black and white morality

[sushi]

i thought i read a topic hear about morality but i couldnt find it


Anyway black and white morality is increasing meaningless in an overpopulated world.
Therefore, parents at a point should stop indoctrinating their children about these notions, as they are near cartoon and disney defintion of good and evil.

As the population and sample size increases, there are more and more types of personality, each of whom have their own standards and perspectives values of what is good and evil. Moreover, people in large population /large population density pools are more and more likely to cut corners and break rules because competition and shortages of resources. Therefore room to be less ethical and manipulative.

Society also become more and more complex as there are more and more personality type variations out there, to the point of being beyond social navigation. You never know the person you meet next is good or evil, and chances are they can probably get away with being a criminal scammer and submerge themselves in a sea of people. This is evident as people in china or india are more open to not follow rules and cut queues as compared to japan. The uncertainty becomes greater and greater when the population become larger. As complexity rises, evil and criminal behavior become less and less obvious.

Only less densely populated areas and small population pool has simple morality code, as people in a village or community know each other well enough to know who had done something bad and get marginalized. Moreover there is less competition for resources and land in small population pools, making less incentive to to break rules and act for self interest.

The kowloon wall city is another example that kind of illustrate my point.

 

[Black Rose]

Only less densely populated areas and small population has simple morality code, as people in a village or community know each other well enough to know who had done something bad and get marginalized. Moreover there is less competition for resources and land in small population or low density communities, making less incentive to to break rules and act for self interest.

Yes, this is exactly seen in voting patterns in the USA.

Red are the low-density areas.

 

[ZenRaiden]

Only less densely populated areas and small population pool has simple morality code, as people in a village or community know each other well enough to know who had done something bad and get marginalized.

You got this almost right.

Let me put it this way.

Peoples code of conduct matters, but if no one else upholds it, its as if you behave certain way and expect everyone else to uphold it? Is that fair?
Of course it is not? Lots of people who don't know each other don't have equal or similar expectations, then its natural we cannot use black and white morality.

If I know someone well enough having expectations of them is meaningful.

If I had expectations of you and you and of me, but we could not agree on them, then our interactions would be pretty unpleasant.

Its not about follow through with punishment, its about pragmatism.

In my humble opinion there is sever limit to black and white morality.

It is pretty streamline and simple, but any situations that is complex - requires thinking and more nuance it breaks down and becomes counter productive.

Obviously where there is lots of people and interactions there is also more complexity, and hence people are more pragmatic and more adept and dealing with complexity.

On flip side lots of interactions can also be very shallow, vs less people means you get to have deeper interactions more on average.

That said I know both village life and city life, and sitting with beer in your hand in a village or in a city is almost the same experience.

You also can have high dense populated areas and more rules, but rules are not ethics, and moral values are not ethics.

At the end of the day we are all makes of our own rules and morals.

We just develop them in relation to other people.

In a world where people don't trust each other, don't rely much on each other and don't have incentives to follow up realistically its going to be harder to keep complex morality.

 

[Black Rose]

In a world where people don't trust each other, don't rely much on each other and don't have incentives to follow up realistically its going to be harder to keep complex morality.

Trust is key.

Most scams are done at times when people realistically don't know what they are doing concerning validating other people's qualifications. In other words, it takes a high IQ to know if a high IQ person can be trusted or is using their intelligence for evil. There is an incentive to be honest in most instances if people are at the same level as you given a reputation.

 

[sushi]

Only less densely populated areas and small population pool has simple morality code, as people in a village or community know each other well enough to know who had done something bad and get marginalized.

You got this almost right.

Let me put it this way.

Peoples code of conduct matters, but if no one else upholds it, its as if you behave certain way and expect everyone else to uphold it? Is that fair?
Of course it is not? Lots of people who don't know each other don't have equal or similar expectations, then its natural we cannot use black and white morality.

If I know someone well enough having expectations of them is meaningful.

If I had expectations of you and you and of me, but we could not agree on them, then our interactions would be pretty unpleasant.

Its not about follow through with punishment, its about pragmatism.

In my humble opinion there is sever limit to black and white morality.

It is pretty streamline and simple, but any situations that is complex - requires thinking and more nuance it breaks down and becomes counter productive.

Obviously where there is lots of people and interactions there is also more complexity, and hence people are more pragmatic and more adept and dealing with complexity.

i agree with this


Relationships and encounters and faces become more and more random, and that are more morally grey areas which people can operate.

Religion and government generally impose black and white morality through law and order, But as the population size becomes larger and more complex, it becomes harder and harder to enforce such rules. People are more likely to cheat in realtionships and commit evil and get away with it.

I think the only good thing that is deterring people from doing evil is the spread of news and the information age,. After all evil and crimes operate in obscurity and darkness , and prey people's ignorance.

 

[ZenRaiden]

People are more likely to cheat in realtionships and commit evil and get away with it.

