Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and our Privacy Policy.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Guest
New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Post Processing, Marketing & Presenting Photos The Business of Photography 
Thread started 23 Jun 2012 (Saturday) 07:59
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

Disturbing trend in high schools

 
mtimber
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
5,011 posts
Likes: 2
Joined Mar 2010
Location: Cambs, UK
     
Jul 16, 2012 17:46 |  #586

To finish.

The absurdity of removing absolute principles of morality from society has created a world where theft is a matter of opinion, rather than a matter of morality...


"Light travels faster than sound. Which is why people some people appear bright, until you hear them speak..."

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
mtimber
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
5,011 posts
Likes: 2
Joined Mar 2010
Location: Cambs, UK
     
Jul 16, 2012 17:51 |  #587

kcbrown wrote in post #14725928 (external link)
Deduction requires that you have something to deduce from.

From what do you deduce the authority?

This is an assertion you continue to make, but you have not proven it. I've given a counterexample which alone should constitute an existence proof that shows this assertion to be false.

To wit: I have defined "good" and "bad" without reference to an external authority. Since morality is merely the evaluation of actions against the concepts of "good" and "bad", it is sufficient to have definitions in hand for "good" and "bad in order to "define the concept" of morality.

You have not defined good and bad, you have offered an opinion on something being good or bad, without defining what standard you have appealed to to make a moral claim such as "goodness" or "badness".


If "goodness" is merely a matter of your opinion, then "goodness" has no objective value.

Morality then is merely everyones opinion...

And that being the case, there is not "goodness" or "badness", just "opinion".


Just hope someone with a bigger opinion than yours, does not disagree with you... :-)


"Light travels faster than sound. Which is why people some people appear bright, until you hear them speak..."

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
mtimber
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
5,011 posts
Likes: 2
Joined Mar 2010
Location: Cambs, UK
     
Jul 16, 2012 17:52 |  #588

Anyway, good night folks. :-)

I have enjoyed the discussion.


"I have applied for jobs at National Geographic, Sports Illustrated and Playboy. The phone should start ringing any minute now" (Curtis N)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
kcbrown
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
5,384 posts
Likes: 2
Joined Mar 2007
Location: Silicon Valley
     
Jul 16, 2012 17:52 |  #589

mtimber wrote in post #14725909 (external link)
So a group of cannibals on a small island that are hungry and believe they gain the spiritual strength when eating their smaller group of neighbours on the other island, are according to your definition, "right"...

They are according to their definition. According to [I]mine[I]? Well, that's an interesting question.

If it comes down to a choice between the island society surviving for the long term as a result of engaging in cannibalism, and nobody on the island surviving as a result of failing to do so, then the right answer is probably for them to engage in cannibalism even though such a thing is horribly distasteful to me personally.

Alternatively, you might say that morality has to give way to necessity.

Therefore, eating your neighbours baby is morally correct?

Not for me it isn't.

Because enough people agreed on it, therefore it is a good idea...

What do you mean a "good idea"? It's entirely possible that the resulting consensus yields a system that causes the death of the society in question. By that measure, it could easily not be a "good idea".


If you're looking for something absolute to measure an ethical system against, I can give you one, and it's the only one that really matters in the real world. But it's not something you're going to like. It's survival itself. Survival of the individual, survival of the family, survival of the group, and survival of the society.

That is the logical conclusion of your argument, do you realise that?

You are attempting to apply a moral judgment to the very notion of morality itself, and are then using that to decide whether or not the notion in question is valid. That is an excellent example of circular logic.


"There are some things that money can't buy, but they aren't Ls and aren't worth having" -- Shooter-boy
Canon: 2 x 7D, Sigma 17-50 f/2.8 OS, 55-250 IS, Sigma 8-16, 24-105L, Sigma 50/1.4, other assorted primes, and a 430EX.
Nikon: D750, D600, 24-85 VR, 50 f/1.8G, 85 f/1.8G, Tamron 24-70 VC, Tamron 70-300 VC.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
kcbrown
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
5,384 posts
Likes: 2
Joined Mar 2007
Location: Silicon Valley
     
Jul 16, 2012 17:55 |  #590

mtimber wrote in post #14725958 (external link)
You have not defined good and bad, you have offered an opinion on something being good or bad, without defining what standard you have appealed to to make a moral claim such as "goodness" or "badness".

What opinion? What "something"? I did not comment on an action to say that it is good or bad, nor did I mention an action at all.

If "goodness" is merely a matter of your opinion, then "goodness" has no objective value.

Morality then is merely everyones opinion...

And that being the case, there is not "goodness" or "badness", just "opinion".

Congratulations. You are finally getting it. More precisely, "goodness" and "badness" are opinion, and that is exactly what we've been trying to convey.


