are not conscious (or impersonal)?So, if I've understood your question properly, consciousness abstracted from any functioning system is indeed impersonal, in that sense. — bert1 -
What Might an Afterlife be Like?
This depends on the particular persons engaged that "futile" situation. I do not see how "the afterlife" is a primary motivating factorAll true. But what of self-sacrifice in an instance where, according to the social reality, it would seem completely futile? [ ... ] Do we still self-sacrifice here? — BitconnectCarlos -
Is there a limit to human knowledge?
:up: :up:I can't subscribe to a philosophy that doesn't know what knowledge is; it would be contrary to my daily experience. — Vera Mont
Well, to begin with it seems, "the point" is to interpret questions we (still) do not know how to (definitively) answer and thereby reason towards more probative questions. Or, in other words, "the point of doing philosophy" is learning how to overcome (or, at least, mitgate) the ignorance of one's own ignorance.[W]hat is the point of doing philosophy? — Angelo Cannata -
What Might an Afterlife be Like?Throughout history and across cultures many many nonbelievers have sacrificed their lives in order to protect their families / communities and/or to oppose various tyrannies. "Belief" in some "afterlife" – or any fact-free, faith-based story – in order to gain a "reward" (or punishment) isn't a necessary motivator and, IMO, more often than not, is only useful for deluding weak minds into throwing away their lives "in the name of (the cause)". Ethically, as a rule, martyrdom isn't an argument (& ends don't justify means – especially those means which undermine or negate their ends). Just my 2 shekels. :victory:
-
Is there a limit to human knowledge?
Humans will probably never know.Are there things in the physical universe that we can never find out? — Vera Mont
Both.If so, is that due to our limitations or time constraint?
Yes: planck and relativistic phenomena ...Are there things beyond our range of perception, ...
I can't imagine it.beyond our ... imagination or
Certainly (re: technical impossibilities).our ... ability to devise instruments?
How about a "God" that hides from us?Or are there things we are not meant to discover ...
Well, 'narrow AI systems' like AlphaGo neural nets play the strategic game Go in ways which are incomprehensible – black boxes – to the best human players and students of the game. I suspect in the coming decade or so we'll encounter many more 'black box solutions' – rendering our species cognitively obsolete – in disciplines automated (colonized) by AGI such as finance, engineering, computation, molecular biology, nanotech, neuroscience, chemistry, fundamental physics, ... public administration, etc.or not able to comprehend? -
An Analysis of Goodness and The Good
On the contrary, I propose that moral agents flourish to the degree effectively 'preventing and reducing harm and/or injustice' become habits. This form of moral naturalism I call aretaic disutilitarianism (i.e. agency-cultivating active opposition to both (agency-disabling) harms and injustices).It seems like you are anchoring your ethics in reducing harm, and not progressing towards flourishing. — Bob Ross
180 Proof
Start FollowingSend a Message
- Other sites we like
- Social media
- Terms of Service
- Sign In
- Created with PlushForums
- © 2026 The Philosophy Forum