I thought it was quite a simple question. You said that our instinctual drives contain nothing of substance morally and yet those same drives in animals seem to produce all the behaviours we consider moral. We do not carry out any behaviour labelled 'moral' that is not carried out by some species of animal driven, presumably, by those same instinctual drives you've dismissed as empty. I was just wondering how you explained the coincidence. — Pseudonym
Every behaviour we think of as moral - helping those in need, defending what is just, sacrificing our own well-being for the benefit of others... These are all behaviours which can be seen in the animal kingdom and so, presumably, all behaviours which derive from instinctive drives. — Pseudonym
they do not posses the same cognitive capacity to transcend to a level of autonomy that human beings can — TimeLine
They are not aware of themselves because they do not have consciousness — TimeLine
[language is] necessary to attain any sense of moral consciousness — TimeLine
what gives us 'humanity' or a 'soul' is our ability to love — TimeLine
Why does autonomy, authenticity have to lead to moral behavior? — T Clark
It is psychological and while I understand the metaphysical considerations, being moral cannot be performed without consciousness, that our instinctual drives or impluses contain nothing of substance and as such conformity is acting on impluse; you do 'good' because that is what you are told and because that is what is expected and not because you consciously will to act. — TimeLine
Then how do you explain the fact that literally every act we consider moral has a parallel in the animal kingdom? Are you suggesting this is just coincidence? — Pseudonym
This distinctness is really the cognitive capacity to rationalise and reason with common sense, but central to this prospect is the autonomy that wills such agency, so it is not really about the separate and unique body that we possess - aside from the health of your brain - neither is it entirely our formative and unique childhood but autonomy is the motive or will that we possess that gives us the capacity to regulate our own behaviour and therefore legitimacy or authenticity to our moral actions; it is moral actions that make us human or good. There needs to be some sort of grounding, though, in this will or autonomy and that is our rational capacity where the mind regulates our decisions and opinions and therefore the obstacles that we face are psychological. We need to overcome these obstacles that enables this continuity of irrational behaviour, such as self-defence mechanisms, fear, negative childhood experiences, self-esteem etc &c., and it doesn't help that these vulnerabilities we possess advantageously complicate the process of transcendence, the latter of which is possible cognitively or psychological and not mystical. — TimeLine
To be clear about 'the problem,' I think about it from an individual's point of view. For some individuals, there must always be a social problem as a prop for their role. As I see it, life is difficult sometimes even for the relatively enlightened. Also, social problems are often directly related to individual freedom. If we want freedom, we will pay for it by tolerating the freedom of others (to be stupid, etc., by our lights.) So the 'broken' world is a mirror of our broken selves (our own ambivalence as complicated creatures.) — foo
I'll grant that we carry virtual societies within ourselves, and that selves are largely constructed in relation to and dependent upon other selves. Nevertheless, I think you can see the continuum I'm pointing at. In short, I think that people can indeed more or less authentic, which is roughly to say more or less flowing, trusting, uncensored. — foo
the just society seeks to promote the unique strengths of each individual, rather than seeking conformity. — Metaphysician Undercover
It is psychological and while I understand the metaphysical considerations, being moral cannot be performed without consciousness, that our instinctual drives or impluses contain nothing of substance and as such conformity is acting on impluse; you do 'good' because that is what you are told and because that is what is expected and not because you consciously will to act. — TimeLine
It is rational thought or reason that gives us the capacity to structure our phenomenal experiences and even if there are properties that transcend this, accessing objects through spatial and temporal representations is a sensibility that allows us to understand and experience and that is all that really matters. Everything - being your identification to and experience with the external world - requires rational clarity. — TimeLine
All that is necessary is focusing on our moral behaviour. Indeed, the metaphysical realm or intuitive consciousness is valuable and perhaps the subconscious allows us to explore concepts, nevertheless we bound by the conditions of sensibility. — TimeLine
The question is where does the human mind derive these principles from. If we do not get them from intuition, instinct, and therefore what is proper to the entire biological realm, then the principles are completely artificial, "inauthentic" you might say. — Metaphysician Undercover
My interpretation of this is that the form, as distinct from the content, of the education system is such as to instil conformity, fear of standing out or being wrong, an obsession with 'right answers', competition and not cooperation, and this has a pathological effect that is normal to the extent of being almost universal. And it doesn't make for contented people either. — unenlightened
It would be extremely interesting to do a control study on children from Summerhill, and that's about the nearest you could get to controlling for education system. In the meantime, finding that a test for anything that Nasa finds important that kids can do that much better than adults is quite striking. I may well be over-interpreting above, but I don't think there is much 'bogus'. Did you watch the vid? — unenlightened
Summerhill used to be famous. Now most people haven't heard of it. Had you heard of it before. — T Clark
Oh yes. I read Neill at uni and was involved with the free school movement and the British home schooling organisation. So I am firmly partisan on this issue. But have some scholarly research on me. — unenlightened
Oh yes. I read Neill at uni and was involved with the free school movement and the British home schooling organisation. So I am firmly partisan on this issue. But have some scholarly research on me. — unenlightened
Two things surprised me 1) the venom with which conservative essayists hated Summerhill and its ideals and 2) the extent to which the liberal writers understated the radical nature of what Neill had done. — T Clark
I think using the phrase "relatively enlightened" in reference to us, I assume, is pretty presumptuous and disrespectful to those you consider relatively unenlightened. — T Clark
This distinctness is really the cognitive capacity to rationalise and reason with common sense — TimeLine
but central to this prospect is the autonomy that wills such agency, so it is not really about the separate and unique body that we possess - aside from the health of your brain - neither is it entirely our formative and unique childhood but autonomy is the motive or will that we possess that gives us the capacity to regulate our own behaviour and therefore legitimacy or authenticity to our moral actions; it is moral actions that make us human or good. — TimeLine
I understand your objection, but it seems to me that the very notion of philosophy is hierarchical. If there is something to be learned from life with the help of books, then those who have partially learned this 'it' are 'relatively enlightened.' — foo
I'm not offended, but even your lines quoted above imply your moral superiority to those who imply their moral superiority (to me, for instance). From my point of view, the quest for moral superiority is a fact of life like digestion. What varies is the understanding of what constitutes this superiority. — foo
And these were the dregs of society being taught by dole- scroungers like me with no pay or qualifications using scrounged materials in a semi-derelict and condemned house. Rather different from the rich brats at fee-paying Summerhill. — unenlightened
I may decide that my culture at large is wrong about some issue. I may decide that some kind of prohibited violence is actually good and even a duty. Those who proscribe such actions while celebrating autonomy will presumably do so in the name of 'reason.' — foo
where do you stand now — T Clark
My interpretation of this is that the form, as distinct from the content, of the education system is such as to instil conformity, fear of standing out or being wrong, an obsession with 'right answers', competition and not cooperation, and this has a pathological effect that is normal to the extent of being almost universal. And it doesn't make for contented people either. — unenlightened
My real problem is with the inclusion of a moral dimension to this issue. People are responsible for their behavior, not for whether or not their internal life meets my standards. — T Clark
Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.