I think its the WHY that matters. People cheat more as the meaningful relations don't exist. If your relationship meets your needs would you cheat?
Cheating is basically manipulation and dishonesty, when it comes to financial stuff the same deal. We have x needs. We meet x needs.
Its also relative how people calculate more cheating?
Do we actually have any statistics from 1908 from Tennessee that women or men cheat less? The short answer is we don't. Its blatant assumption made out of thin air.
When it comes to evil its again a matter of lot of variables.
In general there is more people, so there is more things deemed "EVIL", but in day to day we are actually less evil.

 

[ZenRaiden]

I think the only good thing that is deterring people from doing evil is the spread of news

You "think" or you know?

 

[sushi]

cheating = breaking the contract of social relationship

i have several "friends" who just borrowed money and then run away, hope i will never find them again. I think that count as a form of cheat

the other is business relationship, where one party does not honor any agreement after you have paid them or after the goods are delivered etc. Or jump out of the deal.

what i am implying is not just love and marriage.
Most people wont outright break laws, but they will operate more on the grey zone hoping to never get caught. After all who bothers to know about what they have done in the past.

This makes black and white morality not relevant in an utilitarian perspective to describe society.

 

[ZenRaiden]

cheating = breaking the contract of social relationship

i have several "friends" who just borrowed money and then run away, hope i will never find them again. I think that count as a form of cheat

the other is business relationship, where one party does not honor any agreement after you have paid them or after the goods are delivered etc. Or jump out of the deal.

what i am implying is not just love and marriage.
Most people wont outright break laws, but they will operate more on the grey zone hoping to never get caught. After all who bothers to know about what they have done in the past.

This makes black and white morality not relevant in an utilitarian perspective to describe society.

What is your point though?
Are people doing wrong things?

Black and white does not exist even in court of law.
Hence why there are terms like manslaughter of murder in first degree.
Obviously there is limit to how many laws we can track and invent for sake of utility.

I think you are kind of right there is only so many things we can handle emotionally and cognitively anyway.
Having too many rules is not useful.
Having too few rules is also lacking practicality.
I think the term utilitarian is OK, but honestly I prefer just words like practical or useful.
Utility means how much use we get at end of day.
Which is cool, but not always easy to predict.
Not unless we have crystal balls to see the future.
So utilitarian mindset is kind of INTJ ENTJ ISTJ ESTJ mindset, were we go from A straight to B.

As INTP I tend to see morality as value that you follow and use as compass, when making decisions.

Ethics are just rules that make life easier.


Rules are just agreed upon suggestions that allow us to get by during the day without crashing our car.

Ultimately it all has some degree of utility, but one could argue even bad behavior has utility.

When bad behavior is perceived as good it is situations where utility of good is outweigh by bad.

Hence a person dying of hunger will steal a loaf of bread, but we can see that its not the same as person with money stealing loaf of bread.

 

[Old Things]

I agree with your general gist of what it is like when there are societies that are more heavily populated. Still, I disagree with you very strongly that the Earth is overpopulated (or even close to being such).

 

[sushi]

black and white useful for children and fairly tales, where the person looking ugly is most likely the villain in a disney cartoon or maybe in star wars, which is kind of an extension.

its useless as one grows up in complex and ambiguous society, where many people are grey and unreadable.

but alot of parents still indoctrinate children with these kind of values even as they mature.

most people i have experienced have alot of time following the golden rule, meaning it is ok for them to commit the x action to you such as punching you in the face, but its not ok if you do it to them and reverse.

i think japan or germany wtih high conscietiousness are among the cultures that still have strict moral code and behavior, as compared to more anarchic cultures / places like china, india or mexico.

 

[sushi]

its interesting that the middle class are the ones that follow black and white morality

those at the top or the bottom are least likely to adhere to these principles. perhaps they encounter more people in their social networks and understand the world is more complex.

 

[Old Things]

its interesting that the middle class are the ones that follow black and white morality

Because rich people are overeducated, and poor people don't know any better.

 

[ZenRaiden]

its interesting that the middle class are the ones that follow black and white morality

We ought to define black and white morality.
Because saying its middle class that follow it can be misleading.

Sometimes we follow morality, because its convenient.
A child might follow rules, but may not follow them because they right thing to do, they follow it, because they want to play ps4 and get a cake.

If rich people did not follow morality, then what we have today is mayhem.
Lets realize that rich people often have big impact. I ain't defending rich, but the few bad apples stink and the goody two shoes are invisible.
Creates weird effect, where everyone rich is bad. For every Soros, you might have 100s of invisible people with good moral compass, with same money and influence. You know kind of like Batman. Not every rich person wants to be on TV talking about their crimes like Soros. Some rich people probably have morals and good values and compass.

I also think my moral code might be viewed as something immoral by others.
I am I could say morally more flexible.
But do no harm would be the central node of it.

We can have flawed morality too. It can lead to absurd things like burning witches, or killing weird people or gays.
We can also have radical morality, that can be tentatively bizarre, like people advocating for pedophilia, which was not so long ago acceptable thing socially.
We just grew out of that bull by realizing its harmful to children.

