Help with my Ethics Assignment..

[Vulcan]

number 5. is interesting. I've heard it explained like this. If you have to ask, why am I here, it's because you're not satisfied. It's like when I'm at a lousy party and I wonder, what am I doing here? I have two choices, I either leave [not a good alternative in this life] or I change my attitude. Changing my attitude involves changing my inner self.
My purpose when my life is full is not questioned but to try and put some idea to it, my purpose is to leave this life with more than I came with. I can't take possessions so all that leaves is my experience.
Sorry for the rambling.

[Cube Inmate]

Originally Posted by evman150

I know the difference between science and philosophy "bud". In fact I am in a unique position in that regard given my schooling. My major/minor is Astronomy/Applied Ethics. So I think I know what I'm talking about when it comes to the difference between the two fields.

Science has answered the question. The answer is to propogate the species, just like it is for an ant, a cheetah and a bacterium.

The tree makes a sound. Look up how sound works. All it requires is a medium and an event to cause the sound. Nothing about observation. That is science. Questioning that is not "metaphysics", it is pseudoscience, aka bull****.

I wouldn't have responded here if you hadn't used the "BS" word again, but you did...so here I am. For something to be pseudoscience, I would have to represent it as being science in the first place...e.g., intelligent design. I have not done that...this is philosophical rambling, not scientific inquiry. I'll stipulate that the tree makes a sound if that will put that point to rest. However, I will not let you get away with saying that science has answered the question of the purpose of life. Mechanically, the purpose of a being of any given species is to procreate and make more of itself. But why does the species exist in the first place?

Scientific answer: cosmic accident. A bunch of chemicals gooed together and somehow became self-replicating. Eventually something called "consciousness" emerged from all of this. Stuff evolved. Humans happened.

But why?

Yeah, it's a question that any 4-year-old can ask, but until there's a legitimate answer other than "it just happened," then it's a valid point for philosophical or religious debate. It is simply NOT science, nor can it ever be.

Hypothesis: universe exists regardless of the observer's consciousness
Test/observations: not possible
Conclusion: undefined

Not science. Never will be. By definition.

[troutman]

Originally Posted by Mayer

I'm a Music Major (Guitar) at Rocky Mountain College here in town, and this class is one of the required classes to complete my degree.

Is it true they emphasize "intelligent design" at RMC?

[JohnnyB]

1. What are your views regarding sex outside of marriage?

I'd like to have more. Hooray for sex!

2. What are your views regarding homosexual or lesbian relationships?

I don't want any, but I'm totally cool with other people being that way.

3. Wht are your views on abortion?

Pro-choice. Justified on the basis of it just being more practical.

4. Do you believe in moral absolutes (ie: that there are some things that are always right or wrong regardless of culture or religion)?

I don't believe in non-relative morality.

5. What, in your view, is the purpose of life?

Life is not teleological.

6. What is your view of the Bible and what role should it play in our lives?

The bible is many things to many people. It gives positive guidance to many, and justification for some to be jerks. It's also got some interesting historical stuff in it. If there's a role it should play in our lives I would say that it should be a text to be read critically and mulled over for whatever it may teach. Though I wouldn't say there's really a should with it's role in our lives.

7. Do you go to church? If so, how often?

Never been.

[Mayer]

Originally Posted by troutman

Is it true they emphasize "intelligent design" at RMC?

I have not even heard it said once, so I'm guessing no, but I could just be missing it.

[JohnnyB]

Originally Posted by evman150

Science has answered the question. The answer is to propogate the species, just like it is for an ant, a cheetah and a bacterium.

I think you're confusing the theory with the act. Science has a description of the process that seems to suggest some sort of purpose in it. The act of evolution doesn't have a purpose though, it's just things happening, and the theory of evolution attempts to explain those things.

[FurnaceFace]

Originally Posted by Mayer

1. What are your views regarding sex outside of marriage?

No issue with it

Originally Posted by Mayer

2. What are your views regarding homosexual or lesbian relationships?

No issue with it

Originally Posted by Mayer

3. Wht are your views on abortion?

No issue with it

Originally Posted by Mayer

4. Do you believe in moral absolutes (ie: that there are some things that are always right or wrong regardless of culture or religion)?

