Re: Mind's Eye Towards a modern morality

Yes, manners and etiquette save us from brutish behavior- we have said
this before. I think it still boils down to the Golden Rule for
intimates and healthy caution, otherwise, which does not displace
empathy and hope entirely.

On May 20, 4:28 pm, archytas <nwte...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Pol is right on government - the only question left there is who is
> really doing the governing.  What bangs about in my head is not what
> we currently make of morality or into moral decisions - but rather
> what a modernly derived morality would be.  I don't think we have much
> clue.  Moral codes we do have are based in manners and are easily
> feigned.  The Moses of Numbers 31 is a war criminal against today's
> values - but we haven't even managed to bring Pinochet to official
> trial.  If we could develop a modern code what would it be?
>
> On May 20, 9:41 pm, Allan H <allanh1...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > You have that right..  governments and religions  Governments are not known
> > for their morality
> > Allan
> > On May 20, 2012 9:14 PM, "pol.science kid" <r.freeb...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > speaking of morality... what do you think of terrorism, and insurgency in
> > > countries.. how they justify their violence ... in fact the most outrageous
> > > justification of violence is by the governments today.... but still...
>
> > > On Sun, May 20, 2012 at 1:18 PM, Allan H <allanh1...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > >> I do think the moral compass is lost, well more buried under a bunch of
> > >> garbage.  People are more interested in their finances and how the stock
> > >> market is doing.   Or only the projects of their church..  leaving out
> > >> those that do not belong  aka members... and you have to remember we are
> > >> the old farts Neil that are guiding the nations. We all have made difficult
> > >> choices over the years, oddly enough some how the world is going to survive
> > >> the terrorism of religions and economics. some how we will make it through
> > >> all the mess we created.
> > >> Allan
>
> > >> On Sun, May 20, 2012 at 2:09 AM, rigsy03 <rigs...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > >>> The "good old days" were still lousey for most of humanity- unless you
> > >>> are referring to your own youth as a golden time of life.//Our
> > >>> earliest morals come from our parents usually and they are "tested"
> > >>> against religion and society plus one's own nature- often leading to
> > >>> rebellion and trial and error. Errors are costly and they often repeat
> > >>> themselves until you learn your lesson.//There are lists of many
> > >>> beyond the age of 60 that have continued to create and contribute to
> > >>> society so that notion is relative.//We cannot control the factors of
> > >>> an age- wars, depressions, waste, etc. but we can influence a small
> > >>> circle.//Universal ignorance and superstition didn't work either.:-)
>
> > >>> On May 19, 3:36 pm, archytas <nwte...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >>> > What I'm thinking is that we get our moral decision-making very
> > >>> > wrong.  Every generation ends up as old farts with notions modern
> > >>> > youth is chronic and desiring a return to the good old days.  We don't
> > >>> > see our pathetic failures as contributing.  Moral judgement is left in
> > >>> > the domain of Idols.  Given universal education hasn't worked, we
> > >>> > might try a new set of Idols that are at least modern.
>
> > >>> > On May 19, 9:09 am, gabbydott <gabbyd...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > >>> > > > " The reason I think we need to review morality and come up with a
> > >>> modern
> > >>> > > > one is that I find almost no one can understand stuff like this. "
>
> > >>> > > May I suggest an alternative:
>
> > >>> > > I think the purpose of morality needs to be understood by every
> > >>> individual,
> > >>> > > which is why the main purpose of education is not to forget to
> > >>> always keep
> > >>> > > this door open. These are our real debts.
>
> > >>> > > On Sat, May 19, 2012 at 2:04 AM, archytas <nwte...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >>> > > > I don't mind being backward Gabby.  I don't, of course, propose any
> > >>> > > > return to the kind of religion suffered by so many for so long and
> > >>> the
> > >>> > > > often revolting treatment of women.  Here is a fairly simple
> > >>> treatment
> > >>> > > > of much that's been going wrong in the financial system.
>
> > >>> > > > "While most economists agree that the world is facing the worst
> > >>> > > > economic crisis since the
> > >>> > > > Great Depression, there is little agreement as to what caused it.
> > >>> Some
> > >>> > > > have argued that
> > >>> > > > the financial instability we are witnessing is due to irrational
> > >>> > > > exuberance of market
> > >>> > > > participants, fraud, greed, too much regulation, et cetera.
> > >>> However,
> > >>> > > > some Post Keynesian
> > >>> > > > economists following Hyman P. Minsky have argued that this is a
> > >>> > > > systemic problem, a
> > >>> > > > result of internal market processes that allowed fragility to build
> > >>> > > > over time. In this paper
> > >>> > > > we focus on the shift to the "shadow banking system" and the
> > >>> creation
> > >>> > > > of what Minsky
> > >>> > > > called the money manager phase of capitalism. In this system, rapid
> > >>> > > > growth of leverage
> > >>> > > > and financial layering allowed the financial sector to claim an
> > >>> ever-
> > >>> > > > rising proportion of
> > >>> > > > national income—what is sometimes called "financialization"—as the
> > >>> > > > financial system
> > >>> > > > evolved from hedge to speculative and, finally, to a Ponzi scheme.
