Honor killing in Pakistan - Page 16

SatansMaleVoiceChoir · 21st November 2012, 01:28 AM

Originally Posted by Nessie

x2. I am quite sure that all we need to do and importantly should do, is show that there is another way whereby a society functions perfectly well, if not better without honour killings.

Yes, but the question Brainache was asking is 'How?'. SG didn't answer that. How would you suggest we show these people there is another way?

SatansMaleVoiceChoir · 21st November 2012, 01:39 AM

Originally Posted by Nessie

Everything I have read so far about morals suggests like the predisposition to learn to talk, walk and be social animals, we also have a predisposition for morals.

We are not 'predisposed' to do any of those things. You know what happens to a child that is raised without anyone speaking to it, or being taught to speak? Google 'Russian Bird Boy'. From other examples of Feral Children, and studies into learning it has been shown that if a child is not taught to speak by around the age of 7 or onwards, it will never learn to speak - certainly not properly.

Originally Posted by Nessie

So we are born as a blank canvas, but with the paint already on it ready to make the picture.

Yes, and we have to learn how to paint. Just because we are born with legs, does not mean we are born with the knowledge of how to use them 'baked-in' - it is something we learn. Google 'Goat Boy' - was he born predisposed to walking on all fours, or is that something he picked up by learning from the goats who raised him? If we were born predisposed to walking upright, then he would have done that regardless of what the goats 'taught' him.

Nessie · 21st November 2012, 01:40 AM

I have already answered that question, but again supporting local campaigns to show there is another way and by helping increase access to the interent so people can look for themselves (inbetween the searches for porn

)

SatansMaleVoiceChoir · 21st November 2012, 01:45 AM

Originally Posted by Nessie

I have already answered that question, but again supporting local campaigns to show there is another way and by helping increase access to the interent so people can look for themselves (inbetween the searches for porn

)

Increasing internet access is more likely to be the best way - porn conquers all divides.

But in all seriousness, I'd agree that's the best bet, as the people would be helping themselves, and becoming more aware on their own without having Western values forced upon them - it would happen like gradual osmosis. Only problem is if you have people like the Taliban in charge, would they then forbid access to the internet for the very reason that it could cause the absorbtion of Western values.

Nessie · 21st November 2012, 01:52 AM

Originally Posted by SatansMaleVoiceChoir

We are not 'predisposed' to do any of those things. You know what happens to a child that is raised without anyone speaking to it, or being taught to speak? Google 'Russian Bird Boy'. From other examples of Feral Children, and studies into learning it has been shown that if a child is not taught to speak by around the age of 7 or onwards, it will never learn to speak - certainly not properly.

Yes, and we have to learn how to paint. Just because we are born with legs, does not mean we are born with the knowledge of how to use them 'baked-in' - it is something we learn. Google 'Goat Boy' - was he born predisposed to walking on all fours, or is that something he picked up by learning from the goats who raised him? If we were born predisposed to walking upright, then he would have done that regardless of what the goats 'taught' him.

By predisposition I mean we have all the right tools ready to go and walk, talk etc

You have concentrated on two extreme cases with the feral children and I see nothing to say that the predisposition to walk upright or talk was just removed from them by the learning they had. They have developed legs over arms for walking and developed vocal cords, hence the predisposition I was refering to.

I agree there is learning invloved, but we have developed in such a way that the learning tends very strongly towards certain atributes such as walking, talking and a moral code which as sociable animals we do not just kill randomly.

Again, I think we pretty much in agreement here.

Nessie · 21st November 2012, 01:55 AM

Originally Posted by SatansMaleVoiceChoir

Increasing internet access is more likely to be the best way - porn conquers all divides.

But in all seriousness, I'd agree that's the best bet, as the people would be helping themselves, and becoming more aware on their own without having Western values forced upon them - it would happen like gradual osmosis. Only problem is if you have people like the Taliban in charge, would they then forbid access to the internet for the very reason that it could cause the absorbtion of Western values.

We have the solution! If you think your daughter has brought shame on your family by her sexual proclivity, instead of pouring acid all over her, turn her into a porn star!

I bet the Taliban would be up for a porn industry to add to their drugs, alcohol and guns.

SatansMaleVoiceChoir · 21st November 2012, 02:05 AM

Originally Posted by Nessie

By predisposition I mean we have all the right tools ready to go and walk, talk etc

Agreed.

Originally Posted by Nessie

You have concentrated on two extreme cases with the feral children and I see nothing to say that the predisposition to walk upright or talk was just removed from them by the learning they had. They have developed legs over arms for walking and developed vocal cords, hence the predisposition I was refering to.

They may be 'extreme' cases, but they illustrate perfectly what happens when a human being is removed from its normal environment/culture. Once again I agree that we have all the physical attributes in place for walking and talking, etc, but that these things need to be learned.

Morals obviously come from thought and the brain, but just because we have a brain (just like having legs does not mean we are all born to be professional footballers) does not mean the moral component is built in. Morals - 'right and wrong' are things that need to be learned, and are culturally subjective.

Originally Posted by Nessie

I agree there is learning invloved, but we have developed in such a way that the learning tends very strongly towards certain atributes such as walking, talking and a moral code which as sociable animals we do not just kill randomly.

Again, I think we pretty much in agreement here.

We are broadly in agreement, but I will say this; I believe it is morally wrong to circumcise a baby boy; this raises the following questions - was I born with this attitude, or is it something I have learned as a result of my culture; does this mean all devout Jews are mentally defective, as SG seems to suggest, or does their belief that circumcision is the 'right' thing to do stem from their shared cultural belief?

SatansMaleVoiceChoir · 21st November 2012, 02:15 AM

Originally Posted by Nessie

We have the solution! If you think your daughter has brought shame on your family by her sexual proclivity, instead of pouring acid all over her, turn her into a porn star!

I bet the Taliban would be up for a porn industry to add to their drugs, alcohol and guns.

The Taliban are so hypocritical, they probably would.

I'll tell you a story now; when I was in the Omani desert about 11 years ago, we were told that under no circumstances were we to have porn brought into the country (through mail, or on our person or official freight) because of the strict religious sensibilities of the Islamic locals - we weren't even allowed magazines like 'FHM' or 'Loaded'. Naturally, blokes being blokes, such magazines managed to sneak through and - surprise - the male locals employed by us could not get enough of them.

The women who were out with us were given strict rules about covering up when out of uniform - they were not allowed to wear t-shirts and shorts in the middle of the desert - for fear of upsetting the locals. It was amazing how many of the local men (and even wandering nomads!) we had to dismiss for peeking through the panels of the female shower enclosure...

Even recently on one of my visits to Afghanistan, while going through the files of the various locals employed by the forces around the country, the amount of local men who had been dismissed for sexual assaults, harrassment or inappropriate behaviour towards female coalition soldiers was surprisingly high.

llwyd · 21st November 2012, 02:20 AM

Originally Posted by SatansMaleVoiceChoir

We are broadly in agreement, but I will say this; I believe it is morally wrong to circumcise a baby boy; this raises the following questions - was I born with this attitude, or is it something I have learned as a result of my culture; does this mean all devout Jews are mentally defective, as SG seems to suggest, or does their belief that circumcision is the 'right' thing to do stem from their shared cultural belief?

