wazua Wed, May 6, 2026
Welcome Guest Search | Active Topics | Log In

4 Pages<1234>
On morality and ethics
Muriel
#11 Posted : Thursday, October 30, 2014 9:19:19 AM
Rank: Member

Joined: 11/19/2009
Posts: 3,142
Lotus ,,, the flower. Hhhmmm!

The 'recipe' could be both.

What is this 'burden of life'? And why is it heavy?
tycho
#12 Posted : Thursday, October 30, 2014 9:47:52 AM
Rank: Elder

Joined: 7/1/2011
Posts: 8,804
Location: Nairobi
Muriel wrote:
Lotus ,,, the flower. Hhhmmm!

The 'recipe' could be both.

What is this 'burden of life'? And why is it heavy?


The burden of life is essentially the quest for meaning in contradictory experience. It's Man knowing good and evil trying to maximize on good without avail. It's heavy because though there's toil and clamor the end is never achieved. It's Sysiphus trying to roll an ever growing rock up the mountain only to be overwhelmed by the weight of the rock.

Enlightenment, the recipe, is to stop rolling the rock. Then everything becomes light.
Wakanyugi
#13 Posted : Thursday, October 30, 2014 10:03:43 AM
Rank: Veteran

Joined: 7/3/2007
Posts: 1,635
tycho wrote:


So I'd like those who can and are willing to engage on this matter to join in me in thinking and creating an understanding on this matter.



Tycho, I may be late to this party but here is my small kamchango:

I define morality as the setting of boundaries, between what I consider good and evil.

But I have also come to appreciate that in many respects, this is a false boundary and it applies only to me. This is quite helpful when it comes to appreciating other people's morality or lack thereof.

I have had the good luck, or bad, as you may see it, to encounter people or situations where practically every moral principle I hold dear is inverted. Where taking human life, stealing, rape, blasphemy etc are morally upheld as good.

Where then would I stand to judge or condemn?

My advice is 'just relax.' It is a relative Universe after all.
"The opposite of a correct statement is a false statement. But the opposite of a profound truth may well be another profound truth." (Niels Bohr)
tycho
#14 Posted : Thursday, October 30, 2014 10:17:11 AM
Rank: Elder

Joined: 7/1/2011
Posts: 8,804
Location: Nairobi
Wakanyugi wrote:
tycho wrote:


So I'd like those who can and are willing to engage on this matter to join in me in thinking and creating an understanding on this matter.



Tycho, I may be late to this party but here is my small kamchango:

I define morality as the setting of boundaries, between what I consider good and evil.

But I have also come to appreciate that in many respects, this is a false boundary and it applies only to me. This is quite helpful when it comes to appreciating other people's morality or lack thereof.

I have had the good luck, or bad, as you may see it, to encounter people or situations where practically every moral principle I hold dear is inverted. Where taking human life, stealing, rape, blasphemy etc are morally upheld as good.

Where then would I stand to judge or condemn?

My advice is 'just relax.' It is a relative Universe after all.


If there's an abused expression then it's that of a 'relative universe'. 'Universe' has singularity about it. 'Relative' has multiplicity in it. So your expression makes sense only when the multiple reduces to singularity and vice versa. That's the crux of morality. Morality goes beyond setting boundaries or making judgements.

Per chance, have you ever looked into the mystery of the Baghavad Gita? Story begins in a battle field, where murder is imminent.

Let's take a practical example, how does terrorism feature in your moral conception?
Muriel
#15 Posted : Thursday, October 30, 2014 10:36:28 AM
Rank: Member

Joined: 11/19/2009
Posts: 3,142
tycho wrote:
Muriel wrote:
Lotus ,,, the flower. Hhhmmm!

The 'recipe' could be both.

What is this 'burden of life'? And why is it heavy?


The burden of life is essentially the quest for meaning in contradictory experience. It's Man knowing good and evil trying to maximize on good without avail. It's heavy because though there's toil and clamor the end is never achieved. It's Sysiphus trying to roll an ever growing rock up the mountain only to be overwhelmed by the weight of the rock.

