Blackpill Morality Is Ironically Why Society Is Corrupt and Degeneracy is Flourishing

The ideal society would be driven primarily by logic. I think the reason society is so immoral is ironically because we are trying to be moral and not logical.

The basis of all laws that are good for a society, is logic.

Take murder for example, the law should not be "you should not kill because its bad/evil", it should be - "you should not kill because you also do not want to be killed". We should hate murder as a society because if we allow other people to kill others haphazardly, then we might be next, sounds fucked up but if society ran on cold logic like that, then everything would be more peaceful.

Basing laws on morality is ironically why society is flawed, its because MORALITY IS SUBJECTIVE. Even criminal organizations like the Yakuza or the Italian Mob, etc all have "codes of honour", that are things that even the average citizen would agree with. They have their own set of morals, for example the Mob usually doesn't allow killing women and children, its an emotional and subjective "rule", they have let their emotions create an illogical ruleset, but ironically they can kill men, steal from families, sell drugs, etc.

This is the problem with morals, everybody thinks their moral code is "good enough". If we all had to operate on logic, there is no such thing as "my logic" or "your logic", a choice either is logical or it isn't, logic is based on whats objective, not on how something makes one feel. We need a logical society not a moral one, "true morals" are inherent to logic, because logic usually yields the greatest collective rule set

Imagine how much the rates of rape and human trafficking would go down of prostitution was decriminalized, think about it, its completely illogical that paying for sex is illegal, there's no logical reason why it should be, yet despite all the income it would generate for a country if taxable, despite all the people it would alleviate from suffering, society keeps it illegal due to moral reasoning.

You see that slut on instagram, a lot of you moralfags on this site would say that she is being immoral, but you would be wrong. She doesn't kill, she doesn't steal, she doesn't <insert "bad" thing here>. That's her morals, as far as she's concerned "the times have changed" and she can be a slut and "it isn't hurting anyone". She is completely moral FOR THE ERA SHE EXISTS IN.

Again MORALS ARE SUBJECTIVE, they change from person to person, country to country, era to era. Morals are pointless, we need to be driven by logic not morals, morals can be altered and therefore THEY CAN BE CORRUPTED.

You can't corrupt logic, you can't corrupt objectivity. It always is what its going to be, it will never change, any changes to a law based on logic, will also be logical, but changes to a "moral code" can easily become corrupted.

In fact modern society is the greatest example of this, Christians influenced laws using their moral code, that's why gay marriage was illegal, today morals have been changed due to EMOTIONAL ARGUMENTS. People against gay marriage are seen as "bigots", "evil", etc. Now today gay marriage is legal.

ANY LAW WITH A FOUNDATION BASED ON EMOTION, IS "STRUCTURALLY WEAK" AND CAN BE ALTERED USING EMOTIONS.

MORALS CORRUPT A SOCIETY, THEY DON'T HELP IT

 

[Ap0calypse]

Morals built civilization

And not all morals are equal

 

[TINMAN]

Logic can be flawed just as morals can be flawed. It's known as a logical fallacy. People can be misinformed and make poor lawmaking decisions because of it.

The problem is that the only way to get codified laws based on logic is to use popular opinions on what is logical. The assumption is that when everyone combines their logical capabilities to make laws, they will come to a perfectly logical conclusion in the end, but this is not true. In the end you come to the same problem you are trying to avoid by replacing laws based on morality.

 

[iKillCucks]

Jewstagram whores that post sluty pictures but only put out for gigachad should still be sent to a guillotine tho

 

[Deleted member 1060]

Society is corrupt and degenerate because of "free" economy. Just outlaw all capitalist activities, everything will become straight like a fucking iron pole.

 

[BlkPillPres]

It's known as a logical fallacy.

Dude this is a disingenuous and ridiculous argument.

that's like saying - "logic can also be illogical, that's why these examples of illogical things are known as "flawed logic" "

No, they are known as logical fallacies BECAUSE THEY ARE ILLOGICAL, that' doesn't mean that logic can be flawed, it means that the person is flawed, they are falsely applying the logic. One cannot falsely apply morals, morals are subjective to begin with, any and everyone's morals are simultaneously wrong and right at the same time.