Yeah, if we are all born with an inbuilt biologally based morality we seem to have curiously many conflicting moral views... Say abortion, gay marriage, women's rights, absolutely contrasting brain states - and moreover it seems that most brains currently in the world seem to have formed negative inbuilt moral views about these things. Unfortunately. Luckily the brains - maybe the genes - can change and the inbuilt moral system will inform at least some people to modify their primitive ideas.

Should one start breeding only the ones with the "right" inbuilt morality - or what is to be done with all this biological-genetic moral confusion and conflict?

Belz... · 21st November 2012, 02:25 AM

Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger

It is a side track. But the issue was some claim essentially saying their morals were no better than ours, we only think ours are better.

And this comes right back to westprog's post: how do you derive an "ought" from an "is" ? What if we _were_ wired to kill ? Would that make it right ?

It also doesn't change the fact that behaviour is largely learned. Our "built-in" morality depends on many factors, and is not as precise as you make it out to be. We have a strong tendency to protect members of our "gang", but to attack or ridicule outsiders, for instance.

Belz... · 21st November 2012, 02:26 AM

Originally Posted by Brainache

Well, quite. We do think our morals are better. They think their morals are better. The problem of course comes when we try to impose our "better" morals on these people who will resist our attempts with everything they have. All we get is more wars, more dead and no change in their cultural ideas of "Family Honour".

...and we've proven our morals aren't that much better because we're willing to impose them in the first place.

Belz... · 21st November 2012, 02:37 AM

Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger

They come from our brains and they exist.

That's a trivial point. It also doesn't show that morals are innate.

Quote:

The fact they differ for individuals and the fact there is a range for 'ought' doesn't mean they don't exist.

No, it just means your oughts are different than mine.

Quote:

Culture is not a variable that excuses any and all behaviors.

Someone disagrees on this ?

Antiquehunter · 21st November 2012, 03:30 AM

Originally Posted by SatansMaleVoiceChoir

The Taliban are so hypocritical, they probably would.

<snip>
Even recently on one of my visits to Afghanistan, while going through the files of the various locals employed by the forces around the country, the amount of local men who had been dismissed for sexual assaults, harrassment or inappropriate behaviour towards female coalition soldiers was surprisingly high.

I must say, I find that surprising. Afghan men, approaching Western women in my experience, tend to be embarrassingly awkward and frankly - laughable. Perhaps the forced proximity of a military base differs - or perhaps your typical Afghan hires are different to my own.

Western women complained of Afghans staring at them, or making awkward comments, but I never had one actual incident brought to my attention of an actual concern that was a complaint/concern worthy of a firing and/or some sort of 'hearing'. My span of control was 90 Western consultants over 13 projects, and 330 Afghan staff. Approx 30-40 consultants at any time were women.

It is almost like they were a separate gender. Afghan males by and large, to my observation, had no idea how to conduct themselves around Western women. My hunch is that if complaints on military bases were common, was that people interpreted an awkward or strange comment as being an assault.

Please do not interpret this as being an endorsement of rape, or somehow insensitive. It is simply a fact that Afghan men generally have no clue how to address someone of the opposite gender, and the culture generally is very blunt and direct. If an Afghan man complimented a woman on their breasts, they need to be given a degree of the benefit of doubt. If a woman is uncomfortable by this attention they absolutely should draw the line in the sand and tell them this is unacceptable.

In my practice, there was probably no mechanism to levy a charge of 'sexual assault' - however on a military base with all the relevant niceties & structures, I suspect the opportunity is there.

-AH.

SatansMaleVoiceChoir · 21st November 2012, 03:42 AM

Originally Posted by Antiquehunter

I must say, I find that surprising. Afghan men, approaching Western women in my experience, tend to be embarrassingly awkward and frankly - laughable. Perhaps the forced proximity of a military base differs - or perhaps your typical Afghan hires are different to my own.

Western women complained of Afghans staring at them, or making awkward comments, but I never had one actual incident brought to my attention of an actual concern that was a complaint/concern worthy of a firing and/or some sort of 'hearing'. My span of control was 90 Western consultants over 13 projects, and 330 Afghan staff. Approx 30-40 consultants at any time were women.

It is almost like they were a separate gender. Afghan males by and large, to my observation, had no idea how to conduct themselves around Western women. My hunch is that if complaints on military bases were common, was that people interpreted an awkward or strange comment as being an assault.

Please do not interpret this as being an endorsement of rape, or somehow insensitive. It is simply a fact that Afghan men generally have no clue how to address someone of the opposite gender, and the culture generally is very blunt and direct. If an Afghan man complimented a woman on their breasts, they need to be given a degree of the benefit of doubt. If a woman is uncomfortable by this attention they absolutely should draw the line in the sand and tell them this is unacceptable.

In my practice, there was probably no mechanism to levy a charge of 'sexual assault' - however on a military base with all the relevant niceties & structures, I suspect the opportunity is there.

-AH.

I too found it surprising, as I said.

When I say 'sexual assault', or 'harrassment', I mean such things as following women into the showers and attempting to kiss them while the women were naked, or approaching them when they were alone in their bedspaces and attempting to sexually assault them. Female soldiers tend to be fairly robust about sexual 'banter' and language - they have to be, so the things that were complained about were fairly serious.

As you say, this may well have been due to the nature of the location and working with these women on a regular basis. In nearly all cases - IIRC - the assailants were mostly interpreters, well-educated men, but still of the Islamic faith.

Nessie · 21st November 2012, 08:13 AM

Originally Posted by SatansMaleVoiceChoir

Agreed.

They may be 'extreme' cases, but they illustrate perfectly what happens when a human being is removed from its normal environment/culture. Once again I agree that we have all the physical attributes in place for walking and talking, etc, but that these things need to be learned.

Morals obviously come from thought and the brain, but just because we have a brain (just like having legs does not mean we are all born to be professional footballers) does not mean the moral component is built in. Morals - 'right and wrong' are things that need to be learned, and are culturally subjective.

We are broadly in agreement, but I will say this; I believe it is morally wrong to circumcise a baby boy; this raises the following questions - was I born with this attitude, or is it something I have learned as a result of my culture; does this mean all devout Jews are mentally defective, as SG seems to suggest, or does their belief that circumcision is the 'right' thing to do stem from their shared cultural belief?

I think that another predisposition we have is to fight. We do it if threatened, attacked and to compete for scarce resources. But we also have a predisposition to love, our children, family, partner, friends. Morality, to help guide us with those potentially conflicting views has developed from those predispositions. So it looks like we are predisposed to have morals, but instead we are predisposed to have all the prerequisites to have and indeed need moral codes.

SatansMaleVoiceChoir · 21st November 2012, 08:27 AM

Originally Posted by Nessie

I think that another predisposition we have is to fight. We do it if threatened, attacked and to compete for scarce resources. But we also have a predisposition to love, our children, family, partner, friends. Morality, to help guide us with those potentially conflicting views has developed from those predispositions. So it looks like we are predisposed to have morals, but instead we are predisposed to have all the prerequisites to have and indeed need moral codes.

I think you are confusing emotions (which have a biological component) and built-in instincts (protecting our young in order to ensure the survival of the species, reacting to pain, etc), with morals - knowing 'right' from 'wrong', where 'right' and 'wrong' are culturally subjective.

Is it morally 'wrong' to take an infant boy and, without his consent or even knowledge of what's happening to him, remove a part of his penis for no reason other than tradition? Is mutilating babies for the sake of religious tradition a human 'norm'?

Skeptic Ginger · 21st November 2012, 08:33 AM

Originally Posted by SatansMaleVoiceChoir

Yes, but the question Brainache was asking is 'How?'. SG didn't answer that. How would you suggest we show these people there is another way?