Nope

Originally Posted by Mayer

5. What, in your view, is the purpose of life?

To live

Originally Posted by Mayer

6. What is your view of the Bible and what role should it play in our lives?

I assume the term Bible is used generically and applies to any spiritual book like the Koran or Torah or many others. These religious books in my view are "playbooks" which many people use to govern their life and use to assist them in getting through the ups and downs of life. It should play whatever role in your life you want it to. If it helps you, rock on.

Originally Posted by Mayer

7. Do you go to church? If so, how often?

Nope

[jammies]

1. What are your views regarding sex outside of marriage?

Absolutely ok with it for both sexes, without any moral stigma attached to those who indulge. In fact, I think those that don't indulge are the morally suspect.

2. What are your views regarding homosexual or lesbian relationships?

This is also good by me, although I must admit man/man PDAs bother me, but that is an ingrained emotional response I can't seem to quell.

3. What are your views on abortion?

If it was my child I would counsel the woman against it IF she asked my opinion (and support the child whether or not we were in a relationship), but otherwise it is not my decision to make.

4. Do you believe in moral absolutes (ie: that there are some things that are always right or wrong regardless of culture or religion)?

Yes, although when I try to define what they are difficulties arise.

5. What, in your view, is the purpose of life?

To make the entire universe sentient.

6. What is your view of the Bible and what role should it play in our lives?

Everyone should read it as much of our culture grew from its pages; no one, however, should use it for a guide to how to live life or base your beliefs upon.

7. Do you go to church? If so, how often?

Funerals and weddings only, out of respect for other's beliefs.

[JohnnyB]

Originally Posted by jammies

5. What, in your view, is the purpose of life?

To make the entire universe sentient.

Damn. Talk about promoting misery.

[iggypop]

Originally Posted by evman150

The tree falling in the forest does make a sound. This is not quantum mechanics, observation doesn't change anything.

Why doesn't observation change anything? Define sound before you argue your point so strongly. You guys are both right, its simply a matter of you guys disagreeing the the term sound.

Sound by defintion: The sensation stimulated in the organs of hearing.
Sound by defintion: Transmitted vibrations of any frequency through a medium.

Define sound by the first defintion and he's right. Define it by the second, and your right. Please don't snap at people calling BS if you cant back it up.

[Sparks]

1. What are your views regarding sex outside of marriage?

No problem, as far as I'm concerned. We have this little thing called birth control nowadays.

2. What are your views regarding homosexual or lesbian relationships?

I don't understand why this is a big deal for some people. Who cares? I think it's pretty obvious that people don't choose their sexual orientation, so everyone should do whatever floats their boat.

3. Wht are your views on abortion?

Should definitely be avoided if possible, otherwise, I think it should be an option.

4. Do you believe in moral absolutes (ie: that there are some things that are always right or wrong regardless of culture or religion)?

I think that something is morally wrong if it would hurt our species chances of continued survival. Personally, I think this is where our morals come from. For example, harmonious social relations are essential to our survival. Things that hurt these relations, like theft, sleeping with your friend's wife, etc, are therefore wrong. Murder is obviously not condusive to our collective survival, so it's a baddy. Helping others is good for our survival, so it's good. And so on. But are these things universally right? Well, what if the human race is bad. I mean, we're ruining our planet. If that's the case, wouldn't the annihilation of our race be the right thing to do? Wouldn't it be wrong to let us stay around? Maybe that's a little crazy.

As for absolute values like you're talking about, would it have been right to kill Adolf Hitler? It's murder. It's one of those situations where it would still be a bad thing to do, but it's the right, moral thing to do, you know what I mean? So, from that perspective, I don't think that there are really moral absolutes, per se. That said, as I've explained, IMO people in all societies, regardless of religion, are members of the human race, so they are bound by a moral system, one based on our survival.

5. What, in your view, is the purpose of life?

I think life is what we make it. The purpose of life is to discover your own purpose of life.

6. What is your view of the Bible and what role should it play in our lives?

I don't think it should play any role in our lives. I've read it a few times, and it's pretty interesting in its own right. But, there's a lot of really brutal stuff in there, especially in the old testament. A lot of extremely questionable morals. I think we should throw that one out the window. The New Testament, on the other hand, is mostly OK as far as I'm concerned. You could definitely pick a worse role model than Jesus Christ (as depicted in the Bible).

I don't believe most of what's written in the bible, though. But, that's a whole different discussion.

In my opinion, the negatives outweigh the positives with regards to the bible, especially because we should be trumpeting reason and critical thinking these days, not dogma.

