The Ethical part of Ethics

Could this post be about ethics? Well, yes. In philosophy ethics are a giant umbrella of ideas. Medical ethics, personal ethics, ethical treatment of animals, and many many more. What I would like to focus on is how we use ethics and if they really mean anything at all. The ethics of ethics…

So do ethics hold any bearing on our decision making, or really should they hold any bearing on our decision making. This is a question we can only answer when we have made up our mind on a couple key questions. The debate is probably over if you do not believe ethics are a human creation. If you believe full heartedly in an all powerful Being then the will of god should take precedence of ethical belief.  God’s “will” is always ethical, no matter what. That means you really take ethics out of the equation. As long as what you do is in God’s “will” it is always correct.

Now, if we throw out the all powerful being then we can truly look into ethics. There are so many different kinds of ethical belief systems. Pragmatic ethics, Utopian ethics, Kantian ethics, etc. Being that there are so many ethical systems how do we know which one to follow, or should we follow any at all? In this question we can see why I titled this post the ethical part of ethics. With so many choices why should we believe any ethical system?

Ethics is a way we live our lives. It is how we make decisions that affect our lives as well as other’s lives. The argument I would like to make is that we should not base our life on any ethical system. The reasoning behind this statement is the fact that ethics are a belief system made up by man. There are so many different ethical beliefs how can we put our life behind any of them? Men have tried to create systems to base our society off of for the best possible outcome. What we have seen from the past is that most all encompassing ethical systems fail because we cannot have an answer for every logical question. In Utopian ethics we see that the wellness of the masses is much better than the wellness of one person.  One big problem with this system is that we take away the rights of the individual.  In Kantian ethics Kant tried to fix some of the major issues with Utopian ethics but still failed. So how do we make decisions without an ethical system?

Well, we do have somewhat of a system of ethics. It is based off of society. Our decisions are made based on what the masses do. In fact in the US the supreme court actually makes almost every decision based on what our society thinks is right and wrong. Only in extraordinary cases does the supreme court rule against society. These are times of cultural change.  Our system of decisions is always changing so can we say that our ethical system is ever ethical?

I do not think we can. 150 years ago it was OK to enslave blacks, to buy and sell another person for a white person’s personal gain. How is that ethical? Well by todays standards it is not, but in the past in most cultures this was quite alright. So how can ethics ever be ethical if they are always changing? They cant, right?

Ethics are a funny thing. Really they are a dream thought up by man. Something man can use to make decisions, but not only to make the decisions but to prove that the decisions they make are correct, backed up by facts and solid ideas. In truth, the decisions man makes will always be unethical. This is quite a statement. Every decision I make can be considered unethical. How is that possible? It is possible because there are an infinite amount of ethical belief systems. Because time is infinite there will always be a different ethical system and in any one of those ethical systems I could be wrong based on the system. I am always unethical no matter what.

So then the only truth I can know is that any ethical system is, in reality, unethical. This point is easily seen by looking into our past. Many decisions we made believing we were in the right, by todays standards are unbelievably wrong. They are wrong in every respect we can think of. So then how do we make decisions? How do we know what to do, what is right and what is wrong?

This is a question we cannot answer. Today society makes our decisions for us. Whatever the masses believe is what we believe is correct. If you disobey society they throw you in prison.  Different societies have different beliefs, and different beliefs, as we see in history, start wars. There is no way to get around the fact that people will always believe different things. A vary unsettling fact, that there is no correct underling right answer. Maybe this is why people argue for an all powerful being. To bring order to chaos.

BIGFIX01

Published in: on May 30, 2008 at 6:52 pm  Leave a Comment  
Tags: , , , , , , , , , ,

Freedom and America

How do we rate freedom in America? Is it what we can say, what we can do? And how do we know when our freedom is gone? Does that even mater? What if what we say doesn’t matter, then do we still have freedom? If no one listens is it freedom? Freedom is an interesting thing.

