Forum
A place to discuss topics/games with other webDiplomacy players.
Page 860 of 1419
FirstPreviousNextLast
Dharmaton (2398 D)
18 Feb 12 UTC
The Ancient Mediterranean variant should be taken off this site !
It's way too unbalanced & unfair -
so easy to have 2 vs 1 gang-ups in which there is absolutely no way out of.
21 replies
Open
cteno4 (100 D)
21 Feb 12 UTC
Mods please unpause New Game-41
http://webdiplomacy.net/board.php?gameID=79818

This game was paused all weekend with the public understanding that it would need to remain paused until roughly 24 hours (one order phase) ago now. Two players, Russia and France, have each logged on in the last seven hours and neither one has voted to unpause. Please help.
1 reply
Open
Thucydides (864 D(B))
17 Feb 12 UTC
ANTI-CHOICE VS ANTI-LIFE: DUEL!!!!
CAGE MATCH HERE
31 replies
Open
Diplomat33 (243 D(B))
19 Feb 12 UTC
Lets Play another game of Ankara Crescent
It was fun (and of course funny) the last time. Lets do it again. As I like to do, my F occupies Iceland.
12 replies
Open
MenInBlack (0 DX)
21 Feb 12 UTC
We need a Mod to unpause a game.
http://www.webdiplomacy.net/board.php?gameID=74655#gamePanel

Frozen-Antarctica hasn`t been on in a while from the looks of it and everyone else has unpaused, including the one who needed it. Please unpause it for us!
2 replies
Open
sqrg (304 D)
21 Feb 12 UTC
Funniest Scientific troll of the year
"Theory of the Origin, Evolution, and Nature of Life."
Seen this? http://www.mdpi.com/2075-1729/2/1/1/pdf
Brilliantly psychotic and absurd pseudoscienctific poetry. I hope some people enjoy reading the first few pages as much as I did.
0 replies
Open
HITLER69 (0 DX)
21 Feb 12 UTC
ANTI-FORUM / ANTI-THREAD
WHAT AM I DOING HERE?
0 replies
Open
orathaic (1009 D(B))
12 Feb 12 UTC
Do you believe morality is universal, or relative?
quick survey...
Page 2 of 8
FirstPreviousNextLast
 
redhouse1938 (429 D)
12 Feb 12 UTC
Wow, this is an interesting thread. I read / scanned all posts and there's two comments I'd like to contribute;

The first is the question of morality evolving in time; that's not what "universal" implies. Universal means "uniform over space", the question whether morality is "eternal" (yes or no evolving over time) seems a wholly different matter.

The universality question addresses an interesting point and that is whether mankind, as a species, can be considered to evolve; in other words, does the fact that I had to learn about Jesus and Plato in high school have any consequence for African tribes? I argue that it does, even though I'm not implying any action to follow on it at this point.

But I agree it's open to debate. Living in European and having seen with my own eyes the remnants of the holocaust and WWII (whether they be concentration camps, remainders of small German fortresses you still find scattered on many Dutch beaches etc.) and learnt about it in school, I believe I can conclude that genocide is not a good idea and that that also goes for people in let's say a tropical rainforest I never met, whose existence is completely unknown to me.

Regarding the question whether there is a core of morality that is both universal and eternal, that's a very hard question to answer, but I believe the "Golden Rule" in some form or another is both universal and eternal "One should treat others as one would like others to treat oneself". Every great culture appears to have come up with this and it seems hard wired into my personal belief system much harder than I was instructed to hard wire it by schools/churches/parenting etc.

