The Atheist Agora

@Enco Was Mad King Ludwig II actually “mad”? He could have been eccentric, spoiled, even mentally ill in some form, but not all forms of mental illness amount to being “mad” (by which I mean crazy, bonkers, off his rocker, and nuts).

I’m not sure I trust a diagnosis from so early in the days of psychiatry.

The thing is, though, that if he isn’t…[Read more]

Simon Paynton wrote:
So, I’d say that my hypothesis holds, at least for the lifetimes of those affected.

So, morality varies over time. There is, then, no firm everlasting basis for time. It changes with perceptions. Seems to be a consequent of what you are saying.

Actions and consequences, however, are easy to establish and over time…

Not so fast. Hindsight through your shade of lenses is not even 20/20, let alone predicting results. Now you may well have a fairly accurate probability in some cases and that is all. Will Russia invade? Will omicron be the last C19 wave? Will the US end up as some sort of…[Read more]

Unseen, Simon, and Fellow Unbelievers,

As I have repeatedly alluded to regarding certain trick laws, intention is the hardest, most problematic thing to establish with anyone or their actions. Intentions, thus, cannot be the basis of any ethics or morality based upon Reason.

And while there is no Supernatural Hell, there are many roads to…[Read more]

Unseen wrote:
moral behavior is all about intention, not actions or consequences.

But moral behaviour, as behaviour, covers both intentions and actions.

King Ludwig of Bavaria was a man who abused his subjects and indulged himself through their taxes. He loved to build palaces and castles strictly for his own enjoyment, one of which is the…

[Read more]

_Robert_ wrote:
Good consequences must be the end-goal. As defined by who and for who, Simon? Long-term or short-term consequences, since they are often at odds? How good are people at knowing what the consequences will be?

Good points.  Consequences must be the end goal, because actions take place in the moment, while consequences play out both…[Read more]

@Simon I’m not at all sure you are actually talking about ethics, which takes as its subject matter moral behavior, and moral behavior is all about intention, not actions or consequences.

King Ludwig of Bavaria was a man who abused his subjects and indulged himself through their taxes. He loved to build palaces and castles strictly for his own…[Read more]

Good consequences must be the end-goal.

As defined by who and for who, Simon? Long-term or short-term consequences, since they are often at odds? How good are people at knowing what the consequences will be? There are 5 million plus C19 dead so far, every one of them killed as a consequence of what someone else did. Maybe apply your system to all of that.

The hypothesis is that wicked actions – those tainted by, say, greed, bullying, cruelty, abdication of duty – and ignorance of the truth – will necessarily lead to sub-optimal consequences.

Good consequences must be the end-goal.  Worthy actions, attitudes, intentions, principles, virtues etc. are those that are, by experience, most likely to…[Read more]

Like I said:

So which of the two “competing theories” is right? Utilitarianism or Kantianism? That’s a dumb question in my opinion. The real situation is much more complicated.

Simon, the more you talk about this, the less I believe you have a basic grasp of it. I don’t know what motivates you to make conclusions on things you have a vague “skimmed” knowledge of, but it is odd to say the least. Intentions leads to actions leads to co sequences is nothing profound. Of course this is the case. Different people make…[Read more]

@davis – intentions lead to actions, and actions lead to consequences.  There’s a chain of cause and effect, like driving a car along a road.  So, both intentions and actions are causal factors in the final result, although usually not the only causal factors.

Reality adds up into a coherent whole, but your -isms don’t, so something must be w…[Read more]

Unseen wrote:
Acts based on ill intentions can have positive results. Likewise, well-intended actions can have dire consequences.

A negatively-valued event can be a catalyst for change, but only if people respond to it in a positive way.  I was hearing about a gruesome murder done by some rogue members of the IRA on a civilian, that was a…[Read more]

No, we analyze such situations in terms of the intent, not their success or failure, when it comes to an ethical analysis.

Indeed. It is absurd to base a moral judgement on chance. If a surgery is successful 90% of the time, then is it the case that in 9 operations the doctor made the right decision to operate and the 1 time the patient didn’t…[Read more]

Intentions could be said to be putting the conditions in place for actions

Let me remove your weasel words:

Intentions are putting conditions in place for actions.

I am completely stumped on what this means. Could you please clarify Simon?

If you are talking about consequences then you do not seem to understand deontological ethics. In any case, you didn’t answer my question, you just answered with a statement that is really a question (“but surely”). Even if consequences were relevant (which they aren’t regarding deontological ethics), saying actions are as important as…[Read more]

@Simon Would you condemn someone morally/ethically for an earnest attempt to save a drowning person that wasn’t successful, for a surgery intended to give someone a second life with a donated organ but who died on the operating table?

No, we analyze such situations in terms of the intent, not their success or failure, when it comes to an ethical…[Read more]

@Simon Acts based on ill intentions can have positive results. Likewise, well-intended actions can have dire consequences.

From an ethical standpoint, all that really can be analyzed is what was intended since we can only wait and see as to results.

Unseen wrote:
Ethics, considered qua ethics, should be about intentions, not actions or consequences.

Intentions could be said to be putting the conditions in place for actions, so under that reasoning, they’re vitally important.  The hypothesis is that bad intentions lead to bad actions and bad consequences.