I hope you’re wrong.

why do you disagree?

it is futile to imagine that anything can be perfect, since we can't at all tell what is perfect and what is not. — god must be atheist

Would it be futile to imagine that anything can be true simply because we can’t at all tell what is true and what is not? Let’s imagine a hypothetical situation in which it would be impossible for us to discover the truth for one reason or another. Let’s say for example that someone had a severe form of paralysis that rendered them incapable of discerning fact from fiction. Would their inability to acquire knowledge mean that there is nothing to be known?

the tendency toward a relatively stable equilibrium between interdependent elements, especially as maintained by physiological processes. — Garrett Travers

If all ethical concepts are generated to achieve homeostasis, then all actions that threat homeostasis are a violation of ethical concepts — Garrett Travers

that which is justifiable are actions that without proper provocation would not be justifiable. — Garrett Travers

Correct me if I’m wrong but it seems like survival is the criterion you use to determine whether or not actions are justifiable. Also couldn’t an individual independently act in a way that “threatens homeostasis”?

If consciousness' primary directive is to maintain homeostasis, and it does so by generating conceptual framework from sensory data integration, and all ethical systems are conceptual frameworks themselves, then any violation, or inflicted impairment of the homeostatic directive of the individual consciousness is by definition a violation of ethics at its emergent source, and of its emergent purpose. — Garrett Travers

Do you believe that all “ethical systems” are created equal?

the tendency toward a relatively stable equilibrium between interdependent elements, especially as maintained by physiological processes. — Garrett Travers

Relative to what though?

If all ethical concepts are generated to achieve homeostasis, then all actions that threat homeostasis are a violation of ethical concepts — Garrett Travers

First I would like to confess that I don’t really understand this notion of “homeostasis”. I would appreciate a definition. Second I must confess that I don’t see how B follows from A in this if A then B formulation.

it’s past my bedtime too so I’m going to bed. I hope we can continue this conversation tomorrow.

The only violations of the freedom individual human consciousness to express itself - however it sees fit, at anytime, and for whatever self generated purpose - that is permissible, are responses to exactly those violations of consciousness themselves. — Garrett Travers

Would you mind explaining to me why you think this is the case? I want to thank you for your patience because I know that I’m not entitled to your participation in this conversation. If my questions are a bit obnoxious I hope you’ll forgive me.

that which is justifiable are actions that without proper provocation would not be justifiable. — Garrett Travers

Would you mind telling me what criterion you use to determine what is and what is not “proper provocation”?

Assault is evil, meaning unjustifiable. If you commit the unjustifiable act of assaulting me, me responding in assualt is now a form of justified evil. But, it's just semantic really, it isn't actually evil, it's stopping evil. — Garrett Travers

I’m not sure what you mean by “semantic” in this context. First you say that assault is unjustifiable but then you claim that there are circumstances which would make it justifiable. That seems like a blatant contradiction. Would you mind providing some kind of clarification because I’m a little bit confused as to what you are trying to communicate.

My voluntary participation, contractual agreement, payment of my service, a promise, or having to do with child rearing. — Garrett Travers

Wouldn’t this also mean that there is such a thing as justifiable evil? You did refer to it as evil and that is the only reason I’m asking this question.

Doesn’t that mean that sometimes slavery is justified? You did refer to it as slavery and that is the only reason I’m asking this question.

As if any human has a justified claim on my money, which is my labor, which is my behavior, which is my brain, which is me. I reject this kind of evil, as it goes by a name: slavery. — Garrett Travers

What would qualify as a justified claim in your view?

I have great respect for this person and I suppose the thought that they could do something that would tarnish that makes me feel I've misjudged the person which calls into question my ability to evaluate. Perhaps. — Tex

It sounds like you might be worried about whether or not you made the right decision when you decided to help them. I know you already said that you're comfortable with your choice but you don't seem very confident. If you actually did make the right move then there doesn't seem to be any need to dwell on this dilemma and even if you didn't make the right move you shouldn't worry about it as long as you learned your lesson.

I feel bad about having some slight resentment towards this person — Tex

Forgive me for asking but why do you feel bad about having some resentment towards this person?

Would you agree that behavior is influenced by factors like culture? In other words isn't the behavior of an individual connected to what they believe about the world? In my mind some people are more likely to behave in certain ways due to their understanding of reality which is shaped by their environment and upbringing to some degree. I guess this is the nature versus nurture concept.

What exactly do you have in mind when you mention human nature? My understanding of human history is dominated by warfare.

I gave willingly without expectation so why am I having trouble with this? — Tex

Do you think that you made the right decision when you chose to help them or do you regret it?

Do you think that it's possible to live a life that is flawless? In other words is it possible to live in such a way as to ensure that everything that you do makes sense? This would mean that all of your choices and decisions are rational and correct.

I don't know anything about amplifiers to be honest so your simile isn't something I can understand but I'd like to ask you a question. Would you agree with me when I say that intelligence and ignorance are opposites? Isn't it true that intelligence is the opposite of ignorance?

Do you have anything to say about intelligence? I'd love to hear your perspective.

Yes. I think I might’ve found the answer.

I guess nobody is interested in this conversation.

Giving to a charity because you erroneously thought that you would be able to claim twice the donation back on tax. Does that make the giving to a charity morally wrong? — Banno

“The archer ought not to hit the mark only sometimes, he ought to miss only sometimes. That which takes effect by chance is not an art.” -Seneca

You make it sound so sinister.

I really don't know anything about morality.

I can't think of a situation that would be an example of what you are describing. Perhaps I simply lack imagination.

I wasn't trying to argue that it was similar to math. I was trying to give you an example of the kinds of things I would constitute as correct and incorrect beliefs and I guess it got a bit convoluted.

I personally do believe that there are wrong ways to live — Jake Hen

I guess I was preaching to the choir.

You don't strike me as rude. Maybe I just haven't worked out my epistemological axioms as thoroughly as I should have before attempting to answer your question.

I guess for example if you needed to solve an equation in order to pay your bills properly but you miscalculated and were therefore unable to do so or if you needed to calculate the amount of crops you needed in order to feed your family but do to some error in your solution you ended up planting an insufficient amount and were therefore unable to do so. I think that mathematical knowledge can be true or false in the way I'm describing alongside some other forms of knowledge.

False and correct according to what though? — Jake Hen

I'm not sure that I understand your question so I can't provide you with an answer in good conscience.

If the beliefs that you base your lifestyle upon are false then I would say that your lifestyle is wrong necessarily. If the beliefs that you base your lifestyle upon are correct then I would say that your lifestyle is right necessarily. people probably only embrace a way of life because they believe it will lead to beneficial results. If new information is uncovered and we discover that we were mistaken then it makes sense to adopt a different lifestyle.

you failed to see the broader point. — Tom Storm

I wish you would have made that broader point explicit. That way it would be difficult to miss and It would be easier for me to understand. I hope you take care too because I really do appreciate you and your contribution to this discussion.

you've missed my point about the functionality of drug use. — Tom Storm

I'm not interested in debating the functionality of drug use so I'll yield to you on this subject

you aren't following. — Tom Storm

I apologize. Your argument is a subtle one but I would appreciate it if you could explain to me how your argument is connected to a definition of intelligence or even how it is useful when attempting to understand the nature or essence of intelligence. If you cannot provide me with this kind of clarification then your argument will seem somewhat irrelevant even if it is sound.

It's funny because definitive is definitely related to definition etymologically.

I myself don't have a definitive answer — Jake Hen

lol

What do you think is the best way to generate definitions? Is it even a good idea to develop your own definitions? Should we accept the definitions we receive from others or should we try to formulate our own?