Today we are living in something unreal. The gray area between freedom and the illusion of freedom. When our country was started it was started on the idea of freedom and until recently we have gotten pretty close to a clear and accepted idea of freedom. But what is this idea? The idea of freedom is an idea that people should be free to do as they please as long as it is not hurting other persons and in some way contributes to a growth of some sort of a society. That is about as close as I can sum up the idea of freedom, in words. Though my idea of freedom may be different from the next persons but we should somewhat agree on the vague idea.

So why do I say we are living in the gray area? It is tough to sum up in words but things are changing, as they always do, but they are changing in a way that seems wrong to many Americans. The United States of America has been living in an era of great prosperity and growth of people from small homesteaders to a world power. With this prosperity people have been slowly wained off of freedom and given material things to make up for the lose in freedom. Many people today blame this on George W. Bush, now it is not GW that started this downward spiral. It really cannot be pointed at anyone other than ourselves. We let this happen to ourselves. What GW has done is try to accelerate the progression of absolute government a little faster so more and more Americans are finally waking up to the paradigm shift.

It used to be legal to do any drug you wanted. It used to be legal to do what you wanted to do on your property without getting permission from every organization on the planet. Heck you could smoke on an airplane. That means you could bring lighters and matches on an airplane and no one would bat an eye. I use these examples because they are more recent events that have taken place. Today we have a thing called a patriot act. The reason it is called this is to fake Americans into believing that if they do not agree with what is in this act they are not patriotic. What is patriotism anyway?

Since we have been born we have had patriotism pounded into our heads as a good thing. Believing that our country is the only country blessed by god and we must love America. Sounds like a little brain washing to me. Just to put patriotism in context it started two world wars and has spread war and genocide across countries for thousands of years. How patriotic do you want to be? There is nothing wrong in believing your country is great, but there is a fine line that should never be crossed.

So the patriot act. Among other things it takes away rights given to us in the constitution. THE CONSTITUTION THAT OUR COUNTRY WAS FOUNDED ON. It takes away our constitutional right to a trial, it allows wire taps without a court order. THE BIG PICTURE….it allows authority to pick a person out of a crowd, slap a label on them and put them away forever! WITH NO EVIDENCE JUST HEAR-SAY. That doesn’t sound like American freedom to me.

I cannot get on an airplane without pretty much stripping down and giving away all my rights to privacy just to travel. I cannot cross the border…a fake line made up by a patriotic country without a passport that has all of my personal information locked into it. This is so government can track everywhere I go. The next thing just around the corner is the REAL ID act. DO you know what this is? The REAL ID act plans to give everyone an ID with microchips in it to track everything we do, everything we buy, everywhere we go. A tracking system for every American person. Is that freedom?

The problem is that Americans have been so dumbed down by material possessions and money, money, money that we have lost track of what really matters. REAL FREEDOM. Our government tricks us by telling us we will be safer if we give just a couple “unnecessary freedoms” up. Give up your right to privacy, allow us to tap your phones and then we will be able to find out if you are a terrorist. How many quotes are there saying it is never correct to give up a few rights to feel safer. Were is the limit? How much should we give up for safety? How much is too much? None. Absolutely, positively, none. NONE. We should never be expected to give up any constitutional right. All the power should sit with the people of a country not with a select few. Never forget this. As soon as we do we lose that power, the most important power we will ever have. We the people, we the people have the power, we have the power to change and we will until we pass it away. And how close we are to giving this power away.

Americans, when will we learn. Look into history. Societies that gave up freedom for safety destroyed themselves. Look at Germany, Germans gave up right after right to feel safer until they had none left. This could happen again. I should not lose my right to travel in an airplane with a bottle of booze, a full size tube of toothpaste, and a scissors because some F-upped people blew up planes. I will not be tracked to feel safer. I will not give up my rights. It is about time others open there eyes to what we are losing and figure out what they need to do. DO NOT GIVE UP YOUR RIGHTS just to feel safer. They are yours under the constitution of the United States of America. They do not change. You inherited them when you became a citizen. They are not god given rights, they are rights inherited from your country and they cannot and will not change, because when that happens it is no longer your country. It is something totally and unmistakenly different.
BIGFIX01

Published in: Uncategorized on April 16, 2008 at 6:37 pm  Leave a Comment  
Tags: , , , , , , ,

Hollow Earth Philosophy: Status

Sorry for the last long hiatus but it has been quite busy lately. I have a special post that I am writing that should get posted WED. about Freedoms in America. Hopefully it makes up for the long wait. This is a subject I am very passionate about and hope it starts some discussion.