The problem is that the only way to get codified laws based on logic is to use popular opinions on what is logical.

Nope, most humans are like sheep, inherently illogical and emotional, this world would require a dictatorship or some kind of artificial intelligence that is used to forumlate laws, then a small group of elected officials who have proven themselves to be logical and emotionally dead will decide which of the AI's decisions works best for society.

We need people who are "emotionally dead" making the decisions, people completely removed from normal thinking.

Society is corrupt and degenerate because of "free" economy. Just outlaw all capitalist activities, everything will become straight like a fucking iron pole.

JFL without free economy there is no reason to work, I would just be a criminal in a communist country. I'm not going to work hard if I can't reap the majority of the benefits of that hard work.

 

[IncelKing]

@SergeantIncel must read content

 

[Lifeisbullshit95]

As i always say Morality is a mental illness.

 

[Deleted member 22999]

Jewstagram whores that post sluty pictures but only put out for gigachad should still be sent to a guillotine tho

 

[Michinomiya Hirohit]

Morals built civilization

And not all morals are equal

 

[Deleted member 20207]

Very high IQ.

Morality is a mental illness.

 

[TheReaper]

utilitaristic morality(based on the principle "the greatest amount of good for the greatest number")
and consequentialism [from a consequentialist standpoint, a morally right act (or omission from acting) is one that will produce a good outcome, or consequence] are both logical moral systems.
you're only talking about the kind of moral system that determines "good" and "evil" a priori.

 

[Deleted member 20207]

utilitaristic morality(based on the principle "the greatest amount of good for the greatest number")
and consequentialism [from a consequentialist standpoint, a morally right act (or omission from acting) is one that will produce a good outcome, or consequence] are both logical moral systems.
you're only talking about the kind of moral system that determines "good" and "evil" a priori.

What is a “good outcome” and how do you measure the “amount of good” though? By what the majority thinks is good? It is still a subjective and not a logical word.

 

[Michinomiya Hirohit]

What is a “good outcome” and how do you measure the “amount of good” though? By what the majority thinks is good? It is still a subjective and not a logical word.

 

[TheReaper]

What is a “good outcome” and how do you measure the “amount of good” though? By what the majority thinks is good? It is still a subjective and not a logical word.

these theories are more focused on well-being(objective) than on happiness(subjective), anyway is a complex topic, I post links if you're interested

Consequentialism - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Utilitarianism - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[Deleted member 23537]

Morals built civilization

And not all morals are equal

Morals built shit. Ambition built societies.

 

[Kirito3]

A logical society is a utopian fallacy. Humans are emotional at their core, and at the end of the day laws and rules must be enforced to have effects on day to day life. Rules that are established logically will be enforced based on emotion, making the premise of logical rules moot in the first place.

 

[AlexanderTheGreat11]

Read every word

 

[Deleted member 22685]

We need people who are "emotionally dead"

People who are emotionally dead would most likely have us all killed off, because they would say we are draging down society or some bullshit. Not the best choice exactly.

 

[DarthSpectra]

This is the highest IQ post I've read this year so far

 

[muharremabi]

This is the highest IQ post I've read this year so far

 

[Deleted member 21219]

The ideal society would be driven primarily by logic. I think the reason society is so immoral is ironically because we are trying to be moral and not logical.

The basis of all laws that are good for a society, is logic.

Take murder for example, the law should not be "you should not kill because its bad/evil", it should be - "you should not kill because you also do not want to be killed". We should hate murder as a society because if we allow other people to kill others haphazardly, then we might be next, sounds fucked up but if society ran on cold logic like that, then everything would be more peaceful.

Basing laws on morality is ironically why society is flawed, its because MORALITY IS SUBJECTIVE. Even criminal organizations like the Yakuza or the Italian Mob, etc all have "codes of honour", that are things that even the average citizen would agree with. They have their own set of morals, for example the Mob usually doesn't allow killing women and children, its an emotional and subjective "rule", they have let their emotions create an illogical ruleset, but ironically they can kill men, steal from families, sell drugs, etc.