7. Do you go to church? If so, how often?

I haven't been to church in a long time. When I was 18, I spent a few months really thinking about it and decided that I couldn't believe in Christianity. It wasn't because I had a bad experience as a Christian or something like that. I had serious disagreements with some aspects of the faith (eg. the concept of heaven and hell) and many other things which I simply couldn't believe were true and not just added years after the fact by followers (eg. the factual accuracy of the Bible - Jesus actually rose from the dead, etc). Anyway, I've been really happy I made that decision, and have felt much more clear-headed in the years since.

[Iowa_Flames_Fan]

Don't know if you still need more answers, but here goes:

1. What are your views regarding sex outside of marriage?

I'm fine with it. Marriage is a social compact--and it works well for my wife and me--but it's by no means a universal thing. Some people never get married. Others get married more than once. In the meantime, most people have several sexual partners over the course of their life. Why waste our time on guilt? Sex is good for you.

2. What are your views regarding homosexual or lesbian relationships?

I think this is sort of like asking "are you okay with black people?" It shouldn't be an issue any more. My two best friends are gay, and live together. I wish the world could see that their love is as beautiful as any heterosexual couple's.

3. Wht are your views on abortion?

My views on this are complicated. I'm not comfortable saying that a fetus is a life or is not at any one stage of development. There are easy extremes--a blastocyst is pretty clearly not a life, and a third-trimester fetus pretty clearly is--but that in-between stuff is a lot harder. In truth, my personal views on this changed a lot when my wife became pregnant with our daughter. At this point, I can honestly say that if we ever had an unwanted pregnancy, abortion would not be an acceptable choice to me. With that said, I don't want to tell others how they should make this moral choice. I guess that adds up to pro-choice--since I think government should stay out of it.

4. Do you believe in moral absolutes (ie: that there are some things that are always right or wrong regardless of culture or religion)?

Yes--and this is another tricky one. Is there value in relativist thinking? Sure. But there ARE moral absolutes. Killing is wrong. Female genital mutilation is wrong. Abuse of children is wrong. Just to name a few.

5. What, in your view, is the purpose of life?

For each of us to, in our own way, make the world a better place.

6. What is your view of the Bible and what role should it play in our lives?

I'm not religious. But to deny the role of the Bible in Western thought is ridiculous. Transcendentalism and abolitionism would have been impossible were they not paired with evangelical christianity. I think the so-called "Christian right" has co-opted the Bible and perverted what are its true, core teachings in the New Testament. If you listen to Pat Robertson, you'd think Christ went around telling us to judge people for their sexual orientation and arguing for lower taxes. I think people should read the Bible for themselves, and take from it what moral truths they can, but not be afraid to discard the rest. It's a pretty old book, written by humans a long time ago.

7. Do you go to church? If so, how often?

No.

[peter12]

1. What are your views regarding sex outside of marriage?

I think sex can only be had in a relationship that is loving and trusting. Alot of marriages aren't like that and a lot of marriages are like that.

2. What are your views regarding homosexual or lesbian relationships?

Doesn't really bother me at all. Not my business. I don't think it changes what kind of people that they are.

3. Wht are your views on abortion?

Personally, I find late abortions, such as late second trimester and third trimester to be immoral. When the fetus develops a CNS, you could possibly be causing pain. However, government should stay out and women should always be given the choice.

4. Do you believe in moral absolutes (ie: that there are some things that are always right or wrong regardless of culture or religion)?

Absolutely. Moral relativism is a complete falsehood. There are universal standards of conduct that hold across every culture. Whether you personally believe God or natural selection to be the answer, there is almost definite scientific proof of a universal moral law.

5. What, in your view, is the purpose of life?

Comfort the afflicted and afflict the comfortable.

6. What is your view of the Bible and what role should it play in our lives?

IFF stated it best. I think the Bible is a complicated book. At its most secular, it is the codebook to Western culture. Concepts like the value and purpose of the individual have their roots in Biblical history. Alot of the "unpopular" stuff has its roots in context that must be explored thoroughly in order to be understood. Literal or absolutist interpretations will simply give you a reductionist view of what the Bible fully portrays.

Do I think it is representative of Divine Communion? Personally, yes, I do. But I don't expect others to feel the same way.

7. Do you go to church? If so, how often?

I go every few months. I personally feel that the Church as a whole is missing a good deal of the intellectualism that helped drive itself through the past millennia. The actual concepts of Christianity aren't dwelled upon anymore. It's either too bubblegum or too political.

