返回列表 回覆 發帖

Re: 離開了教會,道德如何?

原帖由 dye 於 2007-7-4 22:44 發表
自私基因論,是道金斯成名作

《自私的基因》,i'm loving it~
支持鼓勵每位離教者 › 閹割神父 刻不容緩 ‹
那同理心論,自古科學家便有研究。

基因論,比如那條公式,也是生物學家William Donald Hamilton的作品

自私基因論,是道金斯成名作

………………

這可都不是我自身的尺。

—————
維基

道德可追溯源於先秦思想家老子所著的道德經,其中指自然運行與人世共通的真理;而德是指人世的美德、品行、王道。在當時是兩個概念,並無道德一詞。

在西方,"道德" 二字,是解作 "正確的行為",是在倫理學的範疇。" 道德" 的標準,在不同的文化上,哲學上,宗教上等也有不同的觀點,但普遍相信人類世界有很大部分的道德觀點也是相同的。道德很多時候跟良心一起談及,而良心就是推動作出良好行為。

在現代的用法中,道德則合禮教的意義相近,是指一种在社会生活实践中形成和发展,主要依靠社会舆论、风俗习惯和良心指导和约束,可以用善恶标准进行评价的个体和社会意识,人格品质规范和调整人与人、人与自然关系的行为规范;它是与这类意识和规范相联系的行为活动;以及通过这些活动所结成的社会关系的体系。

[ 本帖最後由 dye 於 2007-7-4 23:14 編輯 ]
中國既道德,係咪源自《道德經》?

用返道德經果D解釋啦,呢個我知dye兄都幾熟。

我呢D無道德主義者,靜靜觀看你們的討論吧。
支持鼓勵每位離教者 › 閹割神父 刻不容緩 ‹

回復 #66 龍井樹 的帖子

基基便多不認同有這種病。

如果上帝發現法老王只是生腦cancer(其中一自然成因),佢仲點大屠殺
孩童有成人作為監護人,這類病人亦應該受到適當的監管,以免危害社會。

回復 #65 dye 的帖子

我想這個失去是非對錯的病還未受到應有的重視,以及與普遍人對這個病缺乏認識(甚至不認同有這麼樣的一種病);只要假以時日,其他人都會認同他們應該免受刑責,正如不懂是非的孩童應該免受刑責一樣。
你不是失去意識,「輕重」部份損壞後,你仍很清醒。
只是你會不明白該與不該的分別。

(PSYCHOPATH 也要為自己的行為負責的。)

———
我舉例

The first of Dr. Miller's patients was a 54-year-old woman who had begun to experience loss of judgment and inhibition nine years earlier. Once a lover of expensive designer clothing and French cuisine, she had begun to buy cheaper brands of clothing and eat at fast-food restaurants. Her personality became "irritable, aggressive, and domineering" (Miller 2001, p. 818), and she became apathetic and quit her job.

The second patient was a 67-year-old man who had begun showing symptoms of dementia as early as 40. He had sold a business he had owned and had tried a variety of new jobs, but was repeatedly fired for irresponsible behavior; once "a critical, self-reliant individual who recognized his own failings" (p. 919), he now blamed his employers for his poor record. His previously puritanical views about sex became liberal, tolerant and experimental, and he urged his children to adopt a "libertine" lifestyle. By age 57, he had become careless, irritable and easily angered, and by 64 he was thoroughly demented.  

The third patient was a 63-year-old woman who had once been a well-dressed conservative. By age 56, however, she had become withdrawn, antisocial, hostile and uncaring; in one instance, she ran a red light, hit another car and then carelessly left the scene of the accident to go shopping. By age 62, her political ideology had changed, becoming diametrically opposed to her former beliefs; she became a passionate advocate of animal rights, publicly argued with people she saw buying conservative books, began to wear T-shirts and baggy pants with pro-wildlife slogans, and made incendiary anti-conservative statements such as, "Republicans should be taken off the Earth" (ibid.)  

The fourth patient, a 53-year-old man, quit his job as president of a successful advertising agency at age 35, declaring his intent to write a political novel. He moved to Guatemala, but never wrote anything, instead taking up an interest in photography and wax sculpture; during this entire time, he ignored his family and made no attempt to communicate with his wife or children for months at a stretch. He eventually returned home, but by age 51 he was running red lights, cheating and lying compulsively, criticizing unsuspecting guests and family members harshly for minor matters, staring inappropriately at women other than his wife, and masturbating in public. Within two years, he had to be committed to an institution.  