This is the problem with morals, everybody thinks their moral code is "good enough". If we all had to operate on logic, there is no such thing as "my logic" or "your logic", a choice either is logical or it isn't, logic is based on whats objective, not on how something makes one feel. We need a logical society not a moral one, "true morals" are inherent to logic, because logic usually yields the greatest collective rule set

Imagine how much the rates of rape and human trafficking would go down of prostitution was decriminalized, think about it, its completely illogical that paying for sex is illegal, there's no logical reason why it should be, yet despite all the income it would generate for a country if taxable, despite all the people it would alleviate from suffering, society keeps it illegal due to moral reasoning.

You see that slut on instagram, a lot of you moralfags on this site would say that she is being immoral, but you would be wrong. She doesn't kill, she doesn't steal, she doesn't <insert "bad" thing here>. That's her morals, as far as she's concerned "the times have changed" and she can be a slut and "it isn't hurting anyone". She is completely moral FOR THE ERA SHE EXISTS IN.

Again MORALS ARE SUBJECTIVE, they change from person to person, country to country, era to era. Morals are pointless, we need to be driven by logic not morals, morals can be altered and therefore THEY CAN BE CORRUPTED.

You can't corrupt logic, you can't corrupt objectivity. It always is what its going to be, it will never change, any changes to a law based on logic, will also be logical, but changes to a "moral code" can easily become corrupted.

In fact modern society is the greatest example of this, Christians influenced laws using their moral code, that's why gay marriage was illegal, today morals have been changed due to EMOTIONAL ARGUMENTS. People against gay marriage are seen as "bigots", "evil", etc. Now today gay marriage is legal.

ANY LAW WITH A FOUNDATION BASED ON EMOTION, IS "STRUCTURALLY WEAK" AND CAN BE ALTERED USING EMOTIONS.

MORALS CORRUPT A SOCIETY, THEY DON'T HELP IT

Morals are inevitable though. I suspect morality would evolve spontaneously in any natural system of living things. The problem is people thinking that morality is objective.

 

[Reality]

Morality is imperative for the potential advancement of any type of society. If morality were to be discarded or, for instance, damaged, society will fall rapidly. Even when we were caveman, there was some sort of moral framework that we adhered to. That framework, in this case, was rather implicit, but it still holds that morality is one of the fundamental precepts for the well-being of society, and, subsequently, the survival of the individual. After all, we are social animals. No human could possibly survive by themselves. Groups and, eventually, the formation of society comes into play to help in the survival of the individual.

 

[Irishcel]

Morality should be informed by logic, and vice versa.

 

[Emba]

"The beatings will continue until morals improves!"

 

[Doomheim]

fuck ngl im kinda amazed by these posts

 

[Deleted member 24272]

Logic is two dimensional without experience and experience needs morality to occur.
Even a highschooller zoomer knows this

 

[TINMAN]

Morality serves as the underlying motivation for logic. If your morals are corrupt, then your logic will become flawed by extension.

Logic is a tool, not fundamentally good or bad in and of itself, the thing which determines that is what it is used for, in the same way that something like a knife can be used for many different things.

 

[To_Live_is to_Serve]

The ideal society would be driven primarily by logic. I think the reason society is so immoral is ironically because we are trying to be moral and not logical.

The basis of all laws that are good for a society, is logic.

Take murder for example, the law should not be "you should not kill because its bad/evil", it should be - "you should not kill because you also do not want to be killed". We should hate murder as a society because if we allow other people to kill others haphazardly, then we might be next, sounds fucked up but if society ran on cold logic like that, then everything would be more peaceful.

Basing laws on morality is ironically why society is flawed, its because MORALITY IS SUBJECTIVE. Even criminal organizations like the Yakuza or the Italian Mob, etc all have "codes of honour", that are things that even the average citizen would agree with. They have their own set of morals, for example the Mob usually doesn't allow killing women and children, its an emotional and subjective "rule", they have let their emotions create an illogical ruleset, but ironically they can kill men, steal from families, sell drugs, etc.