The thing is morality is something we evolved into, but I think its also something we have innately.

The black and white morality, stems from psychological limitations as well as social limitations.

Being able to see shades of grey, or even colors of hue in morality, is not just intellectual, its also emotional thing.

Psychopathy is good example of this. Psychopathy is emotional problem, not intellectual. Psychopaths are way shut down emotionally to connect with others emotional.
Important to note, I too do not connect well with people, but there are emotions.
Its that psychopathy literally means part of your brain does not go online.

So its important to realize that morality, is often times emotional exercise as well.
If people feel limited and live in limited ways they end up being emotionally limited.
Which by extension leads to black and white stuff.

We also ought to realize that morality, does not have to be single minded.
Ergo everything has to be unicoded for everyone. That kind of morality leaves out the individual. What is good for me, might be terrible for you etc. also extends to morality.
For instance I hate violence, and war. I cannot understand why people willingly commit themselves to army to fight dumb wars.
That does not mean I don't see this morality having values for others. There reasons for why people evolved aggression and territorial ambitions, and exercise this behavior.

 

[Black Rose]

What is good for me, might be terrible for you etc. also extends to morality.
For instance I hate violence, and war. I cannot understand why people willingly commit themselves to army to fight dumb wars.
That does not mean I don't see this morality having values for others. There reasons for why people evolved aggression and territorial ambitions, and exercise this behavior.

Many reasons, one wants to be in the group but one does not think a war is dumb because it benefits the group or some proxy group.

The clan or family is the largest group when it comes to nations where you live close to the territory so to make it benefit you you must be loyal to a piece of land where it is that to protect it means you trust your leaders the head of the pack.

What constitutes dumb is in perspective. If your leader is dumb that makes you dumb so you pick a new leader or move away where they are not dumb.

Like is a war dumb because it is not a moral war? Then what is a moral war?

Example: My mother was watching a movie where this girl said: "It did not matter if you were a patriot or a loyalist, we are all fighting for what we believe in", then they ate Christmas dinner. After the movie ended I told my 6 yo niece that the reason we had the Revolutionary War 250 years ago, way before Grandma was born, was because the king in Britain was not treating the people in the Americas the same as the people in Britain so it was unfair. Now I know there were more complicated reasons for it, like the king did not want expansion westward and they did not want to send technology to America because of competition but what I said to my niece was enough because the movie was dumb.

The USA is like that but not the same, they dominate the oceans because it is important to stop pirates from disrupting trade roots (this was similar to what the Knights Templar did with the banks) but they also wanted to squash competition like in South America via the CIA coups. Iraq had wars with both Israel and Iran so the war there was not to spread democracy as sold. Currently, Taiwan is important to China and the USA but if a war happens both countries lose chip manufacturing there. The war in Ukraine is about the same things we disagree with Mexico about because both are mafia-ruled systems. We don't like mafias because of all the crime it creates in our country. So if we have war it is most likely because of the system that is in place that would be against our system.

After WW1 it was decided that countries be punished but this did not work and WW2 happened, so it was then decided to do so clandestinely. But that did not work either because we started spying on our own people and secrete trials and police. So then we just did so economic war. But then it became seen that it was hard to do because of all the enemies we created. That was when it was decided to stop terrorists of all kinds, inside governments and outside governments. But that created a culture war between left and right when the economy crashed.

What matters now is the security of all people not just Americans.

That means we cannot just pretend to help and keep order we must actually do it at all levels. For example, the CIA ceased all operations in China when China decrypted its communications and killed many of these people. Then the leaks at the Pentagon where it was found that the internet was making things harder to keep secrets. And now the media has been looked into for crimes because of Jan 6.

Elon Musk stopped a nuclear exchange with Russia by protecting their ships from explosions when Star Link refused to allow the drones to attack them. He is not from America, he is from South Africa.

Without a proper system, we cannot have a safe global society. Without honest dialog, wars cannot be stopped so there must be honesty at all levels.

 

[ZenRaiden]

Like is a war dumb because it is not a moral war? Then what is a moral war?

OK here is counter, what war is not dumb. Or when war happens what makes war beneficial?
If war in Iraq happened, and many people died, what benefit do you have from that war? That is the real question, because the war was fought with your vote and with your democracy, and with your money. It was not Bushes money, and it was not his army, and it was not his democracy. Its yours.
That is what seems to elude a lot of people nowdays.
SO smart war is when people get blasted to smithereens and die, I want to know why and what for. If I can answer these two questions then its not dumb war. Then I can have clear conscience and support the war.
Because I don't want people to die in war, simply because someone said its a good idea.
There are millions of people who will say war is good.
There are millions of muslims and christians who are for war.
There are millions of atheists for war.
That does not mean its correct.
The only thing that makes war correct is correct reasons.

 

[Black Rose]

It was not Bushes money, and it was not his army, and it was not his democracy. Its yours.

If war in Iraq happened, and many people died, what benefit do you have from that war?