Another patient was very similar, a retired stockbroker who decided to become an artist. Like the last patient, he exhibited changes in language, dress and behavior, and rapidly grew disinhibited, frequently shoplifting or changing clothes in public without embarrassment. Eventually he stopped bathing and changing clothes entirely, the artistic talent he had developed faded, and he became demented.  

The final patient's case is the most interesting of all. A 70-year-old woman, she expressed "intense hatred" (ibid.) for her husband at his death, even though she had been married to him for decades. As the dementia worsened, the woman, who had been Lutheran all her life, converted to Catholicism, made donations to the church, and fell in love with a priest and claimed she was in a relationship with him. Six months after her religious conversion, she was thoroughly demented.

[ 本帖最後由 dye 於 2007-7-4 16:49 編輯 ]

回復 #63 dye 的帖子

我的腦構成了我,是我的重要部份。
我說的自由,並非全無規範的絕對自由。
自由是在「我」這個限制底下得以有效運作的。
當我受到藥物影響,或是失去意識的情況下,
我是失去了自由的(或說「我」無法正常運作)。
法庭之上,
在失去意識的情況下人無需為自己的行為負責。
物理世界有告訴你什麼該與不該

如你腦中分「輕重」部份損壞,你會失去分辦該與不該的能力。

肚餓時你腦正告訴你該吃點什麼。但同時同理心的部份會告訴你不該吃。也有大腦分析的幫助,形成選擇的錯覺…

[ 本帖最後由 dye 於 2007-7-4 16:29 編輯 ]

回復 #61 dye 的帖子

ethic 應解作「倫理」。
或者說,你的「道德」就是我的「倫理」嗎?

以我理解,「肚餓」不是自由選擇,「食慾」也不是自由選擇,
吃與不吃可是自由選擇;「不吃會死」不是自由選擇,死也不吃可是自由選擇。

物理世界沒有告訴我什麼該與不該,
物理世界只有在與不在。
ethic

2B)
the principles of conduct governing an individual or a group

I ROBOT 中的機器人也有道德(那三條定律)。
T3 中的機器人也有道德(服從命令)。

人也像機器人一樣,受物理世界支配。自不自由看人叫什麼做「自由」。

肚餓吃飯算不算自由選擇?肚餓是藥物的效果。

為什麼受物理世界支配便不自由?物理世界一樣支配着我們不能飛。我們的自由會因此少了嗎?

回復 #59 dye 的帖子

我沒有徵求你同意,我只想知道你為「道德」一詞賦予了怎麼樣的內涵。
《否定了自由選擇,那就澈底否定了道德了》

這個我不同意
這種依戀之情既是藥物的效果,那就沒有所謂價值不價值,只係生理上的自然反應。價值的基礎在於自由選擇,否定了自由選擇,那就澈底否定了道德了。
不單只性衝動,是BONDING, 就像母親愛兒子一樣。

同性戀者有沒有效我未聽過。但女女之間本身有友情化學藥令他們親近(在對話時放出,女人多野講的其中一個因素)

[ 本帖最後由 dye 於 2007-7-4 15:47 編輯 ]
感覺異性(對同性戀者同樣有效嗎?)、或者感覺性變得重要,
真是這樣嗎?
還是感到莫名的性衝動,根本沒有想過重要不重要、價值不價值?
原帖由 龍井樹 於 2007-7-4 15:25 發表

如果沒有價值的等差,只要服藥就能產生愛的感覺,根據那定義,這種愛情感覺就是與道德無關的。


有價值的等差,你會覺得那女/男生價值上升,第三種愛情藥甚至會令你有依依不捨(長久)的感情。
原帖由 dye 於 2007-7-4 15:19 發表


我指是要愛情藥會令你愛上一個人,愛上誰卻視乎你啪藥時的情况。

如果沒有價值的等差,只要服藥就能產生愛的感覺,根據那定義,這種愛情感覺就是與道德無關的。
原帖由 抽刀斷水 於 2007-7-4 15:19 發表

你這麼答,即是在殺人的時候,把「人」的定義扭曲一下,把敵人、奴隸等定義為「不是人」,實乃自欺欺人。


正是。「人」的定義一直在變!成吉思汗可不會當你和我是個人。

現代有人問BONOBO,半人猿、杯貽是不是人。


嗯,的確不一定,但就以自己的尺而言,我觀察到假如人不以為自己的尺是較好、較高的話,普遍是不會去「補充」別人的不是的 ...


那奇怪,可能是我常常引用,卻不以為自己的有什麼好。

[ 本帖最後由 dye 於 2007-7-4 15:30 編輯 ]
返回列表
高級模式 | 發新話題
B Color Image Link Quote Code Smilies
換一個