PsiPog.net

View topic - Your ethical standpoint

PsiPog.net Forum Index » Telepathy and Empathy » Your ethical standpoint

Goto page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 Next

Your ethical standpoint

Author

Message

Posted on Wed Aug 09, 2006 10:41 pm

WhiteRaven

Joined: 13 Jan 2006
Posts: 343

"Everyone assumes that when someone talks of God that they are talking about a religious concept, namely an old white guy."

I wasn't talking about just "an old white guy." God IS a religious concept, or possibly just a spiritual one, either way, it breaks the rules, because, unless I'm mistaken, Peebrain's opinion is that spirituality also falls under religion, and as he owns the site, it's really his opinion that decides the rules.

"Why don't we all assume every concept refers to the most popular thing that falls under that classification. From now on "actor" will only ever refer to "Tom Hanks", "car" will only refer to "Ferrari" and so on."

You have an uncanny ability to miss the point entirely.

"Hopeflully my joking sarcasm has shown you the error in your logic This concept of God that Ancheron (and thus I) referred to is not one derived through "sacred texts" but through personal experience and understanding."

and yapping about your personal experience of SPIRITUALITY breaks the friggin rules.

Posted on Wed Aug 09, 2006 10:53 pm

DanielH

Joined: 27 Nov 2005
Posts: 479

See? WhiteRaven pretty much god it. It's not too hard to understand if you just use some logic.

Posted on Fri Aug 11, 2006 5:08 pm

Woodpecker

Joined: 24 Apr 2006
Posts: 218

Indeed. Stop discussing religious topics and let's get on with discussing ethics!! Otherwise this topic will be locked and we will once again not be able to discuss the morals of tps anywhere. Smile

Posted on Sat Aug 12, 2006 4:03 am

Elliptic

Joined: 19 Jan 2006
Posts: 199

Having done some thinking, I am reversing my standpoint regarding moral relativism - because ethics are a sociocultural construct, there is a theoretical culture in which sentience is not the determinant of ethical consideration. Given such a culture, TPS may not be immoral.

The major trick to this is keeping in mind that we aren't in another culture, we're in this (or these) cultures, and as a result, it is not acceptable to make an argument of personal ethics allowing for the practice - culturally, the practice is unacceptable. Any human within this culture is bound by the codes of ethical behavior of their culture. They may behave unethically, but the consequences become a matter of personal meta-ethics.

Posted on Sat Aug 12, 2006 1:21 pm

Lucidess

Joined: 20 Apr 2006
Posts: 837

If I was going to use TP suggestion on someone, I would try to encourage them of doing whatever they're doing.. as long as it's constructive anyway. I used to think I can do whatever the hell I want but i've changed alot in the past few months. Anyway, I know i'm good at empathy, so I use that before I use teleapthy. I don't want to intrude, I ask don't worry XD

Posted on Sat Aug 12, 2006 8:12 pm

thenadnil

Joined: 01 Apr 2006
Posts: 30

i just dont do anything relating to suggestion , becuse i wouldnt want anybody to do it to me so, i just wont do things to others that i wouldnt want them to do to me.

Posted on Sat Aug 12, 2006 8:23 pm

Nightshade

Joined: 22 Feb 2006
Posts: 421

suggestion can be used for good. let's say you and your friend are walking on train tracks (don't ask why). a train comes, you dive out of the way, but your friend is scared stiff. use TPS to make him jump off the tracks...is that unethical?

or, you and the same friend have homework due. you did your homework like a good little student, but your friend didn't. use TPS to make him do his homework, and get a good grade (i can see the arguement against this example though).

just be creative, i'm sure you all can think of at least 5 other ways TPS can be used for good. i agree, it seems that TPS is generally a negative skill, but thats when you aren't being creative. and controlling, or mindrapping someone mentally is tresspassing and infringing on the freedom of their will, but if used the right way, it can be beneficial, or life saving. i can't change your opinions, all i can do is offer a different way to think about it. think away.

Posted on Sat Aug 12, 2006 10:22 pm

pepsiboy

Joined: 25 Jun 2006
Posts: 562

whenever i use TPS - dunno if im doing it right... somtimes a lot of the ppl around me start to sneeze. doesnt sound like a positive suggestion to me.

Posted on Sun Aug 13, 2006 12:28 pm

Nightshade

Joined: 22 Feb 2006
Posts: 421

are you trying to make them sneeze? if they sneeze and you are trying to make them sneeze, there is a possiblility that you used TPS correctly. i wouldn't think of making someone sneeze as a negative suggestion, i would think of it as a practice suggestion.

here's an ethical question about TPS: is using TPS on animals (such as domestic pets) for practice ethical?