This is the problem with morals, everybody thinks their moral code is "good enough". If we all had to operate on logic, there is no such thing as "my logic" or "your logic", a choice either is logical or it isn't, logic is based on whats objective, not on how something makes one feel. We need a logical society not a moral one, "true morals" are inherent to logic, because logic usually yields the greatest collective rule set

Imagine how much the rates of rape and human trafficking would go down of prostitution was decriminalized, think about it, its completely illogical that paying for sex is illegal, there's no logical reason why it should be, yet despite all the income it would generate for a country if taxable, despite all the people it would alleviate from suffering, society keeps it illegal due to moral reasoning.

You see that slut on instagram, a lot of you moralfags on this site would say that she is being immoral, but you would be wrong. She doesn't kill, she doesn't steal, she doesn't <insert "bad" thing here>. That's her morals, as far as she's concerned "the times have changed" and she can be a slut and "it isn't hurting anyone". She is completely moral FOR THE ERA SHE EXISTS IN.

Again MORALS ARE SUBJECTIVE, they change from person to person, country to country, era to era. Morals are pointless, we need to be driven by logic not morals, morals can be altered and therefore THEY CAN BE CORRUPTED.

You can't corrupt logic, you can't corrupt objectivity. It always is what its going to be, it will never change, any changes to a law based on logic, will also be logical, but changes to a "moral code" can easily become corrupted.

In fact modern society is the greatest example of this, Christians influenced laws using their moral code, that's why gay marriage was illegal, today morals have been changed due to EMOTIONAL ARGUMENTS. People against gay marriage are seen as "bigots", "evil", etc. Now today gay marriage is legal.

ANY LAW WITH A FOUNDATION BASED ON EMOTION, IS "STRUCTURALLY WEAK" AND CAN BE ALTERED USING EMOTIONS.

MORALS CORRUPT A SOCIETY, THEY DON'T HELP IT

I didn’t read all this but:
logic + morality > logic + immorality
I have both logic and morals in my mind.

There are people, often women, who pretend to be moral but not rational while acting immoral. They could not pretend to be rational as they would continue to appear irrational and be immoral too.

 

[Shin no Shi]

Actually you can literally base thing purely on logic. For example, if I were to constantly destroy something that is necessary for my survival, as I assume that it's "always" going to be infinite, when it's not, then I'd be losing myself in this silly game I've played, however, If I realise this to be the case, then I would become more strategical with my resources, until I make it so that I can infinitely create that necessary. I should have used food for a better example, as manipulation of seeds and understanding of effectively using chicken stock or creating a genetic engineering system, where I can inifinitely make animals again and again, is best suited.

I can also view this in the case of humans, in the sense of knowing that if I constantly kill humans, I would eventually lose all man power needed to build a group that benefits my desires as much as theirs, unless of course I have everything I need to do by analysing everything they do and replicate all on my own, whilst being immortal, or using genetic engineering, I can create even more humans to do my bidding, whilst having the pleasure to murder. Otherwise, killing humans would be pointless, as I won't be able to reach what I want nor would I be able to benefit from their work such as learning how to create electricity, woodwork etc.

So I could say morals really are subjective overall and are only associated to the person's character, which I still have such as never forcing an idea of mine onto another person who doesn't buy into it, unless of course they come in the way of my desire, though unless they also have a value, I would just manipulate them for that.

Logic is also associated with psychopaths as well since all they do is manipulate and use the logic necessary to get their way. Thus logic>morals all day any day.

I still do have the framework of a moral person but it will start to decay as soon as I can get all I need, that is if it ever occurs, maybe when I kill god and become the new overlord and assist all incels in future lives.

 

[Intellectual NPC]

You need some sort of morality if you don't want society to disintegrate.

The U.S. in particular would not be so polarized if the left didn't actively try to break down customs and moral codes for decades. Drag queen story hour doesn't have to be illogical to be abhorrent. Despite you claiming there are different systems of morality everywhere, Christian morality is almost universal in Western countries. And that's what we should keep.

 

[Deleted member 20139]

Moral values are based on logic for the most part, it's just when they're written they focus on the more human side of the argument at least in western societies. The idea that you can run a society based on either solely logic or emotion is wrong; you have to balance both factors side by side.

 

[To koniec]

The ideal society would be driven primarily by logic. I think the reason society is so immoral is ironically because we are trying to be moral and not logical.

The basis of all laws that are good for a society, is logic.

