Now that the discussion on Religion has ceased I think I have found a lot more interesting subject to discuss (if any of you want to discuss anymore)
Morality is something we all deal with every day.
I have a few questions:



Then I have on extra assignment:

A train is going to crash the train station. The driver has passed out and can't change the direction. You enter the locomotive:
You have three choises which will it be?
A) Let the train crash. There are thousands of people in the station but there is a chance no one will get hurt in the crash but in the worst case thousands will die you among them.
B) you can turn the train left and the train will crush five people trapped on the train tracks. You don't know them.
C) you can also turn right but there are three of you close relatives on the tracks trapped just like in the case B.

What would be your answers?

Well I actually was planning on giving my answers...
This is going to be long so I will write it down once I have the time and energy (´going for later today)

We're expecting you to write something, -Mayhem-.....

I might give my answers on these questions once I make them in my head, and AFTER you write yours!!!

Yeah I know I had a busy week. I will write as soon as I have time and be prepared for a novel.

I'm waiting for you!!

So:


Every child should have a right to be born but what is a child and what is not is a lot more difficult question.
I am only against so called "social resons" to abortion. Anything that would makes life of the child or the mother unbearable is a reason good enough for abortion.



There have been many most interesting opinnions on person right to choose about his/her own life even in this scale.
Seneca said that life is not important, only good life is. He also said that a wise person does not live as long as he can but just as long as he has to.
This is a very difficult matter. I do believe there are cases when suicide can be the right answer but usually it is not. In a condition when a person can not be considered responsible for his/her choice like when deeply depressed he/she should not try a solution like this.
Timo Tolkki (who most of you might know) said that suicide is a permanent solution to often a temporary problem.
I think that was a good way to put it.



This is simple. I am an Antropocentristic Utilitarist. A nice word right?


Good life has the ingridients of a good life. Good life is nowadays considered individual but is it really?
Many philosophers consider happiness something that can't be denied of good life but the problem is how to define happiness and what does it take to be happy. The little mind game most of you trying this out will go through reveals something that G.E Moore found out and something that would make me go Stoic. Yet I am aware f the problems of Stoicism and I can't say to actually follow rtheir thoughts. But there is something wise about the core thought: Good life comes from a good attitude.



So meta-ethics.
After going through all theories I was pretty messed up. I hate the thought of Subjectivism and relativism so I am leaning towards the thought that morale exists and it is based on something. I believe Institutionalism is something I would like to think it is. Yet I can't say I Know or believe I know it. Yet I am a moral-realist and Kognitivist. (I am not really that aware of the spelling of each of these terms since I am not checking all of them)


I rely very deeply in the ways of Immanuel Kant in everyday decision making but not 100%. That would lead to terrible choises. Some Utilitarist thoughts too but not just the two of them.


Like I said I hate culture relativism and the thought of my nation just watching other nations slaughtering people and our nation only being able to say that "thats the way they do things and it is just as good as ours" just sounds terrible.


No but as I said I am a moralkognitivist and -realist

For the extra assignment:

hint:
Risky person would go for A
Immanuel Kant would go for C
An utilitarist (John Stuart Mill for example) would go for B if he counts his family is big and the believes the five people are just some sad homeless bums looking for a chance of suicide.




Hey this turned out a lot shorter than I expected.

I agree here absolutely. To answer your question, once the fetus is formed, it's a child. Not the thing that forms after third (I think) month of pregnancy, what many people would say. Abortion is, practically, equal to the murder. Even worse, it's a legal murder of the person that didn't have a chance to see the world at all. Imagine that, if your parents had a better opinion on abortion than you or me, you'd probably never be here to discuss this. Abortion process is literarlly "tearing the body apart", piece by piece. And doing it to a little baby, still in the womb. Unforgivable, if you ask me!
Anyway, as you, -Mayhem-, said, "Anything that would makes life of the child or the mother unbearable is a reason good enough for abortion", yes it is, because that "unbearable" usually causes someone's death, in the end.... And that is the same as abortion, so that choise would probably be easier.

My opinion matches Timo Tolkki's, although I didn't know he ever said it. I mean, we probably have only one life. Even if it's not like that, we don't know that and we HAVE TO live like it's the only one. Every problem we have is temporary. Life is short, but still long enough to make it the way we want it. As some people would say "life is a gift". Throwing it away seems like really unlogical solution to anything. You can never bring it back if you wish to. Even if you have a bad life, it's better than not having it at all... I mean, if you have a bad life, you can live and try to "correct" it, and if you kill yourself-never anything. I simply don't understand the point of suicide. If you were never given a life, you'll never have an opportunity to give it away.

Nice indeed. Let me analyse it. Antropo-something including "human"... Centristic-something about "center" probably.... So, humans in center... And utilitarist is probably connected to the word utility... So, you're someone who wants the utility for mankind above all, i guess! right?

My opinions on protecting the environment are simple: if we don't do it, we'll probably soon be gone... I think that includes something from your theory... And everyone's theory, except maybe of some lunatic, I guess...

Ingredients of good life? Really? I have an impression that you don't know how to answer your own questions. What would those ingredients be? Look, -Mayhem-, no offence, but you don't answer anything directly. Sometimes it's good, but sometimes it just sounds complicated and means, well, practically nothing.
Good life cannot be considered individually, that's the fact! I mean, it's simply impossible that for one man, a good life is being rich and for the other being poor, for example... The good life means justice, sharity, sincerity and so, and it's just like that. Happiness is, indeed, at least partially, individual thing. But it's foundations are the same for everyone. No one is happy because of the death of his relative, and no one is sad because of reaching some important goal in his life. "Good life comes from a good attitude"? Well of course.

As I said, you can't answer directly on anything. Honestly, I didn't understand what you wanted to say, and I don't have the time nor will to check it all... But my answer is that it's based on things that are simply good, without any written theory. That's something we know and have in ourselves from the start.

We're coming to religion again, but please don't start the religion topic again. For me it's GOD.

I think that morality of different cultures has, in fact, very little impotrant differences. Morality is something that's the same for everyone, in my opinion.

No, definitely not. My friend stole my favourite book and ripped it apart. Should I steal his? Stealing is wrong. But showing somebody that he wasn't right is right. Should I do it? Yes, but still, it's WRONG. You see? Nothing's black or white.

So you're choosing B, since you once said you're an utilitarist? In my case, I'd choose either A or C, never B.
Really?

Just wanna say that abortion is pure child-murder. Ever seen an aborted foetus? Sickening...

If the mother will die giving birth or there is a certain knowledge the child will be severly handicapped so that it can never live a life but insead will just be in intense pain for all it's life (resumably 4 months) would it be wrong to save the poor child from it's life?