Simon Paynton

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]

TheEncogitationer wrote:
Witches do exist, and they mean to do us harm.

I’d agree with that blurb, except for this bit.  In my experience, witches are “white witches” – they intend to do good rather than harm.  It’s seen as very bad form karmically to try to hurt others with “magic”.

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.

Reg the Fronkey Farmer wrote:
The Religion of Peace has updated its policy for men on how and when to beat women and children.

This is classic patriarchal coercion and control.  It shows that religion is cultural in part, and is there to uphold the status quo in the form of what is convenient for the male species.  The sense of entitlement is o…[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]

TheEncogitationer wrote:
Also, I observed an autistic Grandson of my Grandfather’s friend carry something like 24 Motchbox cars in one hand across the room without dropping one! That would certainly have applications in a survival scenario.

It’s not much of a consolation, but people on the autistic spectrum do often have “super powers” like h…[Read more]

jakelafort wrote:
As to ASPD i was under the impression it is synonymous with psychopathology.

The two terms seem to be very ill-defined in the literature.  According to my experience, psychopathy pretty much means a lack of emotion, especially negative emotion, and including moral emotion; and impulsivity.  All the recognised cluster-B p…[Read more]

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.

Davis wrote:
It is very difficult to imagine how one could possibly create a coherent let alone effective moral system by combining the two.

But surely, both actions and consequences are important.  Consequences are what we have to live with, and actions are putting the conditions in place for consequences.

jakelafort wrote:
Borderline personality disorder, schizophrenia, PTSD, and a host of psychology labels are in the simplest terms, most convenient definitions.

Most of these things seem to be spectrums.  People with BPD are sometimes comorbid with narcissism and/or antisocial personality disorder (exploits others materially).  I knew someone w…[Read more]

Autumn wrote:
That just contributes to the stigmatization of autism.

Some people think that autism has been adaptive in human prehistory, helping the species to innovate new technology etc.

I know.  I was too brief for my own good.  My point is, should someone be condemned or dismissed for having a psychological disorder?

I was referring to gender dysphoria.

Unseen wrote:
dismiss people who think they aren’t absolutely 100% male or female as mentally ill?

Is it dismissing someone to say that they have a psychological disorder, or is it describing them?  It depends how you see it.

Unseen wrote:
is it a way for intelligent people who know how to use big words to dismiss people who think they aren’t absolutely 100% male or female as mentally ill?

Is it dismissing someone, or describing them?  It depends how you see it.

Davis wrote:
I still immensely enjoy their work and don’t for a second support the idea of throwing away their additions to wordily insight, creativity and artistic enjoyment.

I’m a big fan of Throbbing Gristle and Psychic TV (“industrial” music from the ’80s) but it turned out that the lead singer, Genesis P-Orridge, was a narcissistic monster a…[Read more]