Also thanks again for reading and posting on the site I appreciate the feedback and comments I have been getting since I started the blog last year.

BIGFIX01

Published in: on April 14, 2008 at 11:59 pm  Leave a Comment  
Tags: , ,

Warming of the Globe…

Time to mix it up.  How about a post on global warming?  This is quite a popular topic currently and it looks like it is finally shifting in the correct direction, people are starting to believe in global warming.  I personally believe that the earth is warming and I also believe that humans have something to do with it.  Now there is evidence for and against this.  Both sides have valid arguments and both could be correct.  But the real issues lie in if we should do something about global warming even if it doesn’t exist.

Now you can see people every day that fight for or against doing something about it.  Now on the argument of global warming we really do not know if we are the cause of it.  The earth heats and cools for other reasons, axis wobble, the area we are located somewhere in our never ending galactic revolutions, etc.  Please do not post saying it is a scientific fact that we are the cause…period.  That is not the point of this post.  The point is should we change our actions toward global warming?  Here is another argument we should look at.

So we know that greenhouse gasses are bad.  If you were to inhale CO2 or NO2 you would um…..DIE.  Little extreme but if locked in a room with these gasses it wouldn’t take long for you to succumb to the all mighty.  So why do we think it would be OK to pump millions of tons of these gasses into our atmosphere. Shouldn’t we do something about pumping these dangerous gasses into the air we breath?  I do not believe we should worry so much about the fact that they are warming our earth as much as we should look at the fact that these gasses are poisonous to most animals on the planet earth.  If you were not suicidal would you start a car in your garage with the doors closed?  NO!  So why do we pump it into our atmosphere.

The argument stated above, I think, has a lot of merit.  Some may say the earth is to large for humans to ever pump enough poisons gasses into the atmosphere to cause harm to humans.  But I am not so sure that this argument really holds ground anymore.  Humans have finally become a force to throw off nature.  We have the power to terraform our world.  We can destroy worlds now.  But any species with the power to destroy has the same power in the opposite direction.  We have options now to use other non polluting gases.  We are very close to producing cars that only produce water, we have cars that run on air.  The ability to pump your car up with air and run a vehicle, wow.  Why may I ask, do we still feel it is necessary to dispose of millions to billions of tons of toxins into our atmosphere.  Who cares if it harms the environment….IT HARMS US.  Isn’t the whole point of human nature….really the point of any living organism self preservation?  Yes, yes it is.

Published in: on March 28, 2008 at 8:52 pm  Leave a Comment  
Tags: , , , , , ,

Religion and Aliens Part 2

So back to the religion and aliens discussion. Turns out that the first article I wrote on religion and aliens was quite popular so I thought I would elaborate and bring up a couple new ideas in this new post.

So like I said in the first post do aliens showing up on earth mean that god does not exist? First I tried to show why aliens showing up should effect our belief in god. There was definitely a large amount of people that didn’t believe aliens showing up would have any effect at all on our belief system. The truth that I didn’t bring up in that discussion is that based on what religious ideas are currently, aliens really should not affect religion at all. An alien showing up should have no effect on any religious body based on how their ideals work. But should it? That really is the undermining theme. Should other intelligent beings affect our beliefs?