[Mayer]

This is very interesting to read. Thanks again guys. The assignment isn't due until late October, so keep them coming. The more the better.

[evman150]

Originally Posted by Cube Inmate

However, I will not let you get away with saying that science has answered the question of the purpose of life. Mechanically, the purpose of a being of any given species is to procreate and make more of itself. But why does the species exist in the first place?

That is not the same question at all.

The question posed is "What, in your view, is the purpose of life?"

My response was "to reproduce".

Then you say "the purpose of a being of any given species is to procreate".

So what are we arguing about? What does the last question have to do with anything?

And as for the other guy's question, scientifically a sound is the second definition. This is obvious and shouldn't have to be mentioned. The other definition exhibits blatant anthropocentrism.

[peter12]

Originally Posted by evman150

That is not the same question at all.

The question posed is "What, in your view, is the purpose of life?"

My response was "to reproduce".

Then you say "the purpose of a being of any given species is to procreate".

So what are we arguing about? What does the last question have to do with anything?

And as for the other guy's question, scientifically a sound is the second definition. This is obvious and shouldn't have to be mentioned. The other definition exhibits blatant anthropocentrism.

Human beings are really only capable of anthropocentrism. It is in our individual nature to only be concerned about OUR point of view. Seriously, how do you think we go this far without being anthropocentric. For you to throw that out there like a challenge is simply ridiculous.

If our ONLY purpose is to replicate copies of our DNA, why did we make the jump from HG groups to small cities 10 000 years ago? It increased disease, calories available decreased, and the death rate, especially among children shot up.

[Lanny_MacDonald]

Originally Posted by evman150

If you cannot reproduce, your life has no purpose in the grand scheme of things, yes. But that is selling life short. One can still make themselves a great life independent of our evolutionary goal. But by not being able to reproduce, technically you're a failure as a human. Doesn't mean you can't still do a lot of good in the world though.

You believe that drivel that just came from head and some how found its way to the keyboard and onto this site?

Allow me to point out that ANY moron can have a child. It takes little for a man to stick his penis into some bimbo in heat, and with bad timing, impregnate the wench and propagate their DNA. Go to the mall for five minutes and observe the intellect of those pushing strollers or failing to control their offspring. You'll quickly come to the realization that Harvey Danger made a very astute cultural observation when they sang, "only stupid people are breeding". Darwin's theory was wrong. The strong does not survive and improve the herd, as genetics is all about regression to the mean. Procreating doesn't make you success as a human, since almost any animal can do the same thing, it's what you do after that fact that will define your success.

The greatest difference between humans, and the rest of the animals on earth, is the fact that we are self aware. We are cognizant of our environment and the impacts we have on said environment. We understand that we have a sphere of influence and are capable of manipulating it. Success as a human is using that sphere of influence to have an impact on our society, our culture, or our species. Depending on your moral flexibility and your base impulses, that sphere of influence can be recognized as positive or as negative.

On the positive side of the coin, Leonardo da Vinci never had children. Was he a failure as a human? Not a chance. He was arguably the greatest man who lived, providing major insights into all of the humanities (you know, the things that differentiate us from the animals) and the sciences. His contributions to culture and his impact on society, both while he was alive and after his death, had more of an impact than all the people who procreated during his life. Certainly he was successful as a human?

On the opposite side of that moral coin, Adolf Hitler never had children. Was he a failure as a human? Hitler was responsible for many heinous things, but the fact that he inspired a nation and turned them into a world power speaks a lot about his sphere of influence and his success at using this uniquely human characteristic. Hitler will always be associated with evil (through the lens of our cultural perspective anyways), but he was a massive success in being evil and achieving his end goals. He will be remembered for eternity because of this success. Certainly he was successful as a human?

You take a very strange position for a guy whose major/minor is Astronomy/Applied Ethics. Your determination of success/failure is completely out of alignment with a significant intelligence. With the gems of wisdom you've added in this thread I would reccommed you switch (immediately) to a major/minor of Animal Husbandry/Child Rearing. The dissonance in your choice of education and your base beliefs is not only striking, but very disturbing.

[octothorp]

I haven't read through other people's responses yet so I may be repeating things that have already been said, but:

1. What are your views regarding sex outside of marriage?

No problem with it.

2. What are your views regarding homosexual or lesbian relationships?

Absolutely acceptable.

3. Wht are your views on abortion?

Pro-choice, although more needs to be done to prevent teen pregnancies in the first place.