Now, that "goodness" and "badness" are opinions does not imply that the notions of "goodness" and "badness" have no use. They surely do. Nor does the fact that they are opinion imply that there can be no consistency. The fact that we are products of millions of years of evolution in a world that operates in a consistent fashion means that there will be a great deal of agreement among most people on the basics of what is generally considered "good" or "bad". This is why the vast majority of societies throughout history have had the same basic set of prohibitions.


Just hope someone with a bigger opinion than yours, does not disagree with you... :-)

Well, yeah. That's how it has always been throughout history. In the end, the guys with the most power win, regardless of their ethical standards.


"There are some things that money can't buy, but they aren't Ls and aren't worth having" -- Shooter-boy
Canon: 2 x 7D, Sigma 17-50 f/2.8 OS, 55-250 IS, Sigma 8-16, 24-105L, Sigma 50/1.4, other assorted primes, and a 430EX.
Nikon: D750, D600, 24-85 VR, 50 f/1.8G, 85 f/1.8G, Tamron 24-70 VC, Tamron 70-300 VC.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
mtimber
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
5,011 posts
Likes: 2
Joined Mar 2010
Location: Cambs, UK
     
Jul 16, 2012 18:05 |  #591

kcbrown wrote in post #14725984 (external link)
Now, that "goodness" and "badness" are opinions does not imply that the notions of "goodness" and "badness" have no use. They surely do.

My last response tonight.

So we agree, that if you follow your worldview to its logical conclusion, there is no "absolute right or wrong".

Only opinion.


Heres the kicker, the logical conclusion of your argument:

Every act in the world, according to your worldview is permisable, because the only authority it needs is subjective "opinion".

Every single dark deed, is permisable, because it only needs "opinion" as its authority.


:-)


"The general rule for flash photography is that you want the flash to go off while the shutter is open" (Titus213)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
kcbrown
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
5,384 posts
Likes: 2
Joined Mar 2007
Location: Silicon Valley
     
Jul 16, 2012 18:11 |  #592

mtimber wrote in post #14725937 (external link)
To finish.

The absurdity of removing absolute principles of morality from society has created a world where theft is a matter of opinion, rather than a matter of morality...

I've got news for you: it has always been a matter of opinion. That the absolute morality you subscribe to is correct is your opinion.

What you're missing is that the general opinion has always been that theft is wrong.


Which is to say, the aggregate of opinions in a society looks an awful lot like an absolute moral standard.


"There are some things that money can't buy, but they aren't Ls and aren't worth having" -- Shooter-boy
Canon: 2 x 7D, Sigma 17-50 f/2.8 OS, 55-250 IS, Sigma 8-16, 24-105L, Sigma 50/1.4, other assorted primes, and a 430EX.
Nikon: D750, D600, 24-85 VR, 50 f/1.8G, 85 f/1.8G, Tamron 24-70 VC, Tamron 70-300 VC.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
airfrogusmc
I'm a chimper. There I said it...
36,461 posts
Gallery: 147 photos
Best ofs: 6
Likes: 5978
Joined May 2007
Location: Oak Park, Illinois
     
Jul 16, 2012 18:16 |  #593

If you take something thats not yours thats theft and thats not a matter of opinion. It really is that simple.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
kcbrown
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
5,384 posts
Likes: 2
Joined Mar 2007
Location: Silicon Valley
     
Jul 16, 2012 18:18 |  #594

mtimber wrote in post #14726017 (external link)
My last response tonight.

So we agree, that if you follow your worldview to its logical conclusion, there is no "absolute right or wrong".

Only opinion.

There is more than just opinion. There is consensus of opinion.

Heres the kicker, the logical conclusion of your argument:

Every act in the world, according to your worldview is permisable, because the only authority it needs is subjective "opinion".

Permissible to the person carrying out the act, perhaps. Permissible to the victims of the act? Almost certainly not. Permissible to the society in which the act was perpetrated? It depends, but most societies are reasonably consistent with each other on the basics.

Every single dark deed, is permisable, because it only needs "opinion" as its authority.

Again, just because someone thinks an act is permissible doesn't automatically imply that the other people involved will agree with that. Get enough dark deeds going and chances are the society in question will not survive. Dark deeds are dark because allowing them puts the survival of the society in question at risk.

It's not an accident that most absolute standards of morality that people subscribe to are both consistent with each other on the basics and consistent with general survival of the groups which adopt them. That's because the ones that aren't that way have been either thrown away or have been lost in the mists of history along with the societies that adopted them.


"There are some things that money can't buy, but they aren't Ls and aren't worth having" -- Shooter-boy
Canon: 2 x 7D, Sigma 17-50 f/2.8 OS, 55-250 IS, Sigma 8-16, 24-105L, Sigma 50/1.4, other assorted primes, and a 430EX.
Nikon: D750, D600, 24-85 VR, 50 f/1.8G, 85 f/1.8G, Tamron 24-70 VC, Tamron 70-300 VC.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
kcbrown
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
5,384 posts
Likes: 2
Joined Mar 2007
Location: Silicon Valley
     
Jul 16, 2012 18:19 |  #595

airfrogusmc wrote in post #14726056 (external link)
If you take something thats not yours thats theft and thats not a matter of opinion. It really is that simple.