Do you have a reading comprehension problem? Or is it that international social pressure as the world becomes more and more interconnected just not a concept you understand?

SatansMaleVoiceChoir · 21st November 2012, 08:37 AM

Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger

Do you have a reading comprehension problem? Or is it that international social pressure as the world becomes more and more interconnected just not a concept you understand?

No, I don't think I do. The term 'Social Pressure' isn't exactly specific is it?

Speaking of reading comprehension, are you ever going to answer the many questions I have asked you, or provide any links that actually back up several of the assertions you have made?

Skeptic Ginger · 21st November 2012, 08:40 AM

Originally Posted by SatansMaleVoiceChoir

We are not 'predisposed' to do any of those things. You know what happens to a child that is raised without anyone speaking to it, or being taught to speak? Google 'Russian Bird Boy'. From other examples of Feral Children, and studies into learning it has been shown that if a child is not taught to speak by around the age of 7 or onwards, it will never learn to speak - certainly not properly.

Speech is a special case, I mentioned this particular issue earlier. It's well understood. It has nothing to do with moral thought/behavior nor is there evidence that all learning fails if not implemented early.

Originally Posted by SatansMaleVoiceChoir

Yes, and we have to learn how to paint. Just because we are born with legs, does not mean we are born with the knowledge of how to use them 'baked-in' - it is something we learn. Google 'Goat Boy' - was he born predisposed to walking on all fours, or is that something he picked up by learning from the goats who raised him? If we were born predisposed to walking upright, then he would have done that regardless of what the goats 'taught' him.

There's also another thing our brains do. They don't always realize what they don't know. So someone who has not read much of the new studies that establish our moral slates are not blank at birth, draws conclusions that seem correct to them. They are not aware that they are not aware of the new research, so false conclusions appear correct.

SatansMaleVoiceChoir · 21st November 2012, 08:47 AM

Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger

Speech is a special case, I mentioned this particular issue earlier. It's well understood. It has nothing to do with moral thought/behavior

No, it doesn't. I have never said it does. I was replying to something Nessie posted to me.

Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger

nor is there evidence that all learning fails if not implemented early.

No, I agree which is why I didn't say that.

Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger

There's also another thing our brains do. They don't always realize what they don't know. So someone who has not read much of the new studies that establish our moral slates are not blank at birth, draws conclusions that seem correct to them. They are not aware that they are not aware of the new research, so false conclusions appear correct.

Another thing our brains can be taught is the difference between 'conclusive' and 'inconclusive', 'proven' and 'unproven'. Sometimes this takes a bit of effort.

Belz... · 21st November 2012, 08:50 AM

We've strayed a bit from honour killings in Pakistan.

SatansMaleVoiceChoir · 21st November 2012, 08:51 AM

Originally Posted by Belz...

We've strayed a bit from honour killings in Pakistan.

Haven't we just!

westprog · 21st November 2012, 09:01 AM

Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger

I see now we are getting the theists vs the atheists, and the same old arguments.

I think that the fact that three of the people disagreeing with you are identifying themselves as demons should indicate that this is completely wrong. A typical orthodox Christian doesn't normally identify himself as Satansmalevoicechoir. YMMV.

Quote:

If you don't have a magic sky daddy or other suitable definition, then where do 'oughts' come from?

They come from our brains and they exist. The fact they differ for individuals and the fact there is a range for 'ought' doesn't mean they don't exist.

And I've not been saying my oughts are better than someone else's

That may not be what you mean. It is what you've been saying, very explicitly.

Quote:

I've been saying there are human oughts and just as we define certain behaviors as mentally ill, or out of the normal range, so can we define the normal and abnormal range of oughts. Culture is not a variable that excuses any and all behaviors.

And yet you have failed to demonstrate, beyond wishful thinking, that there is anything abnormal in human beings behaving immorally, or conversely, that when human beings behave in abnormal fashion that this is thereby immoral. Babies showing a preference for toys that won't push them down a hill doesn't really do it.

westprog · 21st November 2012, 09:10 AM

Originally Posted by Belz...

And this comes right back to westprog's post: how do you derive an "ought" from an "is" ? What if we _were_ wired to kill ? Would that make it right ?

And conversely - what if we weren't wired to rescue people from burning buildings? Would that make it wrong?

Quote:

It also doesn't change the fact that behaviour is largely learned. Our "built-in" morality depends on many factors, and is not as precise as you make it out to be. We have a strong tendency to protect members of our "gang", but to attack or ridicule outsiders, for instance.

All human behaviour has to be a combination of genetic predisposition and interaction with the environment (which includes other humans, of course). That's all there is. Claiming that some behaviour is normal, and other behaviour abnormal, is biologically meaningless unless some kind of evidence is adduced to indicate that the behaviour is due to a specific flaw.

A lot of animal behaviour is counter-productive for survival when circumstances arise for which evolution has not provided a strategy. Species become extinct because they are doing something wrong, in survival terms. That does not indicate that their behaviour is abnormal.

westprog · 21st November 2012, 09:17 AM

Originally Posted by SatansMaleVoiceChoir

Haven't we just!

I've found that thread drift produces the most interesting discussions. Possibly not in this case.

Nessie · 21st November 2012, 09:32 AM

Originally Posted by SatansMaleVoiceChoir

I think you are confusing emotions (which have a biological component) and built-in instincts (protecting our young in order to ensure the survival of the species, reacting to pain, etc), with morals - knowing 'right' from 'wrong', where 'right' and 'wrong' are culturally subjective.

Is it morally 'wrong' to take an infant boy and, without his consent or even knowledge of what's happening to him, remove a part of his penis for no reason other than tradition? Is mutilating babies for the sake of religious tradition a human 'norm'?

No I am saying emotions, instincts and morality are all linked.

I have less of an issue with male circumcision or anything that has no long term health issues than I do with honour killings. So tattoos, earrings, the neck extension rings appear to be OK so long done properly. Female circumcision has health issues, so I would support campaigns against it.

westprog · 21st November 2012, 09:35 AM

Originally Posted by SatansMaleVoiceChoir

Yes, but the question Brainache was asking is 'How?'. SG didn't answer that. How would you suggest we show these people there is another way?

We could forward them studies in neuro-chemistry.

SatansMaleVoiceChoir · 21st November 2012, 10:27 AM

Originally Posted by westprog

We could forward them studies in neuro-chemistry.

SatansMaleVoiceChoir · 21st November 2012, 10:33 AM

Originally Posted by Nessie

No I am saying emotions, instincts and morality are all linked.

Oh, OK - my mistake. Yes, I'd generally go along with that. Doesn't change what I said about morals though.

Originally Posted by Nessie

I have less of an issue with male circumcision or anything that has no long term health issues than I do with honour killings. So tattoos, earrings, the neck extension rings appear to be OK so long done properly. Female circumcision has health issues, so I would support campaigns against it.

But is mutilating a baby in the name of tradition - however carefully it's done - morally right?

Nessie · 21st November 2012, 10:41 AM

Mutilation is a charged word. How about an earing in a baby? I am OK with that. I am OK with male circumcision. The traditions of putting childrens feet (Japan, females) and heads into blocks of wood (South America) to shape them, I think that is dubious (maybe was as I dont think that goes on any more).

