this post was submitted on 16 Oct 2024
77 points (97.5% liked)

Ask Lemmy

26507 readers
1079 users here now

A Fediverse community for open-ended, thought provoking questions


Rules: (interactive)


1) Be nice and; have funDoxxing, trolling, sealioning, racism, and toxicity are not welcomed in AskLemmy. Remember what your mother said: if you can't say something nice, don't say anything at all. In addition, the site-wide Lemmy.world terms of service also apply here. Please familiarize yourself with them


2) All posts must end with a '?'This is sort of like Jeopardy. Please phrase all post titles in the form of a proper question ending with ?


3) No spamPlease do not flood the community with nonsense. Actual suspected spammers will be banned on site. No astroturfing.


4) NSFW is okay, within reasonJust remember to tag posts with either a content warning or a [NSFW] tag. Overtly sexual posts are not allowed, please direct them to either !asklemmyafterdark@lemmy.world or !asklemmynsfw@lemmynsfw.com. NSFW comments should be restricted to posts tagged [NSFW].


5) This is not a support community.
It is not a place for 'how do I?', type questions. If you have any questions regarding the site itself or would like to report a community, please direct them to Lemmy.world Support or email info@lemmy.world. For other questions check our partnered communities list, or use the search function.


Reminder: The terms of service apply here too.

Partnered Communities:

Tech Support

No Stupid Questions

You Should Know

Reddit

Jokes

Ask Ouija


Logo design credit goes to: tubbadu


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

Let hear them conjects

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] intensely_human@lemm.ee 1 points 12 minutes ago

When people are left to enter deals and economic arrangements as they see fit, it produces the most overall wealth, both for those at the top and those at the bottom of the economic hierarchy.

[–] Okami_No_Rei@lemmy.world 10 points 4 hours ago* (last edited 4 hours ago)

"Sometimes the things that may or may not be true are the things a man needs to believe in the most.

That people are basically good; that honor, courage, and virtue mean everything; that power and money, money and power mean nothing; that good always triumphs over evil; and I want you to remember this, that love... true love never dies.

You remember that, boy. You remember that. Doesn't matter if it's true or not.

You see, a man should believe in those things, because those are the things worth believing in."

  • Hub, Secondhand Lions (2003)
[–] Feathercrown@lemmy.world 4 points 5 hours ago (1 children)

Most of my moral convictions aren't provable because the most basic ideas are simply axioms. "You should be a good person" cannot be justified in a way that's non-circular, and defining "good" is also similarly arbitrary. The only true "evidence" is that people tend to agree on vague definitions in theory. Which is certainly a good thing, imo, but it's not actually provable that what we consider "good" is actually the correct way to act.

I have started creating a moral framework, though. I've been identifying and classifying particular behaviors and organizing them in a hierarchy. So far it's going pretty well. At least my arbitrariness can be well-defined!

[–] okamiueru@lemmy.world 2 points 3 hours ago* (last edited 3 hours ago) (1 children)

I think it is easy enough to argue without making it circular. As for "good", I don't think an objective absolute and universal definition is necessary.

The argument would be to consider it an optimization problem, and the interesting part, what the fitness function is. If we want to maximise happiness and freedom, any pair of people is transient. If it matters that they be kind to you, it is the exact same reasoning for why you should be to kind to them. Kinda like the "do unto others", except less prone to a masochist going around hurting people.

[–] Feathercrown@lemmy.world 1 points 3 hours ago* (last edited 3 hours ago) (1 children)

If we want to maximise happiness and freedom

But that's what I'm saying, that choice is axiomatic. I think most people would agree, but it's a belief, not an unquestionable truth. You're choosing something to optimize and defining that to be good.

If it matters that they be kind to you, it is the exact same reasoning for why you should be to kind to them

Only if you believe that everyone fundamentally deserves the same treatment. It's easy to overlook an axiom like that because it seems so obvious, but it is something that we have chosen to believe.

[–] okamiueru@lemmy.world 1 points 2 hours ago

But that's what I'm saying, that choice is axiomatic. I think most people would agree, but it's a belief, not an unquestionable truth. You're choosing something to optimize and defining that to be good.