SO smart war is when people get blasted to smithereens and die, I want to know why and what for. If I can answer these two questions then its not dumb war.

Reasons exist they are just not good reasons when it comes to the decisions of leaders when the goals self defeat everything we are trying to achieve.

First Iraq was Israel's enemy. Second many people support them because of religion. Third, we had the opportunity to get rid of a "potential threat" when 9/11 gave special war powers to the president. Fourth Iraq was at war many times and could not be trusted in the future.

Many people did not support the war and the war was not planned it just happened. So the only thing that mattered was the destabilization of a threatening country not keeping things as safe as they could be because neocons are stupid at wars. If we wanted a war where Israel would be safe we would plan what to do. We would not create ISIS by disbanding the Iraq military and we would build their economy better. But I was told by a soldier working at the desk in the group home in 2008 "We are there to fight terrorists, not nation build." I told him that without nation-building more terrorists are created and he just repeated "We are there to get the terrorists" This made me really really mad and I just sat on the couch in the living area fumeing. He was fully into the propaganda.

 

[ZenRaiden]

This made me really really mad and I just sat on the couch in the living area fumeing. He was fully into the propaganda.

Don't take it personally is my advice. Secondly be careful with politics.
90 percent of people will not be kind to you in political debate. Thats just how political culture is. Its really vicious.
Kind and meaningful discourse is art, that must be cultivated and also it has to be two way street. Unfortunately most of people don't even want that, let alone know its possible. Your job is not to convince people as a thinker. Your best bet is to make people think for themselves. That is all we can do as thinkers.
I personally don't like conflicts, and I had to learn the hard way that people sometimes just don't want to talk politics in reasonable way. And given how media and politicians spread this aggressive political debate culture, we are all programmed and influenced by this from cradle to crib.
My best advice would be to listen to people before you speak to them.
That way you know whether they will be receptive to your way of thinking or not.
And also acknowledging that others think differently or wildly different from you is really important before you speak to anyone at all.
Next time just talk about something more relatable, like pancakes, chocolate or tabasco hot sauce.

 

[Old Things]

The only thing that makes war correct is correct reasons.

That's true!

I think one of the only times a nation should go to war is if they are attacked first. And if they go to war, people will die on both sides.

War is truly a terrible beast. I would wish that there were no wars ever. But that is not a reality.

 

[ZenRaiden]

War is truly a terrible beast. I would wish that there were no wars ever. But that is not a reality.

Then I assume you really aren't black and white moralist.
After all the world is not a chess game. Its a real time game.
Or to put it simply, if people can make oblique bad moves, so can better people make oblique good moves. It just takes recognition of that possibility.

 

[Old Things]

War is truly a terrible beast. I would wish that there were no wars ever. But that is not a reality.

Then I assume you really aren't black and white moralist.
After all the world is not a chess game. Its a real time game.
Or to put it simply, if people can make oblique bad moves, so can better people make oblique good moves. It just takes recognition of that possibility.

I'm an objective moralist AKA moral realist. This is a view even some atheists hold to. The basic gist is that some things are always evil (with some qualifications). For example, it is permissible to kill another human in a just war, but it is never okay to murder a person. The difference is in killing a person who is playing by a similar framework (war), and another is killing a person for undue reasons.

 

[Black Rose]

The more one understands the more responsibility one has.

But our emotions and ignorance are the limiting factors.

 

[ZenRaiden]

I'm an objective moralist AKA moral realist

If that means to you that there is some outside solution that is inherently right and knowable Id argue that I am at least most of the time in this mindset too.

For me Id say that morality is more like framework where the principal tendency is consistency, but also I would also say multi facet complexity, ergo I admit that there is more than one good way, or I permit, that certain goodness maybe transcended by other goodness, or that trivial solutions can lead to emerging values of morality, that go beyond the trivial thing. That and value and morality are in constant flux.

Ergo since humans are not fixed systems so is not morality a fixed system.
Not to confuse with relativism, but sometimes that too.

 

[Black Rose]

Ergo since humans are not fixed systems so is not morality a fixed system.
Not to confuse with relativism, but sometimes that too.

my "stepfather" says it is God's law that it is wrong to eat pork.

he also says it is a vain pagan costume to have a Christmas tree.

and we should not work on Saturday because Sunday is Not the Sabbath day.

he was suicidal as a child and the churches kicked him out everywhere he went as a 33-year-old adult when he was "saved".

so morality being objective may be true but not everyone is objective in the same ways.

 

[ZenRaiden]

my "stepfather" says it is God's law that it is wrong to eat pork.

I eat pork, but every time I see a pig eat a cookie on youtube I feel guilty. Its a struggle. Pigs are cute.

he also says it is a vain pagan costume to have a Christmas tree.

Symbols mean many things to many people.
We perceive things differently.

and we should not work on Saturday because Sunday is Not the Sabbath day.

Everyday we are alive has meaning. If we see it as such.
God is everywhere.

he was suicidal as a child and the churches kicked him out everywhere he went as a 33-year-old adult when he was "saved".

