Jump to content
Islamic Forum

Isambard

Member
  • Content count

    479
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Isambard

  1. Well here goes my second attempt at explaining the tool mechanism of utilitarianism in practical ethics. Despite the last one being a friendly tribute to someone on the board, it was deemed somehow offensive and closed yet a thread directed at me saying all sorts of insulting things still exists. So here I try again. Old buddy/rival (you know who are) again Iinvite you to review and critisize my work in the hopes of better modeling my ideas :sl: Let us begin with a quick explination of what utilitarianism is. There many variations dealing with different factors and scope but the fundamental mantra is "the greatest good/happiness for the greatest number". Usually associated with it is a Machiveillian flavor of 'ends justifies means'. Not at first glance (assuming you are muslim, christian, liberal) you think what an abhorrant take on ethics but it my intention to prove you are all at heart, secret utilitarians;) When compared with the aforementioned ethical models, there is a clear surface distinction between them. Namely, they hold up 'human lives' and 'values' over the bottom line of utilitarians. On paper this is wonderful. One can do many things, accomplish many goals, and never have to feel guilty...all on paper of course... The problem lies when you make the transition from the abstract to the practical. Given a situation where all there is, is unpleasant options, youll find pure abstractness will fail almost immediately. For an example, let us say you are a fireman. There are two buildings both on the verge of collapse. One has 2 ppl, the other 6. You only have enough time to save one group. Which is best? Regardless of your decision, someone dies. Id assume most of you regardless of ethical background would say saving the 6ppl is the best option simply because it is the most. How did you come to that conclusion? Time for a deeper look wouldnt you say? For those of you who have taken philosophy (or have to much time on your hands ), youll know 'good' and 'happiness' are incredibly abstract and subjuective terms. They can mean just about anything! For sake of simplicity, let us call it our *function* Function then is what is perceived to be best possible good or happiness maximizer. It can range from GDP (the function used in industrial countries) to values and virtues (used in communitarian societies of the past) to even pleasing of a deity (role of Shaiah, following the teaching of Jesus etc.) So the reason for your choice was simple mathmatics. Human lives was your function, 6 being greater than 2 and greater than -8 made your choice easy. 6 maximizes overall human happiness as defined by life! To quickly sum up, the only way to not complete seperate yourself from utilitarianism, is to be either completely apathetic or a god. Being human limits your options so you try to find best possible option depending on the function you have chosen. Utilitarianism is merely a tool that *is always* implimented when a ethical model is transitioned from abstract to practical because of our limited human nature.
  2. I Am Immortal

    Over the past few yrs (and especially the last few months) I have been trying to understand the motivatig factor known as 'faith'. To me it seems so bizarre and foreign. This motivation seems to defy logic, reasoning, scientific method, history and even memory yet remains such a tremendous motivational cause for so many ppl. This doesnt apply simply to muslims or theists, but also liberals, communists, anarachists, parents, soldiers etc. To me it seems like some sort of delusion, a delusion that brings ppl happiness, a delusion that I ultimatly lack. Despite different attacks onto its foundations which in my opinion I consider irrefuteable, those with strong faith (in w/e it may be) simply shrug it off saying I am the one who is blind. In a bid to understand this fascinating motivator I present to you this mental expirement and ask you to disprove my position while I use the arguements of those with 'faith'. Perhaps there is some critizism that I have missed, one that may hlp understand where my own lack of faith (in all things) stems from. So then friends of the forum, truely I tell you, I am IMMORTAL. Do what you will, but I CHALLENGE YOU to prove to me that I CANNOT die! (PS. I have chosen immortality over a religion/political ideology because differences in understanding hinder any universal answer to my desired result and may simply end up confusing everyone. I have chosen a concept [immortality] who's definition and understanding is universal among any who read this post. ty)
  3. Beard Vs Scarf

    :S I was hoping for some practical reason
  4. British Queen Made A Mockery Of Herself

    Actually, the original Satanic Verses was written by Ibn Ishaq. So its muslims slandering muslims....well in this case ancient Muslim scholars. Do your research Link *Edited* {Moderator note} This post violated forum rule #03. Action taken. View (you are not allowed to post links yet)"you can't post links until you reach 50 posts_you are not allowed to post links yetgawaher(contact admin if its a beneficial link)/index.php?act=boardrules"]details[/url].
  5. I Am Immortal

    The nature of faith and if it can ever be more than a wholly subjective experience
  6. British Queen Made A Mockery Of Herself

    I see ideas such as symbolism, context, character personality, irony and mystisicm mean nothing to you. But then I guess thats why his book was so popular seeing as one of the major themes was about ppl who dont think, they simply act in a self-righteous manner never questioning. This thread is a wonderful example As for your last comment, I find it deliciously ironic you have a selective memory of current events when you compare 'the west' to the failure that us the muslim states of today
  7. British Queen Made A Mockery Of Herself

    When does he talk about Muhammed? (Aside from the Islamically accepted facts)
  8. British Queen Made A Mockery Of Herself

    lol Yasnov. Just because you read Cole's Notes does not mean youll be anywhere near the lv to critisize the work. If you read the book does questions would make sense PS> I saw lying around the campus bookstore and the premise and song in the first few pgs sounded very interesting. Only after I read it did I find out about its history and honestly, you must be mentally ill if you believe it insults Islam.
  9. British Queen Made A Mockery Of Herself

    If you read the book, youll see its apples and oranges
  10. British Queen Made A Mockery Of Herself