I'm not really arguing against this tho (perhaps the choosing part, but I'll get to it). I'm saying that a goal post of "axiomaric universal good" isn't all that interesting, because, as you say, there is likely no such thing. The goal shouldn't therefore be to find the global maximum, but to have a heuristic that is "universal enough". That's what I tried to make a point of, in that the golden rule would, at face value, suggests that a masochistic should go around and inflict pain onto others.

It shouldn't be any particular person's understanding, but a collectively agreed understanding. Which is in a way how it works, as this understanding is a part of culture, and differs from one to the other. Some things considered polite in the US is rude in Scandinavia, and vice versa. But, regardless, there will be some fundamentals that are universal enough, and we can consider that the criteria for what to maximise.

[–] Pyflixia@kbin.melroy.org 8 points 11 hours ago

When we die, we're recycled. There's no Heaven, Hell, Rainbow Bridge, Valhalla .etc Because those are man-made constructs to give people a sense of belonging based on what you did in life. Someone talked to me about the Egg Theory and while I have a bit of skepticism towards it, I do understand a plausibility about it.

And if anything from the Egg Theory is true, then cool, I'd love nothing more than to be recycled and born into a life from the past to live it out again.

[–] Gobbel2000@programming.dev 12 points 13 hours ago

That P != NP.

[–] zxqwas@lemmy.world 7 points 15 hours ago (1 children)

That I'd be a fool to strongly hold a belief without equally strong evidence.

[–] faultypidgeon@programming.dev 5 points 15 hours ago (1 children)

Did this man just call himself a fool?

[–] cheese_greater@lemmy.world 5 points 13 hours ago

Everyones a fool and knows nothing :)

[–] Skyrmir@lemmy.world 10 points 18 hours ago

The Pizzagate conspiracy was created to cover up any media coverage of the police reports from the early 90s when Trump was hanging with Epstein and dumping 'used' underage girls at a pizza parlor the next morning.

[–] kalkulat@lemmy.world 9 points 20 hours ago (2 children)

Either greed or religion has killed the most people before their time. One of them has to go.

[–] Feathercrown@lemmy.world 1 points 5 hours ago

That might be provable

[–] coaxil@lemm.ee 8 points 12 hours ago (1 children)
[–] intensely_human@lemm.ee 1 points 10 minutes ago

How about god complexes? Should those be on our radar?

[–] TokenBoomer@lemmy.world 3 points 17 hours ago* (last edited 17 hours ago)

Bigfoot is real. Sasquatch, abominable snowmen, yeti have been spotted all over the globe. Coincidence?

[–] cmoney@lemmy.world 39 points 1 day ago (19 children)

I believe that life as we know it exists somewhere else in the universe .

load more comments (19 replies)
[–] Mr_Blott@feddit.uk 31 points 1 day ago (8 children)

When I started working decades ago, we were taught how to use bent bits of fence wire to find underground pipes before digging

I literally found scores of pipes that way, and saw dozens of other people do it regularly. It was even taught at a local agricultural college as part of the horticulture course

Then someone told me it was a myth and doesn't work, so I set up a blind test with a hidden bucket of water and I utterly failed to find it

I simply cannot explain this

[–] Feathercrown@lemmy.world 1 points 5 hours ago

Clearly it only works if you believe ;)

load more comments (7 replies)
[–] randomdeadguy@lemmy.world 27 points 1 day ago (18 children)
load more comments (18 replies)
[–] OutOfMemory@sh.itjust.works 15 points 1 day ago (11 children)

That global democratic socialism can work. Currently the only states successful in implementing it are oil-rich nordic countries, and I want to believe it can work elsewhere but it'll be hard to prove.

[–] Feathercrown@lemmy.world 4 points 5 hours ago

I think the problem is that no system that gives equal weight to everyone's opinions can survive a population that does not have a majority of good opinions. And if the populace does agree on most things, then it doesn't matter much what system is being used. The best the system can do is incentivise certain behaviors.

[–] dragonfucker 6 points 20 hours ago

No, Norway is social democracy.

load more comments (9 replies)
[–] HubertManne@moist.catsweat.com 7 points 23 hours ago (8 children)
load more comments (8 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›