Agreed, because that is a matter of definition (with the caveat that it is being taken against the wishes of the owner. If the owner approves, even if only after the fact, then it is not theft, even though that which you are taking does not belong to you).


"There are some things that money can't buy, but they aren't Ls and aren't worth having" -- Shooter-boy
Canon: 2 x 7D, Sigma 17-50 f/2.8 OS, 55-250 IS, Sigma 8-16, 24-105L, Sigma 50/1.4, other assorted primes, and a 430EX.
Nikon: D750, D600, 24-85 VR, 50 f/1.8G, 85 f/1.8G, Tamron 24-70 VC, Tamron 70-300 VC.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
airfrogusmc
I'm a chimper. There I said it...
36,461 posts
Gallery: 147 photos
Best ofs: 6
Likes: 5978
Joined May 2007
Location: Oak Park, Illinois
     
Jul 16, 2012 18:25 |  #596

kcbrown wrote in post #14726071 (external link)
Agreed, because that is a matter of definition (with the caveat that it is being taken against the wishes of the owner. If the owner approves then it is not theft, even though that which you are taking does not belong to you).

:rolleyes:

Goebbels words ring like a bell. :lol:




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
kcbrown
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
5,384 posts
Likes: 2
Joined Mar 2007
Location: Silicon Valley
     
Jul 16, 2012 18:29 |  #597

airfrogusmc wrote in post #14726103 (external link)
:rolleyes:

Goebbels words ring like a bell. :lol:

Wait.

What about that are you disagreeing with? I did not render an ethical judgment there.


"There are some things that money can't buy, but they aren't Ls and aren't worth having" -- Shooter-boy
Canon: 2 x 7D, Sigma 17-50 f/2.8 OS, 55-250 IS, Sigma 8-16, 24-105L, Sigma 50/1.4, other assorted primes, and a 430EX.
Nikon: D750, D600, 24-85 VR, 50 f/1.8G, 85 f/1.8G, Tamron 24-70 VC, Tamron 70-300 VC.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
JDPhotoGuy
Senior Member
Avatar
294 posts
Joined Apr 2012
     
Jul 16, 2012 18:32 |  #598

airfrogusmc wrote in post #14726103 (external link)
:rolleyes:

Goebbels words ring like a bell. :lol:

I'm getting tired of the "you're with us or against us" meme you put out there... ENOUGH about Goebbels... The fact that you're putting us in the same league as Hitler's propaganda minister offends me VERY much. Just because we don't agree with you gives you no right to insinuate what you have been over the past dozen pages. Your "you're as bad as Hitler" innuendo is WAY over the line.


Yes, I have severe Equipment Deficiency. No, the pills don't fix it.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
kcbrown
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
5,384 posts
Likes: 2
Joined Mar 2007
Location: Silicon Valley
     
Jul 16, 2012 18:32 |  #599

airfrogusmc wrote in post #14726103 (external link)
:rolleyes:

Goebbels words ring like a bell. :lol:

Heh.

Okay, so let's go back to the original: if you take something that isn't yours, that's theft.

Do you fully agree with that definition? I'll assume so.


Fine. That means if I come into your house and take your camera, that's theft even if I previously got your permission. Right? After all, I took something that is not mine.

No? Then the definition needs clarification.


"There are some things that money can't buy, but they aren't Ls and aren't worth having" -- Shooter-boy
Canon: 2 x 7D, Sigma 17-50 f/2.8 OS, 55-250 IS, Sigma 8-16, 24-105L, Sigma 50/1.4, other assorted primes, and a 430EX.
Nikon: D750, D600, 24-85 VR, 50 f/1.8G, 85 f/1.8G, Tamron 24-70 VC, Tamron 70-300 VC.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
airfrogusmc
I'm a chimper. There I said it...
36,461 posts
Gallery: 147 photos
Best ofs: 6
Likes: 5978
Joined May 2007
Location: Oak Park, Illinois
     
Jul 16, 2012 18:39 |  #600

kcbrown wrote in post #14726127 (external link)
Wait.

What about that are you disagreeing with? I did not render an ethical judgment there.

Give me a break.

Permission is not what we are discussing and you know it and the spin goes on. :rolleyes::rolleyes:

We as creatives should be very concerned about the future and there is plenty evidence of why that concern should be and is very real right here in this thread.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

55,008 views & 0 likes for this thread
Disturbing trend in high schools
FORUMS Post Processing, Marketing & Presenting Photos The Business of Photography 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Index   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset

Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!


COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and to our privacy policy.
Privacy policy and cookie usage info.


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.1forum software
version 2.1 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is Digaron32
956 guests, 363 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 15144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.