It is quite hard to say. We have never met intelligent beings other than ourselves so this isn’t a question easily tackled.   We may never meet intelligent beings so what are we to do, just forget the question, blow it off as nonsence?  I hope not.  Now if we were able to meet intelligent beings would their ideas matter? I think the main point of the last article was to point us in the direction for listening to the other intelligent beings.  Currently saying that aliens showing up doesn’t matter in our religious beliefs is saying that we do not take into account their ideas.  Shouldn’t we?  I would say if other beings were able to make there way all the way to earth I think we should listen to what they have to say.  Even if it goes against what our religious establishments tell us to believe.

But do we?  No.  We the great people of earth have it figured out. Aliens could be sent from the devil to break our faith 🙂  Maybe aliens do not understand what we understand about god. What really makes humans the people that get to decide that. Devine knowledge? That seems a little bit circular in argument.

To be truthful there is not a direct correlation between god and aliens. Never has been and never will be. The interesting fact is that our entire religious belief system does not take into account outside presences. Meaning if aliens were to show up and spread there messages we would not have anyway of incorporating them into our religious belief system. People will say that we would have to spread the word of god to these visitors, but that is just nonsense. We do not spread an earthly belief system to another world organism. It is very, and I mean very far reaching to believe that we are the only ones with the knowledge of the almighty. Do people really think that Earth is the beginning and the end of all existence?

The only way we can justify our religion in the presence of other intelligent beings is to say that Earth is the be all, end all of the universe, and if I understand science well then I know that the universe does not revolve around the earth. The universe didn’t start with earth, earth is not any more important than the minuscule block of dust flying through the cosmos at an incredible speed. If human, earthly, science has taught us anything, it is that the universe is a place where anything and everything is possible and everything is equal created from the same source.

So even if that same source is an almighty being there is no evidence, no reason, and no way that Earth is where life originated, where life evolved, and where god made his simple super plan.

BIGFIX01

Published in: on March 11, 2008 at 7:42 pm  Comments (3)  
Tags: , , , , , ,

Back To Science

For this post I would like to come back to a paper I wrote quite a while ago. I think this relates back to my first post on the philosophy of science. I find this paper interesting because it helps illustrate some of the points with real world examples.

Why is something either considered science or not science? There are different ways of looking at a topic and deciding whether it is science or pseudoscience. What we can know for sure is that there will always be competing arguments. In the following I will look at two different topics and decide for myself whether they are science or pseudoscience. The two topics I will be looking at are life after death and the Bermuda triangle. I will start by explaining each of the following topics starting with life after death.

So what do we mean when we explain life after death? It can be summed up in the following question. Is there anything after we die, or does the spirit of a human being live after the physical body dies? Another area is reincarnation, or if the spirit of a human takes residence inside another object when the current resident passes away. They both deal with the spirit leaving the body after it dies.

The area that believes in life after death will make the claim that the spirit lives on after death. They then support this claim by pointing to a few personal experiences. The first is ghosts and poltergeists. They use the logic that if the spirit doesn’t live on then how do we explain ghosts, ghosts being the spirits of the dead. The near death or out of body experience is also used to support life after death. An example of near death experience would be a person who is clinically pronounced dead, but then is revived to explain seeing a great white light and running to it.

Near death experience is used as one hypothesis to explain life after death, so let’s find an opposing hypothesis that doesn’t support near death experiences. One hypothesis that comes to mind is how the brain works. It can explain things like floating out of your body and seeing a white light at the end of a tunnel. Our brain, as it loses oxygen, misinterprets the signals that the optic nerves send back. This is how we explain kids who perform huffing.

Now I would like to explain my next topic which is the Bermuda Triangle. The Bermuda Triangle is a strip of ocean that has been responsible for a large number of ship and plane disappearances. It is claimed that the Bermuda Triangle is directly responsible for the disappearances of these objects. This claim is supported by the fact that this area has a mysterious way of losing ships and planes. A famous example that is used to keep the mystery in the Bermuda Triangle is the disappearance of Flight 19. Flight 19 disappeared in the triangle in December of 1945. Before the disappearance, the flight crew reported that things were not right. The sea looked strange and the sun was invisible (Hines, 226).

