simon

@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]

@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.

@Simon What would a disproof of evolutionary ethics look like? I’m puzzled because you seem to see some things as affirming evolutionary ethics and the rest you either explain away unconvincingly or put them in a category questions you don’t need to answer for whatever reason.

Unfortunately, you cannot prove your position without tackling …[Read more]

@Simon Paynton What is the evolutionary ethics explanation of Nazi Germany? The exception that proves the rule?

@Simon – Nietszche’s “will to power” is quite a stinker in my opinion.

I am not sure why you would think that but would you say that his ideas on eudaimonism – in that a moral action has its value measured by its capacity to produce happiness,  was a stinker?

@Simon – Actually, in theory, the religious moral system works well in its own way. It promotes good behavior and punishes bad behavior. 

I asked if we could leave religion aside but as you have said the above, I am forced to comment (as there is something wrong on the Internet!!)

At its foundation is the presupposition that god(s) exist.…[Read more]

@Simon – My point is that there is no “comprehensive moral system”, supplied by Western moral philosophy, that is sound enough for ordinary people to use to live by.

Which moral system is the worst in your opinion? Can we assume that Divine Command Theory (or Divine Comedy Theory as I have sometimes called it), is not worth the discussion time here.

Reg the Fronkey Farmer wrote:
@simon – but it’s silly to say that this leads to non-believers having to actively suppress their innate religious feelings. We just don’t. I fully agree Simon. We do not have any innate religious feelings. Humans are prone to magical thinking, to seeing patterns where none exist and to making up an answer when the c…

[Read more]

@Simon – but it’s silly to say that this leads to non-believers having to actively suppress their innate religious feelings. We just don’t.

I fully agree Simon. We do not have any innate religious feelings. Humans are prone to magical thinking, to seeing patterns where none exist and to making up an answer when the correct one is not yet dis…[Read more]

Reg the Fronkey Farmer wrote:
@simon – That is not what he said (or tweeted). I remember the incident very well as I had recently met him.

I wonder how well any of us would stand up if all and every of our actions and remarks are reported to the whole world.

But some things are going to put people’s backs up.  I’ve probably said things on so…[Read more]

I think it was foolish of Richard Dawkins to say, apparently, that women shouldn’t complain about getting minor sexual offences against them, because it’s not as bad as a full-blown rape.

@Simon – That is not what he said (or tweeted). I remember the incident very well as I had recently met him.

Here is some of the reporting from Atheist Ire…[Read more]

@Ivy – Why is that considered woo?

These types of diets come from the fetid halls of Quackademia. There is no science behind them. It would seem they are created to get people to buy supplements. They make extravagant claims and offer no validated evidence to support those claims. Many of them are dangerous to your health.

@Simon – We evolved t…[Read more]

@Simon – But Buddhism has a rational core that makes sense and is very complicated, so it’s not surprising if some people don’t understand it.

Is there a typo there? If Buddhism does have a rational core then how come it is very complicated?  Maybe you mean that it has become more complicated over time because its basic tenets have become corr…[Read more]