I believe the only church we need is our minds spirit and body, that is the real temple to the extent of living beings.

may be true but not everyone is objective in the same ways.

Yes, and therefore I believe some things are unknowable for us humans, and some things are perceptual things. I perceive the world a certain way.
It maybe flawed, but it also may mean my perception is different, if my perception is different from a fish, it does not mean the fish is wrong nor I am wrong.
Perception is dynamic not static, and world is dynamic not static.
Kind of like F=ma in physics means the variables equate the same things, but variables may have different value for different objects.
SO different people will abide by different perceptions, and different situations will make people act differently, because we are exposed to different variables, but unlike in physics life is messy, and instead of 3 variables we have 1000s.

 

[Black Rose]

@ZenRaiden

I think the problem comes when we try an univeralize morality.

If we have 1,000 variables not everything will be applicable but some think that morality is always applicable.

 

[ZenRaiden]

I think the problem comes when we try an univeralize morality.

Only All seeing all knowing all superior being like God can entertain universals.
We humans are always learning and evolving.
That is our missions are mere fragmented entities of God.
Our job is not to be perfect.
Our job is to evolve, grow, live, and play out the life we were meant to play out.
In some sense we have God like essence. We are not the same as God though.

Also not everything is moral.

 

[Black Rose]

Is libertarianism the correct way to act, think, and believe?

Force when applied causes things to happen.

So consequences matter?

 

[ZenRaiden]

Is libertarianism the correct way to act, think, and believe?

Force when applied causes things to happen.

So consequences matter?

Freedom is essential. Its not political brand. Its essential to our survival as species.
If you aren't free you are a slave by default.
Slavery means rebellion kind of like Spartacus or Christians.

Freedom means you can be best version of person you are, that means society gets best version of you, which means society is stronger.

Consequence matter, but how do we know what matters, and why?
Without emotions nothing matters, because that is merely inert wet brain.
It is emotions that make inert wetbrain work and be dynamic.
It is us who make things go. By making things go, we create cause and effect.
That in turn causes us to act, and see consequence, and that in turn makes us able to know. Knowing makes us better at doing things, but it does not makes us go.

A dragon can be trained and trained dragon can help humans to fly and fight.
A dragon that is killed is no use for humans.

But dragons don't have human needs. SO people cannot care for dragons the same way they care for humans, and dragons also have different abilities than humans.
And that is why dragons are important for humans.

 

[Black Rose]

But if we have say the most freedom does that mean we have people who know what is best more than other humans?

The wise king knows best?

But also if God is wisest what is it we are supposed to do?

So many think they know God but do not, then their morality leads to wrong direction.

This means conservatives know what to do as oldest and wisest.

But children must be taught.

And not all adults are wise.

It is foolish to do what will not make you better.

If morality is about being the best you possible?

 

[Black Rose]

People also sometimes try and stop you from being the best you possible.

 

[Old Things]

I'm an objective moralist AKA moral realist

If that means to you that there is some outside solution that is inherently right and knowable Id argue that I am at least most of the time in this mindset too.

For me Id say that morality is more like framework where the principal tendency is consistency, but also I would also say multi facet complexity, ergo I admit that there is more than one good way, or I permit, that certain goodness maybe transcended by other goodness, or that trivial solutions can lead to emerging values of morality, that go beyond the trivial thing. That and value and morality are in constant flux.

Ergo since humans are not fixed systems so is not morality a fixed system.
Not to confuse with relativism, but sometimes that too.

I've said this before here (or something like it) that everyone is a moral objectivist or moral realist as soon as it comes to whether you think someone should unfairly torture and kill you.

 

[Black Rose]

Killing and torturing people is an extreme that always is morally wrong.

So what happens when less extreme things happen that people disagree on?

Because people do fight over trivial things as if they were life and death.

 

[Old Things]

Killing and torturing people is an extreme that always is morally wrong.

So what happens when less extreme things happen that people disagree on?

Because people do fight over trivial things as if they were life and death.

Well, there are several things in this that are worth discussing.

The first thing that comes to mind when I read this is the topic of whether or not there is a categorical difference between greater and lesser moral rights and wrongs. I would say it is the same fundamental principle when discussing rights and wrongs. "Love your neighbor as yourself." If you are not willing to do that, then something is flawed. There are many elites who would if they could control the whole world much like Hitler's paradise. There is even ongoing discussion of such things. But as a Christian, I know that all humans are created equal. There is no categorical difference from one person to another. However, if we tease out this reasoning, then it would mean that we should not treat any person less valuable than the way we view ourselves. I know a man who struggles with SI and intrusive thoughts. I always try to pray for him because he honestly sounds like he is in a rough spot and I hate seeing people suffer. So, some people do not value themselves very highly. But all the more reason to reach into the mire and try and pull them out of the pit. Therefore, "Do to others as you would have them do to you."