Enlightenment, the recipe, is to stop rolling the rock. Then everything becomes light.


What makes is a 'contradictory experience'?

Are not the 'contradictions' merely 'sequences'?
tycho
#16 Posted : Thursday, October 30, 2014 10:45:57 AM
Rank: Elder

Joined: 7/1/2011
Posts: 8,804
Location: Nairobi
Muriel wrote:
tycho wrote:
Muriel wrote:
Lotus ,,, the flower. Hhhmmm!

The 'recipe' could be both.

What is this 'burden of life'? And why is it heavy?


The burden of life is essentially the quest for meaning in contradictory experience. It's Man knowing good and evil trying to maximize on good without avail. It's heavy because though there's toil and clamor the end is never achieved. It's Sysiphus trying to roll an ever growing rock up the mountain only to be overwhelmed by the weight of the rock.

Enlightenment, the recipe, is to stop rolling the rock. Then everything becomes light.


What makes is a 'contradictory experience'?

Are not the 'contradictions' merely 'sequences'?


The contradictions are a result of how cognition develops and the conflict it raises with our nature. Piaget provides us with a picture of what happens in the developing human. Other psychologists provide us with insights on how the developing human understands and relates with the world. Yes, it's a sequence, but the sequence is faulty.
Muriel
#17 Posted : Thursday, October 30, 2014 11:30:56 AM
Rank: Member

Joined: 11/19/2009
Posts: 3,142
tycho wrote:
Muriel wrote:
tycho wrote:
Muriel wrote:
Lotus ,,, the flower. Hhhmmm!

The 'recipe' could be both.

What is this 'burden of life'? And why is it heavy?


The burden of life is essentially the quest for meaning in contradictory experience. It's Man knowing good and evil trying to maximize on good without avail. It's heavy because though there's toil and clamor the end is never achieved. It's Sysiphus trying to roll an ever growing rock up the mountain only to be overwhelmed by the weight of the rock.

Enlightenment, the recipe, is to stop rolling the rock. Then everything becomes light.


What makes is a 'contradictory experience'?

Are not the 'contradictions' merely 'sequences'?


The contradictions are a result of how cognition develops and the conflict it raises with our nature. Piaget provides us with a picture of what happens in the developing human. Other psychologists provide us with insights on how the developing human understands and relates with the world. Yes, it's a sequence, but the sequence is faulty.


Then these 'contradictions' are not really 'contradictions'. What could be perceived as a 'contradiction' by one may not be so to another.

IS this not relativism? Why are we reinventing the wheel? Cannot we learn from the French?
tycho
#18 Posted : Thursday, October 30, 2014 11:40:22 AM
Rank: Elder

Joined: 7/1/2011
Posts: 8,804
Location: Nairobi
Muriel wrote:
tycho wrote:
Muriel wrote:
tycho wrote:
Muriel wrote:
Lotus ,,, the flower. Hhhmmm!

The 'recipe' could be both.

What is this 'burden of life'? And why is it heavy?


The burden of life is essentially the quest for meaning in contradictory experience. It's Man knowing good and evil trying to maximize on good without avail. It's heavy because though there's toil and clamor the end is never achieved. It's Sysiphus trying to roll an ever growing rock up the mountain only to be overwhelmed by the weight of the rock.

Enlightenment, the recipe, is to stop rolling the rock. Then everything becomes light.


What makes is a 'contradictory experience'?

Are not the 'contradictions' merely 'sequences'?


The contradictions are a result of how cognition develops and the conflict it raises with our nature. Piaget provides us with a picture of what happens in the developing human. Other psychologists provide us with insights on how the developing human understands and relates with the world. Yes, it's a sequence, but the sequence is faulty.


Then these 'contradictions' are not really 'contradictions'. What could be perceived as a 'contradiction' by one may not be so to another.

IS this not relativism? Why are we reinventing the wheel? Cannot we learn from the French?


These contradictions are really contradictions @muriel. For clarity let's do this, using what we've said, show how the 'relativism' doesn't lead to contradiction.

