Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

Pehz t1_j0hgpp5 wrote

Reply to comment by IAI_Admin in The good/ binary in morality is misguided and can be dangerous | Tommy Curry, Massimo Pigliucci, Joanna Kavenna by IAI_Admin

"Whether the dichotomy of good and evil does more harm than good."

The debate is using the stones to destroy the stones, it seems.

61

thec0mpletionist t1_j0ipzll wrote

i think theres a significant difference between something being attributed as an inherently good/bad property/form and a system of thinking causing a positive/negative effect if used in specific ways.

8

[deleted] t1_j0hlbci wrote

And if everything is subjective, then there's no truth, then why bother searching for answers?

7

WaveCore t1_j0hliv0 wrote

Not being able to reach a truth is better than reaching a false truth

18

Happyradish532 t1_j0huubd wrote

I wouldn't say so. If people took that stance on enough topics, they wouldn't really believe in any ideas.

1

WaveCore t1_j0i53nm wrote

That's just not true at all. Let's say there are two theories for a truth, A and B. I don't necessarily have to commit to believing theory A or theory B, but I can lean more towards believing and being more convinced by either of them. If I happen to believe theory A more, who's not to say that developments in theory B could cause me to shift towards theory B later down the road?

But what happens to the close-minded is that they're either more sold on theory A or B, and henceforth stick to it and cease to keep up with the other theory. Because they've already written it off as "wrong" or "bad" in this case.

Thinking that you have to commit to beliefs is just intellectual laziness. It's more comfortable to assume that you have all the right and correct takes and therefore there is no need to challenge yourself anymore.

15

Happyradish532 t1_j0i9ihr wrote

The other user said no truth at all is better than a false truth. Sounds like you're saying something else. That you'd rather believe partially in something that may be wrong, and change your mind later. That's different than believing in no truth, which I see as offering the subject no thought at all. I guess we just interpreted the other users comment differently.

4

CaseyTS t1_j0j0wo2 wrote

> That's different than believing in no truth, which I see as offering the subject no thought at all.

Careful not to accuse your opponents of not even thinking just because you strongly disagree. People carefully think about and consider things that they do not have a definite truth for all the time, and even someone who questions everything and believes only in subjective reality (i.e. no objective truth) might think deeply about things.

3

Happyradish532 t1_j0m61u9 wrote

Fair enough, but I'm not accusing anyone of anything. Those were the words they used. How else was I supposed to take it?

0

iiioiia t1_j0i1ywf wrote

There's no requirements for one's beliefs to be true. And while it is often beneficial, it is not always.

5

kequilla t1_j0ied74 wrote

Pursuing the truth is better than resting on falsehoods.

1

iiioiia t1_j0i1r8m wrote

Subjectivity is perceptual, truth (actual, as opposed to perceived/declared) is not.

2

Pehz t1_j0i6x8q wrote

I'm not sure how that's related to my comment, I was just making a joke about using the language "more harm than good" when arguing that "good and bad" are misused.

I mean, it made sense and was arguably reasonable for Thanos to use the stones to destroy the stones.

2