    Really? Its based on a true event where a Shi'a village walked into the ocean and drowned. The last thing the landlord sees is strongly ginted to be a hallusination caused by hunger and grief. So I saw more as a testament agaisnt blind faith. That if reckless, it will strip you of your wealth, of your home, of your friends and family, and even of your sanity
  11. British Queen Made A Mockery Of Herself

    If you have not read it, how do you know the content? Can you cite me what exactly is offensive to Muslims from the book?
  12. British Queen Made A Mockery Of Herself

    I found reading his work is like eating a very fine meal. Incredible once you know your way around the table but once your done you need time to relax and digest. His work is packed with so much than I needed to read lesser books afterwards because of the mental exhastion. Still, Satanic Verses is one of my favorite books because of the depth and scope while the central themes are so simple and universal. Every line was like beautiful poetry
  13. I Am Immortal

    Again, I would appretiate ppl reading the post as well as previous replies before replying themselves. The thread is about the nature of faith, belief of physical immortality was only an example
  14. Beard Vs Scarf

    Why not thou? Reasons for both seem important so why the double-standard?
  15. I Am Immortal

    you missed the pt of the thread
  16. British Queen Made A Mockery Of Herself

    Have you even read the book, or are you simply following sheeple mentality?
  17. Yasnov, The Utilitarian

    For those wondering why I am picking on Yasnov, it is because this thread was inspired I guess you can say, from a series of responses both from and to him. So although this is a friendly poke at Yasnov, it is also for anyone who considers themselves a non-utilitarian as well as ethical :j: Let us begin with a quick explination of what utilitarianism is. There many variations dealing with different factors and scope but the fundamental mantra is "the greatest good/happiness for the greatest number". Usually associated with it is a Machiveillian flavor of 'ends justifies means'. Not at first glance (assuming you are muslim, christian, liberal) you think what an abhorrant take on ethics but it my intention to prove you are all at heart, secret utilitarians;) When compared with the aforementioned ethical models, there is a clear surface distinction between them. Namely, they hold up 'human lives' and 'values' over the bottom line of utilitarians. On paper this is wonderful. One can do many things, accomplish many goals, and never have to feel guilty...all on paper of course... The problem lies when you make the transition from the abstract to the practical. Given a situation where all there is, is unpleasant options, youll find pure abstractness will fail almost immediately. For an example, let us say you are a fireman. There are two buildings both on the verge of collapse. One has 2 ppl, the other 6. You only have enough time to save one group. Which is best? Regardless of your decision, someone dies. Id assume most of you regardless of ethical background would say saving the 6ppl is the best option simply because it is the most. How did you come to that conclusion? Time for a deeper look wouldnt you say? :no: For those of you who have taken philosophy (or have to much time on your hands :sl:), youll know 'good' and 'happiness' are incredibly abstract and subjuective terms. They can mean just about anything! For sake of simplicity, let us call it our *function* Function then is what is perceived to be best possible good or happiness maximizer. It can range from GDP (the function used in industrial countries) to values and virtues (used in communitarian societies of the past) to even pleasing of a deity (role of Shaiah, following the teaching of Jesus etc.) So the reason for your choice was simple mathmatics. Human lives was your function, 6 being greater than 2 and greater than -8 made your choice easy. 6 maximizes overall human happiness as defined by life! To quickly sum up, the only way to not complete seperate yourself from utilitarianism, is to be either completely apathetic or a god. Being human limits your options so you try to find best possible option depending on the function you have chosen. Utilitarianism is merely a tool that *is always* implimented when a ethical model is transitioned from abstract to practical because of our limited human nature. Yasnov, you are a utilitarian :sl:
  18. I Am Immortal

    I tried something like that and it left completely nihilistic as opposed to mostly nihilistic that I was before :sl:
  19. Adherence To Islam Punishable With 20 Years

    I bet the anti-Jewish and anti-catholic organizations are jealous! They used to get so much funding now they ahve to give it up to the new guy
  20. Arrests At Jerusalem Gay Parade

    To quote Jon Stewart "O gays! Is there anything that can bring ppl together more than...hating you?"
  21. Beard Vs Scarf

    O ok. So then why wouldnt it be mandatory?
  22. The Hypocrisy Of Christian Militarists

    I really wouldnt generalize the actions mentality of some of the christian right, in a country where its christiandom is already far-removed, for what the majority of christians have to say. Granted they are very loud and obnoxious, but this only means they are a single man with a microphone as opposed to a population at arms
  23. Beard Vs Scarf

    What does the beard preserve? I know the hijaab is modesty but I still dont really understand the beard
  24. The Hypocrisy Of Christian Militarists

    I agree christian militarists are hypocrites, but not for the reasons the author gave. The christian fundie groups are essentially republican/statist in nature and thru a twisting of "give Cesar what is Cesar's" this doesnt conflict as long as is in perceived self-defence which given the propaganda and techniques used (namely, they are aggressors) is fine. The author is merely being a baby or doesnt know the meaning of hypocracy. The true hypocracy is that the christian msg is passifism even self-defence is a no-no. So christian militarist becomes such a hilarious term as pork-eating-jew. Closest passages that advocate defence are Romans, but even then it is pretty clear Paul is talking about having mental defence agaisnt Satan by being a matyr to oppression and resisting the urge to strike back.
  25. Japan Didn't Surrenderd Because Of Hiroshima

    lol Maybe now Yasnov will see :sl:
×