And yes, people do fight over trivial things all the time. But they are not trivial to the people arguing about them. So what do we make of this? Well, I think that is why having a big-picture view of things is most important here. "Can't see the forest for the trees," etc. But there is hope! Anyone can have a big-picture perspective. How? By majoring on the majors and minoring on the minors. And for me, what all this has to do with is the fate of a person's soul. I can't convince a flat earther or a member of a cult that everything they believe is a lie. And it would be foolish to try. Therefore, start where you can. Tell them their life has purpose. Tell them there is an eternity waiting for them. If they can get to that point, the rest will fall into place. We all have illogical ideas and poorly reasoned arguments at times because we are not omniscient. But we can try and focus on what truly matters. In the end, we must see that we are talking to other people, not just a robot. As such, we must fundamentally focus on the most important axioms that will benefit people to the greatest degree even if they never come around to believing everything we do.

 

[ZenRaiden]

Tell them there is an eternity waiting for them.

I don't want to make this sound judgmental, but if this is your bread and butter for life, then that is hellova bad deal. You certainly won't get many people hooked on Christianity with this bleak promise.

As such, we must fundamentally focus on the most important axioms that will benefit people to the greatest degree even if they never come around to believing everything we do.

Do you even know what those are? Or are you waiting for next life?

 

[Old Things]

Or are you waiting for next life?

Without heaven, then we all die and there is no hope.

Heaven is a great place to be. It tells us how great heaven is in the Bible. It says,

Spoiler

Isaiah 11:6-9
"The wolf will dwell with the lamb,
and the leopard will lie down with the goat.
The calf, the young lion, and the fattened calf will be together,
and a child will lead them.
The cow and the bear will graze,
their young ones will lie down together,
and the lion will eat straw like cattle.
An infant will play beside the cobra’s pit,
and a toddler will put his hand into a snake’s den.
They will not harm or destroy each other
on my entire holy mountain,
for the land will be as full
of the knowledge of the LORD
as the sea is filled with water."

 

[ZenRaiden]

Without heaven, then we all die and there is no hope.

Heaven is a great place to be. It tells us how great heaven is in the Bible. It says,

I never read anything in bible saying "Stiff it out until the crib." Although I am sure someone might have wrote that in the bible too.

 

[Old Things]

Without heaven, then we all die and there is no hope.

Heaven is a great place to be. It tells us how great heaven is in the Bible. It says,

I never read anything in bible saying "Stiff it out until the crib." Although I am sure someone might have wrote that in the bible too.

I'll be honest, I have no idea what "stiff it out until the crib" means.

 

[Black Rose]

Without heaven, then we all die and there is no hope.

Heaven is a great place to be. It tells us how great heaven is in the Bible. It says,

I never read anything in bible saying "Stiff it out until the crib." Although I am sure someone might have wrote that in the bible too.

I'll be honest, I have no idea what "stiff it out until the crib" means.

As adults, we know better that heaven is not going to be like it says in the bible.

The bible describes it as if it were a place where you only do baby stuff, sing to God eat meals, pet sheep. No adults know better because as adults we understand what boredom is. As an adult, I learned that after school ends we have to make decisions about what to do and what to learn because it is a very empty world that has not too much purpose to it. We must understand what to do with our time and that means if heaven is a real place what are we doing there? How quickly will things devolve into decadence when you have nothing to do?

You may not die but then what next? I hope we as adults have things to do other than eating all day and petting sheep.

Getting back to morality: right and wrong exist, that is basic, but when it comes to the things we must do and the things we must not do that is more complex. Why are some things good and others bad? It has a lot to do with what we would call preferences. But also it has to do with getting other people involved in what could be called politics. Reasoning with other people is hard so the best thing to do is to get people on your side without deception or ulterior motives. To do so you must understand reality as it is because if you do not you look like a fool and will be ignored and even blamed for what is "obviously not true". A person trying to convince others of the rightness and wrongness of something must use reason to do so or it is just a power game.

It is more often than not, arbitrary what rules people must follow. We do not get people to follow them just because an authority figure says they are to be followed or if we get threats of punishment for it. It must be agreed that what has happened is wrong for there to be legitimate enforcement. If not then it will easily not stand up to scrutiny and be reversed. Children learn early on what can and cannot be done and what society deems right and wrong. They know that might does not equal right because they have a theory of mind. They can see that what they do and what others do can mean different things and even correct the error of their ways because they know the difference between the significant and trivial when it comes to social relations.

So to get kids to learn right from wrong you must teach them what is worth and not worth fighting for and what is true and not true and what to do in ambiguous circumstances. To get them to learn right from wrong you must show them what is valuable and what is not valuable. That means some things do have more value than other things, it is important to know how and why that is to correctly access them. Self-worth is very important because if they do not have self-worth then they will seek it in unhealthy ways. Ultimately we want kids not to be a detriment to society. We want them to function in the best way possible to become adults and care for others. Morality does not exist if it does not take into consideration how we treat others.

 

[Old Things]

The bible describes it as if it were a place where you only do baby stuff, sing to God eat meals, pet sheep.

Book, chapter, and verse, please.

It has a lot to do with what we would call preferences.

Lack of discernment.

It is more often than not, arbitrary what rules people must follow.

Only if you lack common sense.

 

[birdsnestfern]

Morality creates expectations of others that are not realistic or always reasonable. Those are the cognition/cultural side of the psyche you want to remove as much of as possible.

If someone goes around getting highly peeved because they expect to be treated a certain way, and nobody else is 'in' on whatever that expectation was, it creates a strangely twisted expectation that sets both sides up to fail.

Ie, if I take the time to do something for someone and they don't do the same back, that is not an expectation I should reasonably keep. Instead, if I chose to do something for someone, I should do it because I wanted to with no expectation of anything in return is the mode that will make things more realistic. And/or, simply not to be overly generous to set up disappointment in the first place.

You've got to lose as much of those automatic thoughts that create disappointment as you can so that you are living a healthier freer more balanced life I think. Don't expect ANYTHING from people, only develope your own set of values that have no preconceptions and try to live by what you feel creates more peace to you and others.

I guess if you are going to inject your moralities on the world, then be specific and speak out and communicate whatever expectation judgements you will have to begin with, or its null. Its nobodys fault but your own if you didn't express what moral judgement/expectation you have up front before hand and leave it up to others whether or not they want to engage in that, otherwise, what the hell. Moralities can twist and tangle things up more than they help especially because of how the world is such a melting pot of different desires, there is no way to satisfy them all.

I guess when you are young, you may not know what you want, so that becomes the real issue. You eventually learn what you do NOT want, and when you know that, you can be more clear about what you do want. But then, you are to be responsible for being crystal clear with people and not faking hearts desires. Its not ok to use others unless both are in agreement to the same and aware of it. Its when both souls are aware fully of each others stipulations that it starts to work. Know thyself and what you really want and be open about it, subjectively tell the truth, or else, if you can't, just get good at self enlightenment in the world. In the end, hearts are what are really important, in preserving heart mind, you are encouraging others to do the same.

 

[Black Rose]

The bible describes it as if it were a place where you only do baby stuff, sing to God eat meals, pet sheep.

Book, chapter, and verse, please.

As adults what do people do in heaven not to be bored?

I suppose that was @ZenRaiden 's point.

We may spend time with relatives but what else?

The bride's supper is one verse I read about eating in heaven.

It has a lot to do with what we would call preferences.

Lack of discernment.

in what context?

people think that many things matter that actually don't matter when it comes to people's likes and dislikes. people being judged for liking this or that football team or color shirt or tv show and many many more things.

It is more often than not, arbitrary what rules people must follow.

Only if you lack common sense.

many do.

and this is because of the maturity levels they are at psychologically.

 

[ZenRaiden]

Without heaven, then we all die and there is no hope.

Heaven is a great place to be. It tells us how great heaven is in the Bible. It says,

Are you Christian literalist? Do you actually believe that is the version of heaven?

I'll be honest, I have no idea what "stiff it out until the crib" means.

I am not Christian, but to me it seems like you are not happy so you are waiting for afterlife.
Sounds a lot like giving up, for some reason.

 

[Old Things]

Without heaven, then we all die and there is no hope.

Heaven is a great place to be. It tells us how great heaven is in the Bible. It says,

Are you Christian literalist? Do you actually believe that is the version of heaven?

I'll be honest, I have no idea what "stiff it out until the crib" means.

I am not Christian, but to me it seems like you are not happy so you are waiting for afterlife.
Sounds a lot like giving up, for some reason.

I try and interpret the books of the Bible as they were intended. Sometimes that is literally, and sometimes it is not.

As for my personal life, "happiness" is a word that often means exuberant jubilation or something. I don't experience "excitement" in terms of glee very often, but I am an extremely content person in general.

 

[Old Things]

As adults what do people do in heaven not to be bored?

Heaven is like the best day you have ever had in your life only better in every way all the time.

people think that many things matter that actually don't matter when it comes to people's likes and dislikes. people being judged for liking this or that football team or color shirt or tv show and many many more things.

Those are very superficial judgments. Likes and dislikes are a very poor test of morality.

and this is because of the maturity levels they are at psychologically.

No. Some people who are extremely simple people have an abundance of common sense.

 

[Black Rose]

people think that many things matter that actually don't matter when it comes to people's likes and dislikes. people being judged for liking this or that football team or color shirt or tv show and many many more things.

Those are very superficial judgments. Likes and dislikes are a very poor test of morality.

and this is because of the maturity levels they are at psychologically.

No. Some people who are extremely simple people have an abundance of common sense.

How do simple people deal with complex moral questions then? If black-and-white morality is the opposite of nuance then simple and complex issues are not the same and require more than "common sense". Can common sense be taught or are some people doomed to be unable to deal with complex issues?

 

[Old Things]

people think that many things matter that actually don't matter when it comes to people's likes and dislikes. people being judged for liking this or that football team or color shirt or tv show and many many more things.