How can any of this be explained? Both sides have their theories. A theory from the weird side is that there is a magnetic field that transfers these ships and planes to another dimension. Another more logical theory is that the Bermuda triangle is set up in a volatile weather area. The weather in the triangle can change quite quickly from being perfect to the perfect storm. It is also in an area that is quite dangerous for ships. There are rock formations and reefs that can easily damage the hulls of ships beyond repair. Both of these theories have their believers.

After researching these topics I looked at each of them to find out if they were scientific or just bogus. In both I will use the ideas of Kuhn, Popper, and Lachatosh to explain if they are scientific or not. I wanted to start with the Bermuda Triangle because I think that one is a little bit clearer to define. In my opinion the Bermuda Triangle myth is just that an unscientific myth.

So how did I come to the decision that it is a myth? Looking at the facts about the Bermuda Triangle, there isn’t anything that would point me (for the weird theories) in the direction that there are scientific parts about it. To start out, looking at the so called unexplainable disappearances of aircraft and ships, we see that most of them (contrary to belief) can be explained. Some are blamed on bad weather, others on the cargo that the boats were carrying, and lastly the disappearances can also be blamed on inexperience in the area. There really is not that much mystery in the Bermuda Triangle. If we were to just look at these ways to explain the triangle then I would say that it is scientific. We use this method to find ships all over the world, but this is not the myth of the Bermuda Triangle.

The Bermuda Triangle’s weird believers don’t use scientific means at all. They make up a hypothesis, but that is it. They never really try to prove it. The believers use after effects to try to prove there hypothesis, but after effects prove little to nothing. Oh, a ship has disappeared there must be a magnetic field involved, or aliens. That’s all these people say they never even try to turn up evidence to prove their hypothesis. Poppers point of a hypothesis being falsifiable proves quite useful in this topic. The reason that people never turn up any evidence is because their hypotheses are not able to be proved right or wrong. I also have my own little theory about proving if this is a science or not. I call it the “dig yourself deeper and deeper into a hole theory.” It starts out with a hypothesis, and then when someone asks for the holes in the hypothesis to be filled, the person fills them with another improvable hypothesis. That hypothesis will also of course have holes in it and this will go on forever. The so called science will never get anywhere.

What about the life after death topic, can this one be considered a science? I would consider this a pseudoscience. It falls into many of the same traps as the Bermuda Triangle. The first trap life after death falls into would be that it can not be realistically proven. Even if we could kill a person and then bring them back from the dead we still are faced with the dilemma of taking a first person account. First person accounting has been proven quite inaccurate of the centuries. There is yet another problem that is bigger than just being able to prove life after death. The domain of science is targeted at the natural world. Life after death is in no way pointed at the natural world, it is quite the opposite. Life after death is looking at the surreal or supernatural world.

Both of these topics looked at closely would have to be considered not science. There are both similar and different reasons why they are not science. To just look at the similarities we see that both life after death and the Bermuda Triangle can’t be proven. Another similarity between the two is how we try to disprove them. Both of the topics are being disproved by science, real science. I like to look at how the theories are disproved because it can really contrast the weird theories. Just for example, when we explain ship disappearances the scientific way, finding evidence, looking at the area, proving rational hypotheses, it is the complete opposite of how the Bermuda Triangle group goes about solving ship disappearances.

The topics are different in a few respects also. The Bermuda Triangle has parts that look at the natural world and the life and death crew has nothing to do with the natural world. The major differences between the two are really in the way they go about proving their hypotheses. While the Bermuda triangle group doesn’t really try to fix the holes in their hypotheses, the life after death crew really does. They are always trying to find new methods of explaining and documenting where the problems lie. I also feel that they use the scientific method to look at their problem. That’s why I would consider life after death a fake science rather than no science at all. There is justification behind it, rather than just a whole bunch of made up explanations.

Both of these topics have a long way to go if they ever would hope to become a reputable science. While I will always believe that there is no way either could become a viable science, there is no telling what other people will believe.

BIGFIX01

Published in: on February 23, 2008 at 6:56 pm  Comments (3)  
Tags: , , , , , , ,