Take murder for example, the law should not be "you should not kill because its bad/evil", it should be - "you should not kill because you also do not want to be killed". We should hate murder as a society because if we allow other people to kill others haphazardly, then we might be next, sounds fucked up but if society ran on cold logic like that, then everything would be more peaceful.

Basing laws on morality is ironically why society is flawed, its because MORALITY IS SUBJECTIVE. Even criminal organizations like the Yakuza or the Italian Mob, etc all have "codes of honour", that are things that even the average citizen would agree with. They have their own set of morals, for example the Mob usually doesn't allow killing women and children, its an emotional and subjective "rule", they have let their emotions create an illogical ruleset, but ironically they can kill men, steal from families, sell drugs, etc.

This is the problem with morals, everybody thinks their moral code is "good enough". If we all had to operate on logic, there is no such thing as "my logic" or "your logic", a choice either is logical or it isn't, logic is based on whats objective, not on how something makes one feel. We need a logical society not a moral one, "true morals" are inherent to logic, because logic usually yields the greatest collective rule set

Imagine how much the rates of rape and human trafficking would go down of prostitution was decriminalized, think about it, its completely illogical that paying for sex is illegal, there's no logical reason why it should be, yet despite all the income it would generate for a country if taxable, despite all the people it would alleviate from suffering, society keeps it illegal due to moral reasoning.

You see that slut on instagram, a lot of you moralfags on this site would say that she is being immoral, but you would be wrong. She doesn't kill, she doesn't steal, she doesn't <insert "bad" thing here>. That's her morals, as far as she's concerned "the times have changed" and she can be a slut and "it isn't hurting anyone". She is completely moral FOR THE ERA SHE EXISTS IN.

Again MORALS ARE SUBJECTIVE, they change from person to person, country to country, era to era. Morals are pointless, we need to be driven by logic not morals, morals can be altered and therefore THEY CAN BE CORRUPTED.

You can't corrupt logic, you can't corrupt objectivity. It always is what its going to be, it will never change, any changes to a law based on logic, will also be logical, but changes to a "moral code" can easily become corrupted.

In fact modern society is the greatest example of this, Christians influenced laws using their moral code, that's why gay marriage was illegal, today morals have been changed due to EMOTIONAL ARGUMENTS. People against gay marriage are seen as "bigots", "evil", etc. Now today gay marriage is legal.

ANY LAW WITH A FOUNDATION BASED ON EMOTION, IS "STRUCTURALLY WEAK" AND CAN BE ALTERED USING EMOTIONS.

MORALS CORRUPT A SOCIETY, THEY DON'T HELP IT

Morals are relative. Christcucks and muzzies have different morals, but still have both.

 

[based_meme]

Moral values are based on logic for the most part, it's just when they're written they focus on the more human side of the argument at least in western societies. The idea that you can run a society based on either solely logic or emotion is wrong; you have to balance both factors side by side.

The biggest "WTF" here that most people don't even realize is that emotions have a logic to them - every system has a logic to it; that's what makes it a system. If I buy you your lunch and tell you some funny jokes, you will have the emotion of happiness. If I punch you in the face and insult you, you will have the emotion of anger. These are perfectly logical responses to those behaviors.

Your moral value could be based on something like hedonism. Then it means that all of your moral decisions are emotional decisions, which may or may not be logical (by chance or overlap) in different systems. But it is a system nonetheless and the logic of it is very simple: "do these actions and decisions bring me pleasure and happiness?" If yes, continue. If no, break.

You can program a computer to be hedonistic, that's how simplistic it is. It's no surprise then that very many people in this world operate with this moral system. You're basically a barely-thinking animal this way, and most people don't think past themselves. This is why they're NPCs and their morals are whatever is the current flavor of culture and society.

 

[bkdreamkb]

Read crime and punishment by dostoyevsky.
You can justify pretty much everything using logic.

 

[SuccessfulShark]

True morality is based on logic not emotions but yeah I agree that people are giving more value to emotions than logic but this is obvious because women only have emotions they are devoid of logic

 

[based_meme]

True morality is based on logic not emotions but yeah I agree that people are giving more value to emotions than logic but this is obvious because women only have emotions they are devoid of logic

What's "true morality"?