SatansMaleVoiceChoir · 21st November 2012, 10:52 AM

Originally Posted by Nessie

Mutilation is a charged word. How about an earing in a baby? I am OK with that. I am OK with male circumcision. The traditions of putting childrens feet (Japan, females) and heads into blocks of wood (South America) to shape them, I think that is dubious (maybe was as I dont think that goes on any more).

It is a charged word. Do you see what you're doing though? I don't mean this in an accusatory way, but you're comparing one practice to another that is culturally acceptable to you to try and justify it. Circumcision is basically mutilation of a young baby boy for no other reason than tradition.

Nessie · 21st November 2012, 11:30 AM

Yes but men can get circumcised for health reasons as well. That is why I see it as closer to getting an earring than mutilation.

SatansMaleVoiceChoir · 21st November 2012, 11:48 AM

Originally Posted by Nessie

Yes but men can get circumcised for health reasons as well. That is why I see it as closer to getting an earring than mutilation.

Yes, adult men can in certain circumstances. For babies - especially in the Western world, there is arguably little to no health benefits to circumcision.

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Circumcision

Antiquehunter · 21st November 2012, 12:16 PM

I'm going to duck out of here, if this is switching to circumcision. There are circ-threads on JREF already.

Are we finished talking about honor killing, Afghanistan etc...?

Circumcision does my head in.

Resume · 21st November 2012, 12:19 PM

Originally Posted by Antiquehunter

Circumcision does my head in.

So to speak.

Antiquehunter · 21st November 2012, 12:23 PM

Skeptic Ginger · 21st November 2012, 12:25 PM

Two more citations for the thread readers to consider:

Here's an abstract on the historical argument that's worth a glance. Sorry the whole article is not free to read:
Experimental analysis of nature-nurture interactions.

Quote:

Laboratory experimentation and field observation showed that behavior could develop without learning but also that conditioning paradigms could powerfully mold behavior. The progress of genetics and neurobiology has led to the modern synthesis that neural development, and hence behavior, results from the interdependent action of both heredity and environment.

The key point being how new this avenue of brain research is.

This article focuses on birds rather than humans but I thought the following passage was relevant:
Innateness and the instinct to learn

Quote:

In embarking on this grand endeavor, it will behoove us to bear in mind any lessons we can glean from past history. Those who resist the invocation of genetic contributions to behavioral development, may still need to be reminded that involvement of the genome need not imply a commitment to stereotyped behavior. In fact, as Waddington (1957) once pointed out, the stereotypy of some behaviors could itself actually be deceptive. It could turn out that the underlying potential for flexibility is just as great with stereotyped behavior as with variable behaviors, but is masked by added mechanisms that detect and correct for the perturbations to which a developing organism must always be subject.

Skeptic Ginger · 21st November 2012, 12:43 PM

Originally Posted by Antiquehunter

That took me a second.

I won't get into that discussion either, especially if Ivan is around.

And there are plenty of other threads on morals: nature vs nurture vs gods. My only point in this thread was culture is not an absolute excuse preventing condemnation. We are becoming a global culture more and more anyway. Some things are wrong enough they don't need cross cultural considerations:

Slavery and murder come to mind, as does child abuse though the range of what is or is not abuse may have some bits of fuzzy edge.

SatansMaleVoiceChoir · 21st November 2012, 01:05 PM

Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger

Two more citations for the thread readers to consider:

Here's an abstract on the historical argument that's worth a glance. Sorry the whole article is not free to read:
Experimental analysis of nature-nurture interactions.The key point being how new this avenue of brain research is.

This article focuses on birds rather than humans but I thought the following passage was relevant:
Innateness and the instinct to learn

Are you being serious?! Where in that abstract does it talk about morals being built-in?

Quote:

The 20(th)C saw scientists recast the debate as instinct vs. learning, bitterly argued between behaviorists and ethologists. Laboratory experimentation and field observation showed that behavior could develop without learning but also that conditioning paradigms could powerfully mold behavior. The progress of genetics and neurobiology has led to the modern synthesis that neural development, and hence behavior, results from the interdependent action of both heredity and environment.

The debate that has been recast is 'nature Vs nurture', which is to do with individual behaviours and how much is down to environment, and how much is passed on through genes. Nowhere, but NOWHERE, does the article you linked to back up your assertion that morals are built-in from birth. Here is Wikipedia on "Nature Vs Nurture", and not ONCE does it mention morals being built in, or genetic - it doesn't even mention morals AT ALL that I noticed:

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natur...ture#section_3

Again, your article on birds is talking about behaviours - NOT morals - and it does NOT back up your assertion that we are born with morals built in.

I'll ask you again; is a woman who has an abortion mentally defective?

Skeptic Ginger · 21st November 2012, 01:46 PM

Originally Posted by SMVC

I'll ask you again; is a woman who has an abortion mentally defective?

No, because not everyone sees abortion as baby killing.

21st November 2012, 01:28 AM	#601
SatansMaleVoiceChoir Graduate Poster Join Date: Apr 2007 Posts: 1,300	Originally Posted by Nessie x2. I am quite sure that all we need to do and importantly should do, is show that there is another way whereby a society functions perfectly well, if not better without honour killings. Yes, but the question Brainache was asking is 'How?'. SG didn't answer that. How would you suggest we show these people there is another way?
	__________________ The aim of argument, or of discussion, should not be victory, but progress. - Joseph Joubert Do not believe hastily. - Ovid There is no worse lie than a truth misunderstood by those who hear it. - William James

21st November 2012, 01:39 AM	#602
SatansMaleVoiceChoir Graduate Poster Join Date: Apr 2007 Posts: 1,300	Originally Posted by Nessie Everything I have read so far about morals suggests like the predisposition to learn to talk, walk and be social animals, we also have a predisposition for morals. We are not 'predisposed' to do any of those things. You know what happens to a child that is raised without anyone speaking to it, or being taught to speak? Google 'Russian Bird Boy'. From other examples of Feral Children, and studies into learning it has been shown that if a child is not taught to speak by around the age of 7 or onwards, it will never learn to speak - certainly not properly. Originally Posted by Nessie So we are born as a blank canvas, but with the paint already on it ready to make the picture. Yes, and we have to learn how to paint. Just because we are born with legs, does not mean we are born with the knowledge of how to use them 'baked-in' - it is something we learn. Google 'Goat Boy' - was he born predisposed to walking on all fours, or is that something he picked up by learning from the goats who raised him? If we were born predisposed to walking upright, then he would have done that regardless of what the goats 'taught' him.
	__________________ The aim of argument, or of discussion, should not be victory, but progress. - Joseph Joubert Do not believe hastily. - Ovid There is no worse lie than a truth misunderstood by those who hear it. - William James

21st November 2012, 01:40 AM	#603
Nessie Illuminator Join Date: Jun 2012 Location: At the bottom of a dark Scottish loch. Posts: 4,748	I have already answered that question, but again supporting local campaigns to show there is another way and by helping increase access to the interent so people can look for themselves (inbetween the searches for porn )
	__________________ Audiophile/biker/sceptic

21st November 2012, 01:45 AM	#604
SatansMaleVoiceChoir Graduate Poster Join Date: Apr 2007 Posts: 1,300	Originally Posted by Nessie I have already answered that question, but again supporting local campaigns to show there is another way and by helping increase access to the interent so people can look for themselves (inbetween the searches for porn ) Increasing internet access is more likely to be the best way - porn conquers all divides. But in all seriousness, I'd agree that's the best bet, as the people would be helping themselves, and becoming more aware on their own without having Western values forced upon them - it would happen like gradual osmosis. Only problem is if you have people like the Taliban in charge, would they then forbid access to the internet for the very reason that it could cause the absorbtion of Western values.
	__________________ The aim of argument, or of discussion, should not be victory, but progress. - Joseph Joubert Do not believe hastily. - Ovid There is no worse lie than a truth misunderstood by those who hear it. - William James