Posted on Sun Aug 13, 2006 12:48 pm

Peebrain

Site Admin
Joined: 27 Nov 2005
Posts: 716

Elliptic wrote:

...ethics are a sociocultural construct, there is a theoretical culture in which sentience is not the determinant of ethical consideration. Given such a culture, TPS may not be immoral.

I disagree. I think I've traced back to why TPS is immoral... see if my logic actually makes sense.

Reality does not play "favorites"... we all have to follow the same rules. You can be a "good" person, or a "bad" person, but if you walk off a building - gravity doesn't care. It's going to hurdle you towards the cement. The rules are fair, and everyone has to follow them equally.

From this, we conclude that we are all equal. Since we all follow the same rules, we are all equal. There is no atom that is "better than" another atom. The building blocks of reality are all treated equally and fairly, and whatever those building blocks build, those structures are equal. We are all equal.

From this, we conclude the Golden Rule - treat others how you want to be treated. You are equal to me. I do not want to be TPS'ed, under any circumstance, because it violates my right to make decisions for myself. I have the right to make decisions for myself, therefore, so do you.

So, 1. Reality doesn't play favorites, 2. We are all equal, 3. Golden Rule, 4. TPS is immoral. That's not relativistic, at least not that I can see. It's based off the assumption that reality doesn't play favorites, which is a belief that falls outside of cultural beliefs.

~Sean

Posted on Sun Aug 13, 2006 5:26 pm

Woodpecker

Joined: 24 Apr 2006
Posts: 218

Peebrain wrote:

There is no atom that is "better than" another atom.

Perhaps not. But there are certainly people who are better at things than others, which your logic does not take account of. We are equal only in that reality initially treats us in the same way, but the way we respond to that differs from person to person depending on their aptitude for dealing with reality.

Let's take your gravity example. A person jumps off a tall wall and falls to the ground. All things will fall to the ground if they jump from that wall. However, if the person doesn't fall face first and lands on their feet, they might not die. That is a significant advantage, and in this case all the atoms of that person are better than the atoms of people without that advantage. Smile

Posted on Sun Aug 13, 2006 9:57 pm

Peebrain

Site Admin
Joined: 27 Nov 2005
Posts: 716

I'm not talking about being better at some random skill. When I say we are "equal", I don't mean I can play basketball as good as Michael Jordan. I'm saying that Michael Jordan isn't inherently better than me, as a collection of atoms.

We all follow the same laws. Michael Jordan follows the exact same laws of gravity that I follow. He knows how to put more force behind his jumps than I do - but he still follows the same laws. If I put the exact same force, then I could jump like him. In this sense, we are equal.

In physics books, there aren't different laws for different people. There isn't a "Micael Jordan special case formula". This is what I mean when I say we are all equal.

Force = mass * accelleration. This law exists for ALL cultures, ALL people, and ALL atoms in this universe. Just as that law exists, I believe that TPS is immoral is another law that exists. Or rather, it falls under the umbrella of the Golden Rule, which is a law that dictates the "goodness" of an action.

~Sean

Posted on Wed Aug 16, 2006 6:36 am

striker42

Joined: 27 Jul 2006
Posts: 2

would your ethical stand change if using tps could save the life of someone you love ?

Posted on Sun Aug 20, 2006 5:13 pm

Woodpecker

Joined: 24 Apr 2006
Posts: 218

This has been covered in a similar situation earlier in the thread. Smile

Posted on Tue Aug 22, 2006 4:57 am

WhiteRaven

Joined: 13 Jan 2006
Posts: 343

you can't compare moral laws with physical laws. physical laws are unbreakable, moral laws are broken on a secondly basis.one moral law says I can't steal, if it were the same as a physical law, then when I tried to steal something my hand would freeze up or something, so that's not a very strong argument.

and do unto others as you would have them do unto you is a bit flawed as not everyone would have others do unto them in the same way, a masochist would want to be punched in the face, so to apply the golden rule, masochists should go around punching other people in the face. Furthermore, applying the golden rule during wartimes is not good either, as when a nation didn't follow the rule, they would win.

President: let's give osama bin laden another one of our planes, if it were the other way around we'd want him to give us one of his planes to crash into his twin towers.

see, situations like these change things a lot.

Goto page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 Next

PsiPog.net Forum Index » Telepathy and Empathy » Your ethical standpoint

You must agree to the Terms of Service and Privacy Policy to view this website. Click here to contact the webmaster.