 

[SuccessfulShark]

What's "true morality"?

I mean what morality is supposed to be, it's supposed to be logic based not emotional

 

[based_meme]

I mean what morality is supposed to be, it's supposed to be logic based not emotional

OK. What's that? Start from first principles, if you have to.

Consruct a logic based moral system from scratch.

 

[BenBerger]

OK. What's that? Start from first principles, if you have to.

Consruct a logic based moral system from scratch.

I think it would be hard to construct a morality without a situation or some precedence. I mean something should be there to be judged. IDK.
But perhaps the "Question of Morality" is simply unimportant. I think matters of Creativity, Aesthetics, Productivity, and Justice are far more important that this manipulative term.

@SuccessfulShark you were challanged. Please do it.
I agree that moral should be grounded in hard core logic btw

I am low IQ AF, but i think we dialectic can help here. Formal logic and Mathematics of course also help.

The ideal society would be driven primarily by logic. I think the reason society is so immoral is ironically because we are trying to be moral and not logical.

The basis of all laws that are good for a society, is logic.

Take murder for example, the law should not be "you should not kill because its bad/evil", it should be - "you should not kill because you also do not want to be killed". We should hate murder as a society because if we allow other people to kill others haphazardly, then we might be next, sounds fucked up but if society ran on cold logic like that, then everything would be more peaceful.

Basing laws on morality is ironically why society is flawed, its because MORALITY IS SUBJECTIVE. Even criminal organizations like the Yakuza or the Italian Mob, etc all have "codes of honour", that are things that even the average citizen would agree with. They have their own set of morals, for example the Mob usually doesn't allow killing women and children, its an emotional and subjective "rule", they have let their emotions create an illogical ruleset, but ironically they can kill men, steal from families, sell drugs, etc.

This is the problem with morals, everybody thinks their moral code is "good enough". If we all had to operate on logic, there is no such thing as "my logic" or "your logic", a choice either is logical or it isn't, logic is based on whats objective, not on how something makes one feel. We need a logical society not a moral one, "true morals" are inherent to logic, because logic usually yields the greatest collective rule set

Imagine how much the rates of rape and human trafficking would go down of prostitution was decriminalized, think about it, its completely illogical that paying for sex is illegal, there's no logical reason why it should be, yet despite all the income it would generate for a country if taxable, despite all the people it would alleviate from suffering, society keeps it illegal due to moral reasoning.

You see that slut on instagram, a lot of you moralfags on this site would say that she is being immoral, but you would be wrong. She doesn't kill, she doesn't steal, she doesn't <insert "bad" thing here>. That's her morals, as far as she's concerned "the times have changed" and she can be a slut and "it isn't hurting anyone". She is completely moral FOR THE ERA SHE EXISTS IN.

Again MORALS ARE SUBJECTIVE, they change from person to person, country to country, era to era. Morals are pointless, we need to be driven by logic not morals, morals can be altered and therefore THEY CAN BE CORRUPTED.

You can't corrupt logic, you can't corrupt objectivity. It always is what its going to be, it will never change, any changes to a law based on logic, will also be logical, but changes to a "moral code" can easily become corrupted.

In fact modern society is the greatest example of this, Christians influenced laws using their moral code, that's why gay marriage was illegal, today morals have been changed due to EMOTIONAL ARGUMENTS. People against gay marriage are seen as "bigots", "evil", etc. Now today gay marriage is legal.

ANY LAW WITH A FOUNDATION BASED ON EMOTION, IS "STRUCTURALLY WEAK" AND CAN BE ALTERED USING EMOTIONS.

MORALS CORRUPT A SOCIETY, THEY DON'T HELP IT

Dear,
I would like to ask you a question... Why are you thinking and writing about morality? Why do you think it is important?

IMO, and as you imply, morality is simply a reflection of power relations and some biological factor. Right?
The example of Christianity and Gays is a great example that morality is mutable and affected by emotions.

 

[Wedlors]

We need people who are "emotionally dead" making the decisions, people completely removed from normal thinking.

