Discussion ABOUT the “What is morality?...” thread

The Philosopher Princess

(This thread is an experiment in “sibling” {or, “associated”} threads, which I’ve been meaning to try at Frihost sometime, and finally am. You can help the experiment work, by posting something relevant here.)

This thread is a sibling thread to What is MORALITY, the concept? Let’s be philosophers.

This thread is designed to allow both (1) discussion about that other thread, and (2) discussion pertinent to within that other thread though with much-relaxed rules. Posters to that other thread must meet strict requirements. Posters to this thread have a lot of freedom.

For example, if you want to speak on the morality issue, but you don’t think you want to try to fit in on the other thread, you can write to here. This is also for people writing over there, to discuss here, much lighter but related sub-topics. Another example for here would be discussion of the poll over there; people might want to explain why they voted a certain way, or maybe what voting option should have been given but wasn’t.

This thread is also the place where I will move posts from that other thread that don’t meet its requirements. I might split up posts between here and there too.

The Philosopher Princess

My original topic title over there was “What is MORALITY, the concept? Let’s be philosophical.” I changed just the last word so it’s now: “What is MORALITY, the concept? Let’s be philosophers.”

I am thinking the new title captures more of the intended essence. Here’s my reasoning: While anyone who’s giving any old wishy washy opinion on what they think is ethically right and wrong, is somewhat being philosophical, they aren’t really being a philosopher. Being a philosopher takes more discipline, more rigor. Having discipline does not necessarily mean studying in school. But it does mean being very careful in one’s thinking, and being as precise as possible in one’s writing.

So, your opinions on my opinion of how to use those 2 words is welcome here.

cbf-cma

[EDIT by The Philosopher Princess: This post was moved to here from What is MORALITY, the concept? Let’s be philosophers. Please see “Note #1 @ cbf-cma”, below.]

I think that back-and-forth debating at a surfacy level, but are not particularly trying to encourage people to spend time getting to the deeper stuff, and thus making progress towards a goal always starts with themselves, whether or not they believe in a supernatural being?”, to which above seem to disagree, and at one level they do. However, can’t you just imagine them arguing further on whether God exists or not? But they also could discuss things rationally

make_life_better

I like the idea of a pair of associated threads - in a sense this is of course a meta-thread!

I heartily approve of your title change - it puts the emphasis on the role and possible growth of the people involved in the discussion, rather than just the discussion itself. Hopefully the discussion will not degenerate into name-calling...

I also hope that people don't go too far the other way and get all pretentious about their discussions. It's difficult to tread the fine line between being sloppy with language and being impenetrable.

The Philosopher Princess

The Philosopher Princess

{Note #1 @ cbf-cma}

The Philosopher Princess

I quote here from the sibling thread. What I quote was very appropriate over there, but I consider my responses (which are on the meta-meta issues, not the substantive issues) to be more appropriate here.
~~~~~~~~~~