52 replies to this topic

[Sherapy]

Mr Walker, on 21 February 2013 - 09:36 PM, said:

I must be in an argumentative mood this morning but Plato was wrong. In a society all people require laws to establish a standard codification of behaviour. "Good" people may choose to obey those laws and "bad" people may choose to disobey them, but people do not inherently KNOW the laws of a culture they have to be taught them, and for this to happen the laws must exist.

In Plato's time this was not so much so, as people grew up in a culture learning expectations from birth and generally those expectations were consistent within a culture, but today, as we move from one culture to another, and as cultures break down into sub cultures and individualism,, laws are essential For example, in amsterdam prostituion and drugs may be perfectly legal. In singapore you can be fined for chewing gum. Laws reflect the standards and moralities of a culture, and are used as a tool to show ALL people, good and bad, what that society's expectaions are. I am a good person but if i do not know the laws of a country then I can still get into terrible trouble.

Mr Walker, on 21 February 2013 - 09:36 PM, said:

I must be in an argumentative mood this morning but Plato was wrong. In a society all people require laws to establish a standard codification of behaviour. "Good" people may choose to obey those laws and "bad" people may choose to disobey them, but people do not inherently KNOW the laws of a culture they have to be taught them, and for this to happen the laws must exist.

In Plato's time this was not so much so, as people grew up in a culture learning expectations from birth and generally those expectations were consistent within a culture, but today, as we move from one culture to another, and as cultures break down into sub cultures and individualism,, laws are essential For example, in amsterdam prostituion and drugs may be perfectly legal. In singapore you can be fined for chewing gum. Laws reflect the standards and moralities of a culture, and are used as a tool to show ALL people, good and bad, what that society's expectaions are. I am a good person but if i do not know the laws of a country then I can still get into terrible trouble.

I think you bring in a good point MW, I think Plato has a point in his quote though too,...Which is along the lines of what you are saying,

When I read the quote,  I read it to mean that as we mature(it is a process one which is learned) our moral ethical nature will too (hopefully) and we will eventually grow to moral integrity of the quote. For me-- this  is what I glean from this quote. ( Sort of along the lines of Kohlberg's theory of morality.) Not that Kohlberg is the end all to morality but his ideas have and still serve as  a frame to understand the process of moral develpment.

Perhaps Plato was on to something.

Edited by Sherapy, 21 February 2013 - 10:13 PM.

[Jor-el]

Perhaps what is meant by this quote has got to do more with the inherent nature of a person than the codification of laws written by the standards of a society. In my view, the laws of a society are artificial constructs that allow us to work together as a unit, but that has nothing to do with the nature of the person within that society. While some will do good because of their nature, other people will invariably do harm and in so doing will find ways to corrupt those laws they do not agree with or can't be bothered to obey, habitually doing so to further their own ends, never with the intent to benefit others.

I would add that sometimes doing good means that we will go against those very same laws, while doing harm means that one will obey those laws. In the end that is the reason why religion does no good, it is a codifier of laws, while God himself seeks those that rather than obey laws seeks to do good and what is right.

Edited by Jor-el, 22 February 2013 - 08:14 AM.

[Frank Merton]

In an ideal state, according to Plato, philosophers (lovers of wisdom) rule without any restraint except the restraint their own wisdom and compassion forces on them.

This is not too unlike Lenin's vision of an elect party of carefully selected individuals ruling in dictatorial fashion.

This has the benefit that they are actually able to do things without encumbrance.  I don't need to go into the dangers -- they are obvious enough from history and the example of a couple of modern nations.

Still, the advantage of this sort of arrangement over the present rule of most countries by the wealthy and their political allies, the lawyers and politicians, or by demagogues, does have its appeal.

[Jor-el]

Frank Merton, on 22 February 2013 - 09:03 AM, said:

In an ideal state, according to Plato, philosophers (lovers of wisdom) rule without any restraint except the restraint their own wisdom and compassion forces on them.

This is not too unlike Lenin's vision of an elect party of carefully selected individuals ruling in dictatorial fashion.

This has the benefit that they are actually able to do things without encumbrance.  I don't need to go into the dangers -- they are obvious enough from history and the example of a couple of modern nations.

Still, the advantage of this sort of arrangement over the present rule of most countries by the wealthy and their political allies, the lawyers and politicians, or by demagogues, does have its appeal.

But... there is always a but, it is wishful thinking. It is an ideal that cannot truly be brought into reality. As old Winston Churchill once said, democracy is the worst form of government except all those other forms that have been tried from time to time.

[Sherapy]

Frank Merton, on 22 February 2013 - 09:03 AM, said:

In an ideal state, according to Plato, philosophers (lovers of wisdom) rule without any restraint except the restraint their own wisdom and compassion forces on them.

This is not too unlike Lenin's vision of an elect party of carefully selected individuals ruling in dictatorial fashion.

This has the benefit that they are actually able to do things without encumbrance.  I don't need to go into the dangers -- they are obvious enough from history and the example of a couple of modern nations.

Still, the advantage of this sort of arrangement over the present rule of most countries by the wealthy and their political allies, the lawyers and politicians, or by demagogues, does have its appeal.

I agree- and I'd add another point which is  morailty is cultivated with the help of ones genes, brain,(frontal lobe, amygdala) and enviornmental influences. In other words, the inherent potential comes into  being because of these factors too.

Edited by Sherapy, 22 February 2013 - 08:35 PM.

[Sean93]

Explaining ones religion goes something like this:

Person 1: So what's your faith?
Person 2: Well, I'm a Christian.
Person 1: I see. What's doctrines and teachings does it involve?
Person 2: Well, There was this man Named Jesus, Christ whom we believe was the Son of God and who came to save us.

Preaching goes like this:
Person 1: So, what's your faith?
Person 2: Christianity, the one and only TRUE religion. Heed Jesus' infallible words or Die a heretic.
Person 1: ...
Person 2: So, what do you believe in?
Person 1: I'm Atheist.
Person 2: Heretic, Sinner! (and you can place the rest)

As for children and religion. They should discover it on their own and not be forced into it. They shouldn't be labelled as a religious child, shouldn't be put into schools named after saints (such is the way here in Ireland) and above all, they should be taught about acceptance of others' faiths too. If we did this, and let our children think for themselves, the world would be just a bit nicer because preachy, religious fundamentalists would be far fewer in numbers and kids would also not be having their heads filled with horrible stuff such as Hell and the fact that they're being watched by some invisible man, seriously, I could have done without that as a child myself.

Edited by Sean93, 23 February 2013 - 12:13 AM.

[HavocWing]

Sean93, on 23 February 2013 - 12:13 AM, said:

Preaching goes like this:
Person 1: So, what's your faith?
Person 2: Christianity, the one and only TRUE religion. Heed Jesus' infallible words or Die a heretic.
Person 1: ...
Person 2: So, what do you believe in?
Person 1: I'm Atheist.
Person 2: Heretic, Sinner! (and you can place the rest)

Preaching or insanity?

[Sean93]

HavocWing, on 23 February 2013 - 02:55 AM, said:

Preaching or insanity?

They're usually packaged together.