The big problem here is that there are no people that are completely free from emotions. While there are people who are more rational and don't let emotions influence their thoughts too much, it is impossible to be 100percent unemotional because it is human nature to have emotions. In my opinion a perfect society is impossible while humans are alive. There will never be a political system that will be flawless bc human nature has too many flaws. A lot of faggots here want to kill women bc they did not want to have sex with them, but it is logical to not want to have sex with ugly ass people, I wouldn't want that too. Now women are even worse than men when it comes to being irrational and letting emotions affect their actions because women are almost completely emotional and don't act out of logic for the most part, just out of emotional impulses.
TLDR: There is no thing as perfect logic for humans as they are now, we would need to evolve to a better species.

 

[based_meme]

I think it would be hard to construct a morality without a situation or some precedence. I mean something should be there to be judged. IDK.
But perhaps the "Question of Morality" is simply unimportant. I think matters of Creativity, Aesthetics, Productivity, and Justice are far more important that this manipulative term.

Morality can be abstracted into concepts, categories etc. Situations are then concrete instances, or examples if you prefer, of those abstractions. This is no picnic and it is incredibly difficult, but it's worth attempting. We should note that we wouldn't need to deal with Hume's law, since these axioms would need not be any descriptive truths about the world, but self-evident and contained within themselves.

Some first principles (read: axioms) of morality would be something like the following (these are preliminary and tentative, and are subject to revision and further analysis):

I. All actions* have a positive, negative, or neutral value.

Whatever action you do - anything - whether it's sitting down in a chair or drinking a glass of x, has some value. That value (with any of the three parities: positive, negative, or zero, with no assigned value to the former two) can be for yourself, for other living things or inanimate (like someone's property), or for the space surrounding you (local and distant).

II. The value is absolute and not relative, and may increase, decrease or lose all value.

If some action x has value y>0 to, say, myself, but it has some value z<0 to another, and if |y|-|z|>0, then the moral value of x is positive. Conversely, if |y|-|z|<0, then the value of x is said to be negative. And if it equals 0, then x has no moral value.
---

This may be construed as dressed up Utilitarianism, and that characterization would not wholly be inaccurate, but I'm not done yet. I intend to incorporate aspects of the other moral paradigm and build additional axioms, but it's going to take some time and effort.

*An action is defined as any volitional interaction an agent has with itself, other moral agents, and/or the space surrounding the agent, whether local or extended and distant.

@SuccessfulShark you were challanged. Please do it.
I agree that moral should be grounded in hard core logic btw

I am low IQ AF, but i think we dialectic can help here. Formal logic and Mathematics of course also help.

It's not a challenge to him tbh. This is a cooperative effort.

Formalizing is the goal here. The idea is to construct, from axioms, propositions that must necessarily follow, and then use those moral theorems to find more truths. We keep doing this until we have a collection of theorems we can build a system with that we can then use in practically every moral instance we could encounter and even instances we are yet to encounter, for example, with new technologies like machines that have self-directed decision making capabilities and are demonstrably sentient and self-aware.

 

[LonelyDreamer]

Imagine how much the rates of rape and human trafficking would go down of prostitution was decriminalized, think about it, its completely illogical that paying for sex is illegal, there's no logical reason why it should be, yet despite all the income it would generate for a country if taxable, despite all the people it would alleviate from suffering, society keeps it illegal due to moral reasoning.

Prostitution is not illegal because of morals but because of feminism.

 

[To koniec]

Read crime and punishment by dostoyevsky.
You can justify pretty much everything using logic.

 

[BlkPillPres]

Prostitution is not illegal because of morals but because of feminism.

Prostitution was illegal BEFORE feminism, its religious moral values that made it become illegal in society

 

[B.O.G.A.R.T.]

You can't corrupt logic, you can't corrupt objectivity. It always is what its going to be, it will never change, any changes to a law based on logic, will also be logical, but changes to a "moral code" can easily become corrupted.

This take is so bad I wish Nietzsche could crawl out of his grave and spank your bare ass. What you call "logic" here is tied to your personal benefit so of course it is subjective, it is by definition. For a self-described 'nihilist' I can tell you never read a page from Die fröhliche Wissenschaft in your life, didn't you?