Those are very superficial judgments. Likes and dislikes are a very poor test of morality.

and this is because of the maturity levels they are at psychologically.

No. Some people who are extremely simple people have an abundance of common sense.

How do simple people deal with complex moral questions then? If black-and-white morality is the opposite of nuance then simple and complex issues are not the same and require more than "common sense". Can common sense be taught or are some people doomed to be unable to deal with complex issues?

Often, the more educated a person is the more they lack common sense.

There is a difference between wisdom and knowledge. Knowledge is just what you know. Wisdom is rightly applying the knowledge you already have. It's the difference between getting lost in the details and seeing what the main thing is. People can really screw themselves up by looking to themselves as the source of wisdom. Wisdom is basically the ability to get down to the most essential and distilling the meaning of something. People often get lost in the weeds of their own ideas and never look back. The Bible says that God gives people over to their own delusions, which is what being a fool is. You can well be a fool and be the smartest person alive. Morality is not that difficult to know. Whatever is good and pure and wholesome that is what makes something moral or not. In the West today, perversion abounds because we have a complete lack of common sense.

 

[Black Rose]

Wisdom is rightly applying the knowledge you already have. It's the difference between getting lost in the details and seeing what the main thing is.

Morality is not that difficult to know. Whatever is good and pure and wholesome that is what makes something moral or not. In the West today, perversion abounds because we have a complete lack of common sense.

Some people are more or less wiser than others. So there is a scale to morality in that knowledge is lacking and therefore cannot be applied correctly. In the instance that children fight each other over the most trivial things and so to adults can act like children not understanding the correct way to act. To know what is good is simple but in complex environments, it makes sense that doing the right thing requires understanding all factors involved in decisions. it requires knowing the bigger consequences. meaning that prioritization matters. that some things are more important than others if you are faced with more data more information and more variables. We put smarter people in charge of such processes because we hope they can deal with all the chaotic deluge and do the critical thinking necessary to get the job done.

People often get lost in the weeds of their own ideas and never look back. The Bible says that God gives people over to their own delusions, which is what being a fool is. You can well be a fool and be the smartest person alive.

Correct, but then people need both smartness and wisdom because if one is wise but not smart then they cannot handle much and should not be in certain positions of power requiring hard problems to solve. But being smart and not wise a person will use their smartness in inappropriate ways just to fill agendas and such.

I think my point is that a smart wise person can handle complex moral issues than a simple wise person. If a person is in a situation of complexity there is not going to be one correct answer. Because one correct answer assumes the issue is not complex and is simply black and white. As an example, a wise 90-year-old man will understand the bible in a different way than an 8-year-old.

Jewish Bible interpretation methods classify four levels of Torah study, known as PaRDeS:

• P'shat: A literal reading
• Remez: An allegorical reading through a text's hint or allusion
• Derash: A metaphorical reading through a comparison or illustration
• Sod: A hidden meaning reading through a text's secret or mystery

In Christianity, the four senses of Scripture are literal, allegorical, tropological, and anagogical. In Kabbalah, the four meanings of biblical texts are literal, allusive, allegorical, and mystical.

 

[Old Things]

prioritization matters

Yes, this is the nub of the issue. What does a person prioritize? If some people are more evil than others, then intelligence doesn't do anything in that equation. This is why I think whoever becomes president in the 2024 US presidential election we are screwed either way. It's going to be between Trump and Biden. Neither is what I would call a good option. It's so deplorable that I probably will vote third party again because it will just be a rerun of 2020. Neither are capable of making good moral decisions. But those are the two who are most likely to be our next president. Part of being evil is that you want power. That's why most politicians are terrible people in general, who are the opposite of who you want running your country. And they get away with it because they are smart.

Right and wrong are not a form of knowledge. Not directly, anyway. Knowing right and wrong is discernment, which is a spiritual gift. It's something you cannot teach a person. Same goes for common sense.

 

[Black Rose]

Right and wrong are not a form of knowledge. Not directly, anyway. Knowing right and wrong is discernment, which is a spiritual gift. It's something you cannot teach a person. Same goes for common sense.

Demonstration is what needs to happen first of all. You learn some things from parents and other things from friends and society which is why I mention maturity. Maturity is something that can become more than just facts about the world but an example of what you should and should not do when seen in others and the relationships you have with others. If you have wise parents you will be wise more likely to have parents who teach you deception and hate. What matters in wisdom is self-awareness to know good and bad things but knowing good and bad things has always come from a person's personal experience with actual events that lead to this understanding.

When a person has in them a self-awareness then they too can distinguish what is good and bad just from being placed in a situation requiring them to do what is necessary for the good of others. So when we teach people what is good from the beginning it is proper to have them intend to do good first and to do good one needs to look inside themselves for what would be good for the other person. Is this best for them and in what way and what must they know and understand so they see it is the best good possible? Communication becomes key to showing others what good is and what needs to be done.

When people see that others care for them then it becomes much more easily applicable to get them to become good and have common sense because they will see those good things exist and also the many ways in which good is possible through demonstration and practice.