4. Do you believe in moral absolutes (ie: that there are some things that are always right or wrong regardless of culture or religion)?

I believe moral absolutes do exist, but generally they tend to be so obvious that they're pretty much useless. For example, killing an innocent person for no reason: that's absolutely wrong. In a situation where you'd actually need guidance (let's say you're faced with a situation where you can kill one innocent person to save the life of ten innocent people), there isn't a moral absolute. This is the problem with religious or cultural moral codes: they tend to be very black and white (thou shalt not kill), while a useful moral code would need to be far more nuanced.

5. What, in your view, is the purpose of life?

To create, in one way or another. This can be procreation, it can be artistic creation. Simply giving birth to another human does not make you successful, but raising that child into a functioning, well-adjusted adult does. Producing works of art or a body of research are other excellent ways of giving meaning and purpose to your life.

6. What is your view of the Bible and what role should it play in our lives?

An important work to study if for no other reason than its influence on western culture. It has some literary and artistic merit specifically in Job and Songs of Solomon. As far as a moral code, it's fairly useless, simply antiquated laws and veiled metaphors that have been misinterpreted over the years. A possible exception would be the parables of Jesus, some of which are a decent start as far as moral codes. That's about 20 pages of good advice in the entire thing.

7. Do you go to church? If so, how often?

I went to church religiously until about the age of 16. Now I never go except for occasions like christmas eve, funerals and weddings.

[octothorp]

Originally Posted by evman150

If you cannot reproduce, your life has no purpose in the grand scheme of things, yes. But that is selling life short. One can still make themselves a great life independent of our evolutionary goal. But by not being able to reproduce, technically you're a failure as a human. Doesn't mean you can't still do a lot of good in the world though.

I know what you're getting at here, but within a number of species, those who cannot reproduce are still valued members of society, and in some cases the scoeity could not actually exist without them. Most obvious example would be colony insects like bees and ants: in a hive, only a tiny fraction of bees actually reproduce. Does this make the great majority of worker bees who actually build and maintain the colonies 'failures' as bees?
Similarly, in many forms of animals from primates to fish to rodents, animals not directly involved in the reproductive process are invaluable to the existance of the society through food-provision, nursing/caregiving, or even security/surveillance.
When you state that the purpose of life is to reproduce, I think it's a defensable statement (though I don't personally agree with it). But stating that a particular life is a failure simply because it doesn't lend its genetic material to an offspring, that's a flawed notion even from a strictly evolutionary perspective.

[LChoy]

Originally Posted by Lanny_MacDonald

Allow me to point out that ANY moron can have a child. It takes little for a man to stick his penis into some bimbo in heat, and with bad timing, impregnate the wench and propagate their DNA. Go to the mall for five minutes and observe the intellect of those pushing strollers or failing to control their offspring. You'll quickly come to the realization that Harvey Danger made a very astute cultural observation when they sang, "only stupid people are breeding". Darwin's theory was wrong. The strong does not survive and improve the herd, as genetics is all about regression to the mean. Procreating doesn't make you success as a human, since almost any animal can do the same thing, it's what you do after that fact that will define your success.

The greatest difference between humans, and the rest of the animals on earth, is the fact that we are self aware. We are cognizant of our environment and the impacts we have on said environment. We understand that we have a sphere of influence and are capable of manipulating it. Success as a human is using that sphere of influence to have an impact on our society, our culture, or our species. Depending on your moral flexibility and your base impulses, that sphere of influence can be recognized as positive or as negative.

I agree with your 2nd paragraph about how we differ from animals, but I won't go as far to say that Darwin is wrong. Darwin theory isn't about that only the strong reproduce, but that adapbility is the driving factor of evolution. Sure it's easy for any Moron to reproduce, but from a sociology point of view, how successful could their offspring be if they come out of a weak socio-economic background? Just like in Africa, it is in the best interest of a so called "less success" person, to have as many children as possible, so that at least there will be a greater chance one of them will make it to adulthood. Also, in the age of social support structure and technology, the so called weak hae a better chance at surviving. People can be supported by the government, we have plastic surgury to improve ones looks, universal health care to provide basic prevention and treatment of disease. If we got back into a caveman society, or again look at primitive tribes around the world, the strongest or best of the group usually has all the advantages when it comes to mating. Hell, even in our modern society, qualities such as intelligence, wealth, and physical appearance are the things most sought after.