If you're really a blackpilled nihilist it would be observable logic to be not objective. It's bound by someones perspective. Your self-interest is far from being universally applicable like algebra. It's a perspective your preaching here, your perspective. Your head head is so far up your ass here you fail to recognize the unbearable subjectiveness of your own reasoning.

 

[Deleted member 25707]

Morality can be abstracted into concepts, categories etc. Situations are then concrete instances, or examples if you prefer, of those abstractions. This is no picnic and it is incredibly difficult, but it's worth attempting. We should note that we wouldn't need to deal with Hume's law, since these axioms would need not be any descriptive truths about the world, but self-evident and contained within themselves.

Some first principles (read: axioms) of morality would be something like the following (these are preliminary and tentative, and are subject to revision and further analysis):

I. All actions* have a positive, negative, or neutral value.

Whatever action you do - anything - whether it's sitting down in a chair or drinking a glass of x, has some value. That value (with any of the three parities: positive, negative, or zero, with no assigned value to the former two) can be for yourself, for other living things or inanimate (like someone's property), or for the space surrounding you (local and distant).

II. The value is absolute and not relative, and may increase, decrease or lose all value.

If some action x has value y>0 to, say, myself, but it has some value z<0 to another, and if |y|-|z|>0, then the moral value of x is positive. Conversely, if |y|-|z|<0, then the value of x is said to be negative. And if it equals 0, then x has no moral value.
---

This may be construed as dressed up Utilitarianism, and that characterization would not wholly be inaccurate, but I'm not done yet. I intend to incorporate aspects of the other moral paradigm and build additional axioms, but it's going to take some time and effort.

*An action is defined as any volitional interaction an agent has with itself, other moral agents, and/or the space surrounding the agent, whether local or extended and distant.



It's not a challenge to him tbh. This is a cooperative effort.

Formalizing is the goal here. The idea is to construct, from axioms, propositions that must necessarily follow, and then use those moral theorems to find more truths. We keep doing this until we have a collection of theorems we can build a system with that we can then use in practically every moral instance we could encounter and even instances we are yet to encounter, for example, with new technologies like machines that have self-directed decision making capabilities and are demonstrably sentient and self-aware.

Interesting Peanomaxxing.
You'll need Category Theory

 

[based_meme]

Interesting Peanomaxxing.
You'll need Category Theory

I would, but I don't know if functions and morphisms are valid abstractions in moral ontologies, since feelings and perceptions (the things that evaluate "goodness" and "evilness") are unfortunately tied into it and can't be concretized and mapped the same way, if at all. Even something as simple as the concept of an isomorphism may not necessarily have an analogue in moral abstraction.

Think about something like associativity. It's straightforward in mathematics, but the operation of collecting elements aka addition, or in this case moral actions (since actions are the irreducible elements in morality), won't logically function in the same way. For example, if i punch you in the face and then apologize afterward, it's a completely different process and outcome than if I were to apologize first then punch you in the face. The moral values would be different.

You would need to create a new kind of logical structure. It would have to be some kind of fuzzy logic. Axiomatizing a fuzzy system is difficult - perhaps even logically impossible - since you're creating statements that are supposed to be 100% true and 0% false, but then using those to come up with propositions that have different T:F ratios (or M:I, moral:immoral).

What the hell did I get myself into?

 

[based_meme]

@Grothendieck I'm beginning to think that binary or polynary operarions may not in fact be possible in a moral ontology, which means axiom two may have to be scrapped, unless I save it somehow.

It could be entirely possible that all moral actions only have the unary operation and it could be something very weird like the value of those actions being in a sort of fluctuating fuzzy logical state until the action takes place and is instantiated.

It's also possible that I might have accidentally sniffed glue and don't know WTF I'm doing.

 

[Deleted member 25707]

@Grothendieck I'm beginning to think that binary or polynary operarions may not in fact be possible in a moral ontology, which means axiom two may have to be scrapped, unless I save it somehow.

It could be entirely possible that all moral actions only have the unary operation and it could be something very weird like the value of those actions being in a sort of fluctuating fuzzy logical state until the action takes place and is instantiated.

It's also possible that I might have accidentally sniffed glue and don't know WTF I'm doing.

Interesting observation. You should think about it more. I think you're on to something here ngl