More seriously - yeah, evil is a social construction. Look at molecules all you want, and you'll never find the Morality Particle. But, as we are social creatures, our artificial social constructions are pretty important to us.
No one in reality sees themselves as evil, and technically, no one in history has been evil as it is described. There have been a few rare good people though with a vast majority of humans being neutral. I play evil ingame since it is an enigma which does not exist in reality, but exists in fantasy.
More seriously - yeah, evil is a social construction. Look at molecules all you want, and you'll never find the Morality Particle. But, as we are social creatures, our artificial social constructions are pretty important to us.
I was actually thinking of making the sub say "You Kant be serious" but I thought it would be too much. My chuckle at your post now makes me see how "objectively" wrong I was
Argh, Philosophy 101... I don't understand Kant's philosophy at all but I still discussed it at length in more than one paper. Which I guess is how I approach debates on the internet as well
I don't get the reference. But I assume the Simpsons episode "Kent Say What You Want" is based on it. Yay Simpsons!
Well, *technically* its a reference to the Rolling Stones song, "You Can't Always Get What You Want", but more specifically I was quoting a line from Hedwig and the Angry Inch, which is a musical about a transgendered rockstar from East Germany (it is the title of a lecture she gives on the aggressive influence of German Philosophy on Rock'n'Roll music) .
I play good alignments because I'm good, and I just can't have fun being an evil jerkwad. I identify with my game toons. If I commit evil jerkery, or chaotic idiocy, with my game toon, I feel the same guilt as if I were doing it in real life.
Anybody who makes their point by posting a screenie of an Order of the Stick comic gains 1,001 cool points with me immediately.
The same for anybody who can appropriately quote Immanuel Kant. His ethical "Categorical Imperative" is the essence of the lawful good ethos.
Well, the simple answer is: Kant is wrong. You cannot develop a consistent and universal moral philosophy by reason alone. Moreover, I disagree with his postulate that the intent of an action necessarily outweighs the results of said action. His philosophies are far too entrenched in the Judeo-Christian worldview to be objective (as evidenced by him considering the Christian God necessary as an ideal of morality, and his inability to fully understand the artificial nature of the idea of objective universal good, a concept which has not been extant for all or even most of human history) The entire idea of categorical imperatives also has some flaws.
...you wanna Philosophy 101 some more, or did you just want to do a funny picture?
his inability to fully understand the artificial nature of the idea of objective universal good, a concept which has not been extant for all or even most of human history
Elaborate.
also post funny pictures and don't take things to seriously
You cannot develop a consistent and universal moral philosophy by reason alone.
Elaborate.
In short: reason alone without using knowledge of reality necessarily produces philosophies that may be interesting but are deeply flawed when actually used to interact with reality.
his inability to fully understand the artificial nature of the idea of objective universal good, a concept which has not been extant for all or even most of human history
Elaborate.
Exactly what I said. The notions of objective universal good and evil are relatively recent historical inventions; nobody thought in those terms thousands of years ago. While equivalents of "good" and "evil" existed as philosophical constructs, they weren't universal but tended towards personal or society-level (a more rationalist viewpoint). The concept of universal morality is tied deeply (though not exclusively) into monotheism for obvious reasons, and Kant is the product of a society where it was almost impossible to avoid that influencing your thought processes. He also simply wasn't knowledgeable enough of history to know better.
"The notions of objective universal good and evil are relatively recent historical inventions; nobody thought in those terms thousands of years ago" The globe was not thought of as round until the past millenia.
it was not round before that
Also... where is my funny picture???? I demand a refund.
"The notions of objective universal good and evil are relatively recent historical inventions; nobody thought in those terms thousands of years ago" The globe was not thought of as round until the past millenia.
it was not round before that
Also... where is my funny picture???? I demand a refund.
Wait, you are equating the oblate spherical nature of the physical world with an artificially constructed system if morality? You actually believe objective good and evil exist as metaphysical realities independent of human thought and culture, and we were just waiting for someone to discover them?
Wait, you are equating the oblate spherical nature of the physical world with an artificially constructed system if morality? You actually believe objective good and evil exist as metaphysical realities independent of human thought and culture, and we were just waiting for someone to discover them?
Well, I personally agree with Ayike for the most part, but Kant would say that his system of morality is in no way "artificially constructed". Then he'd say "Kant touch this"
@Eudaemonium nah, it was the Greeks, they spread their knowledge to the East, Europe forgot the knowledge of the Greeks, and then Europe learned from the East.
I've seen rabbits with pancake like hats! 'Tis true, I swear!
And now something on-topic, I play because I play, right now I am playing TN, and it is a Half-orc who is uncaring about anything else but 1) The reward 2) being recognized as the hero 3) himself, so, yeah, he is an evil bastard too.
I? No, I am Chaotic Evil myself, I Kant be good, mainly because I am uncaring (and evil) with others, and I cannot be neutral either, or maybe yes I can be CN, but I do consider myself CE, also, the Half-Orc (he was the one level drained till Fighter level 0, in the thread you've posted right before now) is going to turn evil in hell, he will accept the gift offered towards him.
Comments
...
I'll see myself out now.
Anybody who makes their point by posting a screenie of an Order of the Stick comic gains 1,001 cool points with me immediately.
The same for anybody who can appropriately quote Immanuel Kant. His ethical "Categorical Imperative" is the essence of the lawful good ethos.
...you wanna Philosophy 101 some more, or did you just want to do a funny picture?
also post funny pictures and don't take things to seriously
The globe was not thought of as round until the past millenia.
Also... where is my funny picture???? I demand a refund.
The truth can be funny!
http://scienceblogs.com/startswithabang/2011/09/21/who-discovered-the-earth-is-ro/
Then he'd say "Kant touch this"
And now something on-topic, I play because I play, right now I am playing TN, and it is a Half-orc who is uncaring about anything else but 1) The reward 2) being recognized as the hero 3) himself, so, yeah, he is an evil bastard too.