21st November 2012, 01:52 AM	#605
Nessie Illuminator Join Date: Jun 2012 Location: At the bottom of a dark Scottish loch. Posts: 4,748	Originally Posted by SatansMaleVoiceChoir We are not 'predisposed' to do any of those things. You know what happens to a child that is raised without anyone speaking to it, or being taught to speak? Google 'Russian Bird Boy'. From other examples of Feral Children, and studies into learning it has been shown that if a child is not taught to speak by around the age of 7 or onwards, it will never learn to speak - certainly not properly. Yes, and we have to learn how to paint. Just because we are born with legs, does not mean we are born with the knowledge of how to use them 'baked-in' - it is something we learn. Google 'Goat Boy' - was he born predisposed to walking on all fours, or is that something he picked up by learning from the goats who raised him? If we were born predisposed to walking upright, then he would have done that regardless of what the goats 'taught' him. By predisposition I mean we have all the right tools ready to go and walk, talk etc You have concentrated on two extreme cases with the feral children and I see nothing to say that the predisposition to walk upright or talk was just removed from them by the learning they had. They have developed legs over arms for walking and developed vocal cords, hence the predisposition I was refering to. I agree there is learning invloved, but we have developed in such a way that the learning tends very strongly towards certain atributes such as walking, talking and a moral code which as sociable animals we do not just kill randomly. Again, I think we pretty much in agreement here.
	__________________ Audiophile/biker/sceptic

21st November 2012, 01:55 AM	#606
Nessie Illuminator Join Date: Jun 2012 Location: At the bottom of a dark Scottish loch. Posts: 4,748	Originally Posted by SatansMaleVoiceChoir Increasing internet access is more likely to be the best way - porn conquers all divides. But in all seriousness, I'd agree that's the best bet, as the people would be helping themselves, and becoming more aware on their own without having Western values forced upon them - it would happen like gradual osmosis. Only problem is if you have people like the Taliban in charge, would they then forbid access to the internet for the very reason that it could cause the absorbtion of Western values. We have the solution! If you think your daughter has brought shame on your family by her sexual proclivity, instead of pouring acid all over her, turn her into a porn star! I bet the Taliban would be up for a porn industry to add to their drugs, alcohol and guns.
	__________________ Audiophile/biker/sceptic

21st November 2012, 02:05 AM	#607
SatansMaleVoiceChoir Graduate Poster Join Date: Apr 2007 Posts: 1,300	Originally Posted by Nessie By predisposition I mean we have all the right tools ready to go and walk, talk etc Agreed. Originally Posted by Nessie You have concentrated on two extreme cases with the feral children and I see nothing to say that the predisposition to walk upright or talk was just removed from them by the learning they had. They have developed legs over arms for walking and developed vocal cords, hence the predisposition I was refering to. They may be 'extreme' cases, but they illustrate perfectly what happens when a human being is removed from its normal environment/culture. Once again I agree that we have all the physical attributes in place for walking and talking, etc, but that these things need to be learned. Morals obviously come from thought and the brain, but just because we have a brain (just like having legs does not mean we are all born to be professional footballers) does not mean the moral component is built in. Morals - 'right and wrong' are things that need to be learned, and are culturally subjective. Originally Posted by Nessie I agree there is learning invloved, but we have developed in such a way that the learning tends very strongly towards certain atributes such as walking, talking and a moral code which as sociable animals we do not just kill randomly. Again, I think we pretty much in agreement here. We are broadly in agreement, but I will say this; I believe it is morally wrong to circumcise a baby boy; this raises the following questions - was I born with this attitude, or is it something I have learned as a result of my culture; does this mean all devout Jews are mentally defective, as SG seems to suggest, or does their belief that circumcision is the 'right' thing to do stem from their shared cultural belief?
	__________________ The aim of argument, or of discussion, should not be victory, but progress. - Joseph Joubert Do not believe hastily. - Ovid There is no worse lie than a truth misunderstood by those who hear it. - William James

21st November 2012, 02:15 AM	#608
SatansMaleVoiceChoir Graduate Poster Join Date: Apr 2007 Posts: 1,300	Originally Posted by Nessie We have the solution! If you think your daughter has brought shame on your family by her sexual proclivity, instead of pouring acid all over her, turn her into a porn star! I bet the Taliban would be up for a porn industry to add to their drugs, alcohol and guns. The Taliban are so hypocritical, they probably would. I'll tell you a story now; when I was in the Omani desert about 11 years ago, we were told that under no circumstances were we to have porn brought into the country (through mail, or on our person or official freight) because of the strict religious sensibilities of the Islamic locals - we weren't even allowed magazines like 'FHM' or 'Loaded'. Naturally, blokes being blokes, such magazines managed to sneak through and - surprise - the male locals employed by us could not get enough of them. The women who were out with us were given strict rules about covering up when out of uniform - they were not allowed to wear t-shirts and shorts in the middle of the desert - for fear of upsetting the locals. It was amazing how many of the local men (and even wandering nomads!) we had to dismiss for peeking through the panels of the female shower enclosure... Even recently on one of my visits to Afghanistan, while going through the files of the various locals employed by the forces around the country, the amount of local men who had been dismissed for sexual assaults, harrassment or inappropriate behaviour towards female coalition soldiers was surprisingly high.
	__________________ The aim of argument, or of discussion, should not be victory, but progress. - Joseph Joubert Do not believe hastily. - Ovid There is no worse lie than a truth misunderstood by those who hear it. - William James

21st November 2012, 02:20 AM	#609
llwyd Critical Thinker Join Date: Sep 2010 Location: Helsinki Posts: 259	Originally Posted by SatansMaleVoiceChoir We are broadly in agreement, but I will say this; I believe it is morally wrong to circumcise a baby boy; this raises the following questions - was I born with this attitude, or is it something I have learned as a result of my culture; does this mean all devout Jews are mentally defective, as SG seems to suggest, or does their belief that circumcision is the 'right' thing to do stem from their shared cultural belief? Yeah, if we are all born with an inbuilt biologally based morality we seem to have curiously many conflicting moral views... Say abortion, gay marriage, women's rights, absolutely contrasting brain states - and moreover it seems that most brains currently in the world seem to have formed negative inbuilt moral views about these things. Unfortunately. Luckily the brains - maybe the genes - can change and the inbuilt moral system will inform at least some people to modify their primitive ideas. Should one start breeding only the ones with the "right" inbuilt morality - or what is to be done with all this biological-genetic moral confusion and conflict?

21st November 2012, 02:25 AM	#610
Belz... Fiend God Join Date: Oct 2005 Location: In the details... Posts: 28,440	Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger It is a side track. But the issue was some claim essentially saying their morals were no better than ours, we only think ours are better. And this comes right back to westprog's post: how do you derive an "ought" from an "is" ? What if we _were_ wired to kill ? Would that make it right ? It also doesn't change the fact that behaviour is largely learned. Our "built-in" morality depends on many factors, and is not as precise as you make it out to be. We have a strong tendency to protect members of our "gang", but to attack or ridicule outsiders, for instance.
	__________________ The Onmyouza Theatre, An unofficial international fanclub forum dedicated to the Japanese heavy metal band Onmyo-Za: "In the interests of time and space, it is not unreasonable to cite one point at a time. Citing 30 is the equivalent of citing none. Obviously." - Robert Prey "Physical evidence must be observed and interpreted by witnesses which makes it subjective and subject to mistakes and to fraud." - Robert Prey

21st November 2012, 02:26 AM	#611
Belz... Fiend God Join Date: Oct 2005 Location: In the details... Posts: 28,440	Originally Posted by Brainache Well, quite. We do think our morals are better. They think their morals are better. The problem of course comes when we try to impose our "better" morals on these people who will resist our attempts with everything they have. All we get is more wars, more dead and no change in their cultural ideas of "Family Honour". ...and we've proven our morals aren't that much better because we're willing to impose them in the first place.
	__________________ The Onmyouza Theatre, An unofficial international fanclub forum dedicated to the Japanese heavy metal band Onmyo-Za: "In the interests of time and space, it is not unreasonable to cite one point at a time. Citing 30 is the equivalent of citing none. Obviously." - Robert Prey "Physical evidence must be observed and interpreted by witnesses which makes it subjective and subject to mistakes and to fraud." - Robert Prey

21st November 2012, 02:37 AM	#612
Belz... Fiend God Join Date: Oct 2005 Location: In the details... Posts: 28,440	Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger They come from our brains and they exist. That's a trivial point. It also doesn't show that morals are innate. Quote: The fact they differ for individuals and the fact there is a range for 'ought' doesn't mean they don't exist. No, it just means your oughts are different than mine. Quote: Culture is not a variable that excuses any and all behaviors. Someone disagrees on this ?
	__________________ The Onmyouza Theatre, An unofficial international fanclub forum dedicated to the Japanese heavy metal band Onmyo-Za: "In the interests of time and space, it is not unreasonable to cite one point at a time. Citing 30 is the equivalent of citing none. Obviously." - Robert Prey "Physical evidence must be observed and interpreted by witnesses which makes it subjective and subject to mistakes and to fraud." - Robert Prey

21st November 2012, 03:30 AM	#613
Antiquehunter Degenerate Gambler Join Date: Aug 2005 Location: El Quisco, Chile; Sometimes, Kabul, Afghanistan; currently, Port Moresby, PNG Posts: 4,468	Originally Posted by SatansMaleVoiceChoir The Taliban are so hypocritical, they probably would. <snip> Even recently on one of my visits to Afghanistan, while going through the files of the various locals employed by the forces around the country, the amount of local men who had been dismissed for sexual assaults, harrassment or inappropriate behaviour towards female coalition soldiers was surprisingly high. I must say, I find that surprising. Afghan men, approaching Western women in my experience, tend to be embarrassingly awkward and frankly - laughable. Perhaps the forced proximity of a military base differs - or perhaps your typical Afghan hires are different to my own. Western women complained of Afghans staring at them, or making awkward comments, but I never had one actual incident brought to my attention of an actual concern that was a complaint/concern worthy of a firing and/or some sort of 'hearing'. My span of control was 90 Western consultants over 13 projects, and 330 Afghan staff. Approx 30-40 consultants at any time were women. It is almost like they were a separate gender. Afghan males by and large, to my observation, had no idea how to conduct themselves around Western women. My hunch is that if complaints on military bases were common, was that people interpreted an awkward or strange comment as being an assault. Please do not interpret this as being an endorsement of rape, or somehow insensitive. It is simply a fact that Afghan men generally have no clue how to address someone of the opposite gender, and the culture generally is very blunt and direct. If an Afghan man complimented a woman on their breasts, they need to be given a degree of the benefit of doubt. If a woman is uncomfortable by this attention they absolutely should draw the line in the sand and tell them this is unacceptable. In my practice, there was probably no mechanism to levy a charge of 'sexual assault' - however on a military base with all the relevant niceties & structures, I suspect the opportunity is there. -AH.
	__________________ "If ignorance is bliss, why aren't there more happy people in the world?" -Stephen Fry, 2006

21st November 2012, 03:42 AM	#614
SatansMaleVoiceChoir Graduate Poster Join Date: Apr 2007 Posts: 1,300	Originally Posted by Antiquehunter I must say, I find that surprising. Afghan men, approaching Western women in my experience, tend to be embarrassingly awkward and frankly - laughable. Perhaps the forced proximity of a military base differs - or perhaps your typical Afghan hires are different to my own. Western women complained of Afghans staring at them, or making awkward comments, but I never had one actual incident brought to my attention of an actual concern that was a complaint/concern worthy of a firing and/or some sort of 'hearing'. My span of control was 90 Western consultants over 13 projects, and 330 Afghan staff. Approx 30-40 consultants at any time were women. It is almost like they were a separate gender. Afghan males by and large, to my observation, had no idea how to conduct themselves around Western women. My hunch is that if complaints on military bases were common, was that people interpreted an awkward or strange comment as being an assault. Please do not interpret this as being an endorsement of rape, or somehow insensitive. It is simply a fact that Afghan men generally have no clue how to address someone of the opposite gender, and the culture generally is very blunt and direct. If an Afghan man complimented a woman on their breasts, they need to be given a degree of the benefit of doubt. If a woman is uncomfortable by this attention they absolutely should draw the line in the sand and tell them this is unacceptable. In my practice, there was probably no mechanism to levy a charge of 'sexual assault' - however on a military base with all the relevant niceties & structures, I suspect the opportunity is there. -AH. I too found it surprising, as I said. When I say 'sexual assault', or 'harrassment', I mean such things as following women into the showers and attempting to kiss them while the women were naked, or approaching them when they were alone in their bedspaces and attempting to sexually assault them. Female soldiers tend to be fairly robust about sexual 'banter' and language - they have to be, so the things that were complained about were fairly serious. As you say, this may well have been due to the nature of the location and working with these women on a regular basis. In nearly all cases - IIRC - the assailants were mostly interpreters, well-educated men, but still of the Islamic faith.
	__________________ The aim of argument, or of discussion, should not be victory, but progress. - Joseph Joubert Do not believe hastily. - Ovid There is no worse lie than a truth misunderstood by those who hear it. - William James

21st November 2012, 08:13 AM	#615
Nessie Illuminator Join Date: Jun 2012 Location: At the bottom of a dark Scottish loch. Posts: 4,748	Originally Posted by SatansMaleVoiceChoir Agreed. They may be 'extreme' cases, but they illustrate perfectly what happens when a human being is removed from its normal environment/culture. Once again I agree that we have all the physical attributes in place for walking and talking, etc, but that these things need to be learned. Morals obviously come from thought and the brain, but just because we have a brain (just like having legs does not mean we are all born to be professional footballers) does not mean the moral component is built in. Morals - 'right and wrong' are things that need to be learned, and are culturally subjective. We are broadly in agreement, but I will say this; I believe it is morally wrong to circumcise a baby boy; this raises the following questions - was I born with this attitude, or is it something I have learned as a result of my culture; does this mean all devout Jews are mentally defective, as SG seems to suggest, or does their belief that circumcision is the 'right' thing to do stem from their shared cultural belief? I think that another predisposition we have is to fight. We do it if threatened, attacked and to compete for scarce resources. But we also have a predisposition to love, our children, family, partner, friends. Morality, to help guide us with those potentially conflicting views has developed from those predispositions. So it looks like we are predisposed to have morals, but instead we are predisposed to have all the prerequisites to have and indeed need moral codes.
	__________________ Audiophile/biker/sceptic

21st November 2012, 08:27 AM	#616
SatansMaleVoiceChoir Graduate Poster Join Date: Apr 2007 Posts: 1,300	Originally Posted by Nessie I think that another predisposition we have is to fight. We do it if threatened, attacked and to compete for scarce resources. But we also have a predisposition to love, our children, family, partner, friends. Morality, to help guide us with those potentially conflicting views has developed from those predispositions. So it looks like we are predisposed to have morals, but instead we are predisposed to have all the prerequisites to have and indeed need moral codes. I think you are confusing emotions (which have a biological component) and built-in instincts (protecting our young in order to ensure the survival of the species, reacting to pain, etc), with morals - knowing 'right' from 'wrong', where 'right' and 'wrong' are culturally subjective. Is it morally 'wrong' to take an infant boy and, without his consent or even knowledge of what's happening to him, remove a part of his penis for no reason other than tradition? Is mutilating babies for the sake of religious tradition a human 'norm'?
	__________________ The aim of argument, or of discussion, should not be victory, but progress. - Joseph Joubert Do not believe hastily. - Ovid There is no worse lie than a truth misunderstood by those who hear it. - William James

21st November 2012, 08:33 AM	#617
Skeptic Ginger formerly skeptigirl Join Date: Feb 2005 Location: Shifting through paradigms Posts: 40,509	Originally Posted by SatansMaleVoiceChoir Yes, but the question Brainache was asking is 'How?'. SG didn't answer that. How would you suggest we show these people there is another way? Do you have a reading comprehension problem? Or is it that international social pressure as the world becomes more and more interconnected just not a concept you understand?
	__________________ (*Tired of continuing to hear the "Democrat Party" repeatedly I've decided to adopt the name, ~~Pubbie Party, Repubs~~ "Republics" and Republic Party in response.)

21st November 2012, 08:37 AM	#618
SatansMaleVoiceChoir Graduate Poster Join Date: Apr 2007 Posts: 1,300	Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger Do you have a reading comprehension problem? Or is it that international social pressure as the world becomes more and more interconnected just not a concept you understand? No, I don't think I do. The term 'Social Pressure' isn't exactly specific is it? Speaking of reading comprehension, are you ever going to answer the many questions I have asked you, or provide any links that actually back up several of the assertions you have made?
	__________________ The aim of argument, or of discussion, should not be victory, but progress. - Joseph Joubert Do not believe hastily. - Ovid There is no worse lie than a truth misunderstood by those who hear it. - William James

21st November 2012, 08:40 AM	#619
Skeptic Ginger formerly skeptigirl Join Date: Feb 2005 Location: Shifting through paradigms Posts: 40,509	Originally Posted by SatansMaleVoiceChoir We are not 'predisposed' to do any of those things. You know what happens to a child that is raised without anyone speaking to it, or being taught to speak? Google 'Russian Bird Boy'. From other examples of Feral Children, and studies into learning it has been shown that if a child is not taught to speak by around the age of 7 or onwards, it will never learn to speak - certainly not properly. Speech is a special case, I mentioned this particular issue earlier. It's well understood. It has nothing to do with moral thought/behavior nor is there evidence that all learning fails if not implemented early. Originally Posted by SatansMaleVoiceChoir Yes, and we have to learn how to paint. Just because we are born with legs, does not mean we are born with the knowledge of how to use them 'baked-in' - it is something we learn. Google 'Goat Boy' - was he born predisposed to walking on all fours, or is that something he picked up by learning from the goats who raised him? If we were born predisposed to walking upright, then he would have done that regardless of what the goats 'taught' him. There's also another thing our brains do. They don't always realize what they don't know. So someone who has not read much of the new studies that establish our moral slates are not blank at birth, draws conclusions that seem correct to them. They are not aware that they are not aware of the new research, so false conclusions appear correct.
	__________________ (*Tired of continuing to hear the "Democrat Party" repeatedly I've decided to adopt the name, ~~Pubbie Party, Repubs~~ "Republics" and Republic Party in response.)

21st November 2012, 08:47 AM	#620
SatansMaleVoiceChoir Graduate Poster Join Date: Apr 2007 Posts: 1,300	Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger Speech is a special case, I mentioned this particular issue earlier. It's well understood. It has nothing to do with moral thought/behavior No, it doesn't. I have never said it does. I was replying to something Nessie posted to me. Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger nor is there evidence that all learning fails if not implemented early. No, I agree which is why I didn't say that. Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger There's also another thing our brains do. They don't always realize what they don't know. So someone who has not read much of the new studies that establish our moral slates are not blank at birth, draws conclusions that seem correct to them. They are not aware that they are not aware of the new research, so false conclusions appear correct. Another thing our brains can be taught is the difference between 'conclusive' and 'inconclusive', 'proven' and 'unproven'. Sometimes this takes a bit of effort.
	__________________ The aim of argument, or of discussion, should not be victory, but progress. - Joseph Joubert Do not believe hastily. - Ovid There is no worse lie than a truth misunderstood by those who hear it. - William James

21st November 2012, 08:50 AM	#621
Belz... Fiend God Join Date: Oct 2005 Location: In the details... Posts: 28,440	We've strayed a bit from honour killings in Pakistan.
	__________________ The Onmyouza Theatre, An unofficial international fanclub forum dedicated to the Japanese heavy metal band Onmyo-Za: "In the interests of time and space, it is not unreasonable to cite one point at a time. Citing 30 is the equivalent of citing none. Obviously." - Robert Prey "Physical evidence must be observed and interpreted by witnesses which makes it subjective and subject to mistakes and to fraud." - Robert Prey

21st November 2012, 08:51 AM	#622
SatansMaleVoiceChoir Graduate Poster Join Date: Apr 2007 Posts: 1,300	Originally Posted by Belz... We've strayed a bit from honour killings in Pakistan. Haven't we just!
	__________________ The aim of argument, or of discussion, should not be victory, but progress. - Joseph Joubert Do not believe hastily. - Ovid There is no worse lie than a truth misunderstood by those who hear it. - William James

21st November 2012, 09:01 AM	#623
westprog Philosopher Join Date: Dec 2006 Posts: 8,928	Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger I see now we are getting the theists vs the atheists, and the same old arguments. I think that the fact that three of the people disagreeing with you are identifying themselves as demons should indicate that this is completely wrong. A typical orthodox Christian doesn't normally identify himself as Satansmalevoicechoir. YMMV. Quote: If you don't have a magic sky daddy or other suitable definition, then where do 'oughts' come from? They come from our brains and they exist. The fact they differ for individuals and the fact there is a range for 'ought' doesn't mean they don't exist. And I've not been saying my oughts are better than someone else's That may not be what you mean. It is what you've been saying, very explicitly. Quote: I've been saying there are human oughts and just as we define certain behaviors as mentally ill, or out of the normal range, so can we define the normal and abnormal range of oughts. Culture is not a variable that excuses any and all behaviors. And yet you have failed to demonstrate, beyond wishful thinking, that there is anything abnormal in human beings behaving immorally, or conversely, that when human beings behave in abnormal fashion that this is thereby immoral. Babies showing a preference for toys that won't push them down a hill doesn't really do it.
westprog Philosopher Join Date: Dec 2006 Posts: 8,928	__________________ Dreary whiner, who gradually outwore his welcome, before blowing it entirely.

21st November 2012, 09:10 AM	#624
westprog Philosopher Join Date: Dec 2006 Posts: 8,928	Originally Posted by Belz... And this comes right back to westprog's post: how do you derive an "ought" from an "is" ? What if we _were_ wired to kill ? Would that make it right ? And conversely - what if we weren't wired to rescue people from burning buildings? Would that make it wrong? Quote: It also doesn't change the fact that behaviour is largely learned. Our "built-in" morality depends on many factors, and is not as precise as you make it out to be. We have a strong tendency to protect members of our "gang", but to attack or ridicule outsiders, for instance. All human behaviour has to be a combination of genetic predisposition and interaction with the environment (which includes other humans, of course). That's all there is. Claiming that some behaviour is normal, and other behaviour abnormal, is biologically meaningless unless some kind of evidence is adduced to indicate that the behaviour is due to a specific flaw. A lot of animal behaviour is counter-productive for survival when circumstances arise for which evolution has not provided a strategy. Species become extinct because they are doing something wrong, in survival terms. That does not indicate that their behaviour is abnormal.
westprog Philosopher Join Date: Dec 2006 Posts: 8,928	__________________ Dreary whiner, who gradually outwore his welcome, before blowing it entirely. Last edited by westprog; 21st November 2012 at 09:17 AM.

21st November 2012, 09:17 AM	#625
westprog Philosopher Join Date: Dec 2006 Posts: 8,928	Originally Posted by SatansMaleVoiceChoir Haven't we just! I've found that thread drift produces the most interesting discussions. Possibly not in this case.
westprog Philosopher Join Date: Dec 2006 Posts: 8,928	__________________ Dreary whiner, who gradually outwore his welcome, before blowing it entirely.

21st November 2012, 09:32 AM	#626
Nessie Illuminator Join Date: Jun 2012 Location: At the bottom of a dark Scottish loch. Posts: 4,748	Originally Posted by SatansMaleVoiceChoir I think you are confusing emotions (which have a biological component) and built-in instincts (protecting our young in order to ensure the survival of the species, reacting to pain, etc), with morals - knowing 'right' from 'wrong', where 'right' and 'wrong' are culturally subjective. Is it morally 'wrong' to take an infant boy and, without his consent or even knowledge of what's happening to him, remove a part of his penis for no reason other than tradition? Is mutilating babies for the sake of religious tradition a human 'norm'? No I am saying emotions, instincts and morality are all linked. I have less of an issue with male circumcision or anything that has no long term health issues than I do with honour killings. So tattoos, earrings, the neck extension rings appear to be OK so long done properly. Female circumcision has health issues, so I would support campaigns against it.
	__________________ Audiophile/biker/sceptic

21st November 2012, 09:35 AM	#627
westprog Philosopher Join Date: Dec 2006 Posts: 8,928	Originally Posted by SatansMaleVoiceChoir Yes, but the question Brainache was asking is 'How?'. SG didn't answer that. How would you suggest we show these people there is another way? We could forward them studies in neuro-chemistry.
westprog Philosopher Join Date: Dec 2006 Posts: 8,928	__________________ Dreary whiner, who gradually outwore his welcome, before blowing it entirely.

21st November 2012, 10:27 AM	#628
SatansMaleVoiceChoir Graduate Poster Join Date: Apr 2007 Posts: 1,300	Originally Posted by westprog We could forward them studies in neuro-chemistry.
	__________________ The aim of argument, or of discussion, should not be victory, but progress. - Joseph Joubert Do not believe hastily. - Ovid There is no worse lie than a truth misunderstood by those who hear it. - William James

21st November 2012, 10:33 AM	#629
SatansMaleVoiceChoir Graduate Poster Join Date: Apr 2007 Posts: 1,300	Originally Posted by Nessie No I am saying emotions, instincts and morality are all linked. Oh, OK - my mistake. Yes, I'd generally go along with that. Doesn't change what I said about morals though. Originally Posted by Nessie I have less of an issue with male circumcision or anything that has no long term health issues than I do with honour killings. So tattoos, earrings, the neck extension rings appear to be OK so long done properly. Female circumcision has health issues, so I would support campaigns against it. But is mutilating a baby in the name of tradition - however carefully it's done - morally right?
	__________________ The aim of argument, or of discussion, should not be victory, but progress. - Joseph Joubert Do not believe hastily. - Ovid There is no worse lie than a truth misunderstood by those who hear it. - William James

21st November 2012, 10:41 AM	#630
Nessie Illuminator Join Date: Jun 2012 Location: At the bottom of a dark Scottish loch. Posts: 4,748	Mutilation is a charged word. How about an earing in a baby? I am OK with that. I am OK with male circumcision. The traditions of putting childrens feet (Japan, females) and heads into blocks of wood (South America) to shape them, I think that is dubious (maybe was as I dont think that goes on any more).
	__________________ Audiophile/biker/sceptic

21st November 2012, 10:52 AM	#631
SatansMaleVoiceChoir Graduate Poster Join Date: Apr 2007 Posts: 1,300	Originally Posted by Nessie Mutilation is a charged word. How about an earing in a baby? I am OK with that. I am OK with male circumcision. The traditions of putting childrens feet (Japan, females) and heads into blocks of wood (South America) to shape them, I think that is dubious (maybe was as I dont think that goes on any more). It is a charged word. Do you see what you're doing though? I don't mean this in an accusatory way, but you're comparing one practice to another that is culturally acceptable to you to try and justify it. Circumcision is basically mutilation of a young baby boy for no other reason than tradition.
	__________________ The aim of argument, or of discussion, should not be victory, but progress. - Joseph Joubert Do not believe hastily. - Ovid There is no worse lie than a truth misunderstood by those who hear it. - William James

21st November 2012, 11:30 AM	#632
Nessie Illuminator Join Date: Jun 2012 Location: At the bottom of a dark Scottish loch. Posts: 4,748	Yes but men can get circumcised for health reasons as well. That is why I see it as closer to getting an earring than mutilation.
	__________________ Audiophile/biker/sceptic

21st November 2012, 11:48 AM	#633
SatansMaleVoiceChoir Graduate Poster Join Date: Apr 2007 Posts: 1,300	Originally Posted by Nessie Yes but men can get circumcised for health reasons as well. That is why I see it as closer to getting an earring than mutilation. Yes, adult men can in certain circumstances. For babies - especially in the Western world, there is arguably little to no health benefits to circumcision. http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Circumcision
	__________________ The aim of argument, or of discussion, should not be victory, but progress. - Joseph Joubert Do not believe hastily. - Ovid There is no worse lie than a truth misunderstood by those who hear it. - William James

21st November 2012, 12:16 PM	#634
Antiquehunter Degenerate Gambler Join Date: Aug 2005 Location: El Quisco, Chile; Sometimes, Kabul, Afghanistan; currently, Port Moresby, PNG Posts: 4,468	I'm going to duck out of here, if this is switching to circumcision. There are circ-threads on JREF already. Are we finished talking about honor killing, Afghanistan etc...? Circumcision does my head in.
	__________________ "If ignorance is bliss, why aren't there more happy people in the world?" -Stephen Fry, 2006

21st November 2012, 12:19 PM	#635
Resume Philosopher Join Date: Apr 2010 Posts: 8,014	Originally Posted by Antiquehunter Circumcision does my head in. So to speak.
Resume Philosopher Join Date: Apr 2010 Posts: 8,014