Jump to content

Mike C.

Member
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    30

  • Joined

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Utah
  • Interests
    Economics, Philosophy, Religion, Tech, Social issues, Family/parentling
  • Occupation
    Data Analyst

Mike C.'s Achievements

Newbie

Newbie (1/14)

9

Reputation

  1. Mike C.
    Even better than all that might be this LEGAL gold or silver-backed currency (available in the US only): http://popularliberty.com/8671/i-am-divorcing-my-bank-and-so-can-you-conveniently I am gonna get an account here soon as the divorce is done.
  2. Mike C.
    Yeah Stef does. Like, he says that IF you want to build a more fair society, THEN apply and spread the practice of UPB to others. Or something like that. A pragmatic argument, indeed.
  3. Mike C.
    Yeah it's a good course. I am glad you are enjoying it! I think all FDR-ers should check it out.
  4. Mike C.
    I would like an explanation, not of what UPB is (logical rules), but why I should use UPB? How exactly is it needed to "have the happiness and joy of life long term", as you say. That's my question. I want a persuasive argument as to why and when I would use UPB (the logic) in morality. So , with kids (or rational-open-minded people), once they see (because you show them, or explain...) the utility (usefulness) of a concept (like math or UPB) then they will start using it, if it leads to safety and happiness for them. So treat me like a rational-open-minded person, please, and make a persuasive appeal to my self-interests.
  5. Mike C.
    LiberT, that's not a bad definition of UPB/morality. I like how short it is. Sadly it assumes the reader knows the definition of universality (not too hard to look up) and NAP (also can look up, although there are some disagreements about NAP definitions, especially regarding how to determine property rights). But you didn't answer my main question in bold above your post. Why is UPB something everyone should do? What's the goal? What happens if you are immoral according to UPB?
  6. Mike C.
    Well with the caveats, right? 1) Unless the person is in danger and seems to not be aware (blind man crossing the path of a bus) 2) Unless you are defending your person or rightful property (a whole other topic about property right, but whatev) 3) Unless the person is incapable of giving consent but would have done so if able to. (CPR on a passed out person) etc. Right?
  7. Mike C.
    So what's the principle, here? Is it: If one of the involved parties finds the action (such as killing) as "bad" or "distasteful", or however they want to call the action, then the action cannot be deemed as "good" and therefore fails the UPB test? Or is it: If an action is deemed hurtful by one of the affected parties, then the action is "bad" or perhaps "not good"?
  8. Mike C.
    @ Kevin Beal I think you did a pretty good job summing up what UPB is. I also read the book about 2 months ago for the 1st time. Kinda confusing but I think I understood what the argument was. My question is this though: You say UPB is to see what behaviors are "objectively required". I understand that part of the book, but I ask required for what exactly? What is the goal? To avoid being a hypocrite with a double standard, Thus, bettering our society?
  9. Mike C.
    Above, in the Preferability section, it says that UPB is not referring to preferences that are subjective. So, pertaining to ethics, how do we know what human's universally "intended effect" is? ie. To further the human race onward and in a way that maximizes happiness. Some could say that that preference is (although widely shared) also subjective, as some people don't care much about the future of the human race or the majority of people's happiness. I don't know any of these people, but I bet they exist.
  10. Mike C.
    Good question! I hope she will join in the call! She did say she would like to see a couples therapist. I just need to find one that isn't religious. Any suggestions? Anyways, I will let you know what she says about joined the call once I find out the call date.
  11. Mike C.
    I actually didn't notice what sub forum I was in, so my bad. I tried editing my post but I missed that part. Responsible (Meriam Webster def. 3): marked by or involving responsibility or accountability Responsibility: a duty or task that you are required or expected to do I am guessing that's what he meant... Does that help?
  12. Mike C.
    She said morality matters more to everyone than personal preferences because it affects how the individual will treat the other people. Sort of interesting.
  13. Mike C.
    For those interested, I will post the date of the show I get scheduled for here, so go to the top of the page and click "Follow Thread" to get notified.
  14. Mike C.
    Are you referring to the silly illogical arguments that religious people make up? Yeah it's funny how they try to justify what they are doing. I also like making fun of this argument: Me: "How do you know God is real and not just in your head?" Them: "Well I feel Him when I pray to Him." "How do you know that's God and not your unconscious or something like that" "Because I can't fathom how that would be possible. It's gotta be God." "But God is clearly impossible. He is a self-contradictory being..." "Well, I definitely know that it must be God." "Okay, then. I'll leave you alone, then."
  15. Mike C.
    Had to read that a few times to get it, but yes! Haha! Well spoken, good sir.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.

  I accept