> > >>> > > > The policy response to the financial crisis in the United States
> > >>> and
> > >>> > > > elsewhere has
> > >>> > > > largely been an attempt to rescue money manager capitalism.
> > >>> Moreover,
> > >>> > > > in the case of the
> > >>> > > > United States. the bailout policy has contributed to further
> > >>> > > > concentration of the financial
> > >>> > > > sector, increasing dangers. We believe that the policies directed
> > >>> at
> > >>> > > > saving the system are
> > >>> > > > doomed to fail—and that alternative policies should be adopted. The
> > >>> > > > effective solution
> > >>> > > > should come in the way of downsizing the financial sector by two-
> > >>> > > > thirds or more, and
> > >>> > > > effecting fundamental modifications."
> > >>> > > > explain
> > >>> > > > The paper can be found at the Levi Institute along with loads more.
> > >>> > > > The rub is that banking is mostly parasitic and we need a return to
> > >>> > > > primitive banking that supports productive projects.  The reason I
> > >>> > > > think we need to review morality and come up with a modern one is
> > >>> that
> > >>> > > > I find almost no one can understand stuff like this. One can barely
> > >>> > > > get students to look up the papers and our news programmes are
> > >>> aimed
> > >>> > > > at a teenage mentality.  We are both over-complicating and
> > >>> > > > trivialising decision making so that ordinary people can't take
> > >>> part
> > >>> > > > other than as voting dupes.  The pressures on me are not to
> > >>> explain so
> > >>> > > > most people can understand, but to take part in esoteric debate to
> > >>> > > > earn my academic corn.  Pol Kid sets out some of the dangers and
> > >>> Gabby
> > >>> > > > often has - yet if we are to retain democracy (I'm not a fan, but
> > >>> it
> > >>> > > > sure beats not being able to vote - though here in the UK I never
> > >>> have
> > >>> > > > a real vote) we have to find ways to stop it being abused by a
> > >>> > > > financial-political class.
>
> > >>> > > > My own suspicion is that rational debate is essentially violent and
> > >>> > > > hence doomed to fail other than as a domination strategy (or as
> > >>> > > > refined chattering). There are structural answers about - such as
> > >>> > > > having the people make law and government administer it.  There
> > >>> have
> > >>> > > > been at least half-way successful changes in, say, feminism and gay
> > >>> > > > rights (surely moral causes both in repression and emancipation
> > >>> > > > stages).  I would recommend 'The Life and Times of Colonel Blimp'
> > >>> to
> > >>> > > > get in the swing of things and begin to consider how 'there is no
> > >>> > > > alternative' mentalities screw us.
>
> > >>> > > > On May 18, 7:45 pm, "pol.science kid" <r.freeb...@gmail.com>
> > >>> wrote:
> > >>> > > > > no i guess Schopenhauer said.. religion is philosophy of the
> > >>> masses...
>
> > >>> > > > > On Fri, May 18, 2012 at 11:48 PM, pol.science kid <
> > >>> r.freeb...@gmail.com
> > >>> > > > >wrote:
>
> > >>> > > > > d the generally revolting treatment of women
>
> > >>> > > > > > Your post touches many relevant points.. but right now the
> > >>> point about
> > >>> > > > > > religion comes to my mind... its true religion has been a
> > >>> source of
> > >>> > > > > > morality for the most people...like it was schopenhauer(?) who
> > >>> > > > > > said religion was the morality or ethics of  the masses.. dont
> > >>> remember
> > >>> > > > > > clearly ... anyways... see what i observe is.. the ethical
> > >>> hold of
> > >>> > > > religion
> > >>> > > > > > is fast disappearing...i rather see religion being
> > >>> appropriated for
> > >>> > > > > > political propaganda..or communal menace... plus.. i wonder
> > >>> how you can
> > >>> > > > > > remove religion form the past legacy in invoking it for
> > >>> morality
> > >>> > > > afresh...
> > >>> > > > > > religion does not have a glorius history.. i dont know really
> > >>> know..
> > >>> > > > havent
> > >>> > > > > > read religious history... i often wonder how it would be if
> > >>> there was a
> > >>> > > > > > community.. functioning politically, terrtorially integrated
> > >>> and
> > >>> > > > sovereign
> > >>> > > > > > composed of all atheist people...   i guess our brains or
> > >>> minds are too
> > >>> > > > > > steeped in history to be entirely radical(Routine and
> > >>> familiarity have
> > >>> > > > > > such a powerful hold)... how many would support the system of
> > >>> ethics
> > >>> > > > not
> > >>> > > > > > enforced by an idea of the divine or sacred.. or God.. but it
> > >>> would be
> > >>> > > > > > wonderful if we had something of the 'Kantian' ethics .. based
> > >>> on
> > >>> > > > > > humanity... i
>
> ...
>
> read more »- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -