CreateDebate is a social debate community built around ideas, discussion and democracy.
If this is your first time checking out a debate, here are some quick tips to help get you started:
Arguments with the highest score are displayed first.
Argument replies (both in favor and in opposition) are displayed below the original argument.
To follow along, you may find it helpful to show and hide the replies displayed below each argument.
To vote for an argument, use these icons:
You have the power to cast exactly one vote (either up or down) for each argument.
Once you vote, the icon will become grayed out and the argument's score will change.
Yes, you can change your vote.
Debate scores, side scores and tag scores are automatically calculated by an algorithm that primarily takes argument scores into account.
All scores are updated in real-time.
To learn more about the CreateDebate scoring system, check out the FAQ.
When you are ready to voice your opinion, use the Add Argument button to create an argument.
If you would like to address an existing argument, use the Support and Dispute link within that argument to create a new reply.
All the laws and ethical theories mankind has created was all for only one reason: For us to do the Right thing, imagine that you can weigh certain doings wether it's good or evil, so we can tell how much the certain doing or occurance is heading to the good side or the bad side, regarding the statue you see at most courts.
Telling the Truth like what most people who follow the Deontological Ethics is not neccessarily the Right thing to do, due to the fact that telling the Truth dosen't mean that you are definitley tilting the scale towards the good side, but it would always baise the scale, perhaps to the bad side, depending on the situation. Ignorance is not a bliss, but sadness.
Teleologist Ethics works in a way to be more complicative, with far more intelligence. It attempts to see how balance the scale is first, so you can have a better knowledge of the goodnesses and badnesses in order before making a final judgement to tilt the scale to the good side. And things should work more complicative, as our minds should be flexible and not like block heads if we are to respect the gift G-d has given us as intelligent species with Free Will choice. In addition, including the Ying and Yang theory, things are not only about viewing things as either a must be good or bad, but rather through the middle, as all bad things does have a bright side which you can follow towards. Concerning the fact that ignorance is not a bliss, but sadness, the aim for doing the Right thing is to bring happiness into reality, as that's what it's all about. Even in some cases were some may not get a chance to feel the warmth of it, it's still there, as G-d is omniscient. Furthermore, there is also a reason as to why my Teleologist Ethics's paragraph is much longer than the previous one, it's due to the fact that it is far more complicated with more intelligence, as Free Will choice had given me more important topics to type about.
Although some may say it also depends on how much sadness and happiness there is, within' a case, wether allot of people gain happiness, and just one person undergoes sadness or vise versa, if the Right thing is what most people would agree on to what should happen, which most people had already agreed on due to the fact that their are so many Ethical things such as the bible, then the happiness should be given to the righteous person or people. Therefore, doing the Right thing is our main duty, it helps everything to ride and not just overide everything else like what the Categorical Imperative says. As a result, my belief would be Teleologist Ethics. In addition, although what I said was mainly one sided, I was only talking on behalf of the right side, after filtering what I've known, so due to the fact that we have a Free Will choice to filter the things we know and come up with more ideas as answers lead to more questions, so that we can learn more, why not? If everybody had followed the Deontological Ethics like prisoners, then we would never had advanced our civilization.
I think you missed the point of what he was saying there Jake.
The "right thing" to do can sometimes be the "better choice" out of two worsts, but on it's own, the act itself, can still be an unethical thing to do.
Let me give you an example.
If we had to sacrifice one man's life in order to save 100 others, then some would argue that killing the one man, under these circumstances, is the "right thing to do", because it saves 100 other lives.
But on its own, the killing of a man is still an unethical and "wrong" act.
Yes, you're pretty much correct, but then it all still depends on the situation. If the one person has done allot of justice while the 100 others are all deep sinners, then the righteous person, which is the good one should deserve to live. But on the other hand, if he was meant to sacrifice himself at his own freewill, in order to save 100 other lives, then he's doing a good thing, and if he hadn't wished to scacrifice himself for that, then he is still bad and unethical for not concerning the problems of others and being selfish which means he deserves to die...This may had not sounded so nice, I agree, but then I strongly believe that being unethical does not always mean it's a wrong act, as being ethical does not always mean that you're a good person. They are just two different things which both needs to be viewed in order to make the final right judgement.
The right thing is the right thing, being Teleological doesn't have to mean being ethical. Teleological Ethics basically means that you are attempting to do the right thing after balancing the black and white scale of the situation, imagine it as a mathematical question like : 1+1, if you're being Teleological, you would review the whole sum and then calculate it at the end in order to give yourself the correct final result which is 2, but then if you're being Deontological, you would just straight away, strictly (stiffly) look at the two numbers then simply (blindly) put them together, giving 11 which is the wrong answer. If you're always ethical, then you're using the Deontological Ethics to lead your life no matter what. The truth of the laws of the Universe is being good as we do the right thing, whether if it is Ethical, we don't care, as all we care about is doing good, as it is important if we are to be justice. Furthermore, if we want justice things to happen and effect us positively, then we must be justice to all if we are to make a change for everything including ourselves. But then we should still always stay true and be real, in order to satisfy the entire word of Justice meaning that we shouldn’t always be thinking about the benefits just for ourselves, but to do good for others so that we're truly doing the right thing or things.
So here's my result after calculating (viewing) both (all) the pros. and cons., the Laws of the Universe is that:
Like rituals, whatever you send out always comes back.- XD
Like I said, the "right thing" is merely what you have concluded to be the "right choice" at the time. No act is "right" by default however good we may think it is.
The trait of judging acts as "right" or "wrong" from an ethical perspective is only to be found in humans, and humans are only a minuscule fraction of the universe. Which is why, to presume that the "laws of he universe" abide by our interpretations of "right" and "wrong" is a very narrow anthropocentric approach.
To say that 1+1 equals 11 is only wrong with regards to the fact that the person has not followed mathematical rules. But outside those rules, the answer 11 is still a valid response.
The rest of your paragraph sounds like a chapter out of The Secret...
Yes, perhaps I had been kinda off topic just then, but my meaning of the Laws of the Universe is what's real, reality and not the actual Laws of the Universe. Remember, as a part of the things we'd learnt in philosophy, things can have different meanings towards different people, as the question many philosophers usually uses is : "How do you know?", I will not go in too deep into that topic incase I once again go off topic...
You'd said this:
"To say that 1+1 equals 11 is only wrong with regards to the fact that the person has not followed mathematical rules. But outside those rules, the answer 11 is still a valid response."
Well, how do you know? The Mathematical rules are according to Reality, it was made after calculating many things, before making final decisions for rules. If you are going to construct things without these Mathematical rules, then many many many more buildings would've collapsed...
And no, Real Reality are the Right things, as for Maths, people are the ones who are working the rules out, and not the other way round. Therefore, Math was just an idea for me to be a little sarcastic towards Ethics, as the rules of Ethics are Not according to reality, real reality is supposed to be just there, that's real reality, and Ethical rules are only made to try and change it negatively in my prospect, which means that it ain't according to the Right thing, the actual right thing, due to the fact that Humans are the ones who setted the rules to it (without calculating everything, that's why Ethical rules are all pretty much one sided), and not the other way round.