For me I'll show that this relativism when it excludes the union of the relations is contradictory.
Wakanyugi
#19 Posted : Thursday, October 30, 2014 11:41:54 AM
Rank: Veteran

Joined: 7/3/2007
Posts: 1,635
tycho wrote:
Wakanyugi wrote:
tycho wrote:


So I'd like those who can and are willing to engage on this matter to join in me in thinking and creating an understanding on this matter.



Tycho, I may be late to this party but here is my small kamchango:

I define morality as the setting of boundaries, between what I consider good and evil.

But I have also come to appreciate that in many respects, this is a false boundary and it applies only to me. This is quite helpful when it comes to appreciating other people's morality or lack thereof.

I have had the good luck, or bad, as you may see it, to encounter people or situations where practically every moral principle I hold dear is inverted. Where taking human life, stealing, rape, blasphemy etc are morally upheld as good.

Where then would I stand to judge or condemn?

My advice is 'just relax.' It is a relative Universe after all.


If there's an abused expression then it's that of a 'relative universe'. 'Universe' has singularity about it. 'Relative' has multiplicity in it. So your expression makes sense only when the multiple reduces to singularity and vice versa. That's the crux of morality. Morality goes beyond setting boundaries or making judgements.

Per chance, have you ever looked into the mystery of the Baghavad Gita? Story begins in a battle field, where murder is imminent.

Let's take a practical example, how does terrorism feature in your moral conception?


Relative Universe, singularity... I'll skip that as I believe we clobbered that horse to death sometime back.

Baghvad Gita, I am ignorant on this score but always happy to learn. Please share.

Terrorism...in my morality balance sheet, this one ranks firmly in the negative column. It is wrong. But then you have heard the saying 'one mans terrorist is another mans freedom fighter.'

My understanding of terrorism therefore may surprise you, or maybe not. I hold an extreme liberal view that the ultimate destiny of any human being is absolute autonomy. Where one may only give over such autonomy to another freely and without coercion.

Terrorism, of the exploding kind, is only one extreme of events that attempt to truncate such autonomy. Therefore it is immoral. But similarly most religion is a form of terrorism too, as is government, parenting...heck, much of society.

You are a terrorist Tycho, of the intellectual kind.


"The opposite of a correct statement is a false statement. But the opposite of a profound truth may well be another profound truth." (Niels Bohr)
Muriel
#20 Posted : Thursday, October 30, 2014 12:04:20 PM
Rank: Member

Joined: 11/19/2009
Posts: 3,142
tycho wrote:
Muriel wrote:
tycho wrote:
Muriel wrote:
tycho wrote:
Muriel wrote:
Lotus ,,, the flower. Hhhmmm!

The 'recipe' could be both.

What is this 'burden of life'? And why is it heavy?


The burden of life is essentially the quest for meaning in contradictory experience. It's Man knowing good and evil trying to maximize on good without avail. It's heavy because though there's toil and clamor the end is never achieved. It's Sysiphus trying to roll an ever growing rock up the mountain only to be overwhelmed by the weight of the rock.

Enlightenment, the recipe, is to stop rolling the rock. Then everything becomes light.


What makes is a 'contradictory experience'?

Are not the 'contradictions' merely 'sequences'?


The contradictions are a result of how cognition develops and the conflict it raises with our nature. Piaget provides us with a picture of what happens in the developing human. Other psychologists provide us with insights on how the developing human understands and relates with the world. Yes, it's a sequence, but the sequence is faulty.


Then these 'contradictions' are not really 'contradictions'. What could be perceived as a 'contradiction' by one may not be so to another.

IS this not relativism? Why are we reinventing the wheel? Cannot we learn from the French?


These contradictions are really contradictions @muriel. For clarity let's do this, using what we've said, show how the 'relativism' doesn't lead to contradiction.

For me I'll show that this relativism when it excludes the union of the relations is contradictory.


Tough assignment, that.

After you.
4 Pages<1234>
Forum Jump  
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.

Copyright © 2026 Wazua.co.ke. All Rights Reserved.