Then a small subnote on slavery: I think it's worth pointing out that slavery was abolished during a period when it was still considered normal by some. It's not like prior to the Civil War in the US every American believed slavery was right and after that they were all convinced it was wrong. The abolitionist were present also in areas where based on cultural grounds you probably would never expect them to be.
redhouse1938 (429 D)
12 Feb 12 UTC
PS to which I should add that my own country was among the most fervent slave trading nations and among the last to prohibit slave trade, I believe much later than the US and England (although it isn't as marked in our culture as in US culture since we didn't have many slaves in our homeland, nor did we fight a civil war that was partly about this issue) sorry for mentioning another country in this context when Holland would have made an equally fine example :)
Putin33 (111 D)
12 Feb 12 UTC
How does morality become uniform over space if not by evolution? Are there certain moral rules that have always existed and been uniform over space? What moral rules are 'uniform over space' today?

"I believe I can conclude that genocide is not a good idea and that that also goes for people in let's say a tropical rainforest I never met, whose existence is completely unknown to me."

But leaders prior to WWII were quite frank and open about how they believed genocide of certain races was perfectly acceptable and an example of progress.

"I do not admit... that a great wrong has been done to the Red Indians of America, or the black people of Australia... by the fact that a stronger race, a higher grade race... has come in and taken its place.
Churchill to Palestine Royal Commission, 1937"

Putin33 (111 D)
12 Feb 12 UTC
" I think it's worth pointing out that slavery was abolished during a period when it was still considered normal by some. It's not like prior to the Civil War in the US every American believed slavery was right and after that they were all convinced it was wrong"

Doesn't this speak to the falsity of moral universalism? Morality evolves in fits and starts. It does not doing anything close to spreading evenly across space.
dubmdell (556 D)
12 Feb 12 UTC
Well if we are using slavery as our example of moral relativism, we should note that the Inca didn't have slaves while the Aztecs did, and they were contemporaries living in nearby geographic areas.

I am fairly certain that this conversation is doomed to circular reasoning and logic unless someone takes the time to define terms that everyone can agree on. Then, of course, there is the matter of how many morals arise from genetics and how many morals are human constructs. If we define "moral" correctly, we can speak of animals having morals, and from there we can discern certain "universal" morals (a term I use loosely). Likewise, if we define it correctly, then no moral could ever arise from genetics and all are human constructs. Similarly, a correct definition would allow for all morals to be subjugated upon the physical world by a spiritual force (in which case, there is no need for discussion, the answer would be universal). Then we have people wanting to distinguish between what is "natural" (morals from genetics, if you will) and what is "moral" (human constructed morals, if you will). Perhaps we should agree on some terms?
Yellowjacket (835 D(B))
12 Feb 12 UTC
"The first is the question of morality evolving in time; that's not what "universal" implies. Universal means "uniform over space", the question whether morality is "eternal" (yes or no evolving over time) seems a wholly different matter."

I disagree on principle. Maybe it's the physicist in me, but space and time are really the same thing. Morality changes do not happen instantaneously across all of space; the meme needs communication (time) to develop. Pair that with the plain observation that any change in morality over time started someWHERE, and you must arrive at the conclusion that for each and every shift in morality, there exists a point in time when there were competing moralities in the same space as well.
Yellowjacket (835 D(B))
12 Feb 12 UTC
*competing moralities ACROSS the same space, of course is what I meant.
Putin33 (111 D)
12 Feb 12 UTC
"Perhaps we should agree on some terms?"

Why don't you provide actual definitions instead of just raising these points to confuse people.
Putin33 (111 D)
12 Feb 12 UTC
Also, can we stop this tendency of asserting at the beginning of post how pointless a particular debate is, only to then go on a long paragraph participating in it? If you don't like the debate don't participate.
Putin33 (111 D)
12 Feb 12 UTC
"Well if we are using slavery as our example of moral relativism, we should note that the Inca didn't have slaves while the Aztecs did, and they were contemporaries living in nearby geographic areas. "

Again, what does this demonstrate except that universalism is false?
obiwanobiwan (248 D)
12 Feb 12 UTC
Relative...from whence cometh universal moral ideals?

God?

If you believe in God...nope, as oddly enough, God seems to change his all-perfect, universal rules depending on whether you're Catholic, Protestant, Baptist, Lutheran, Calvinist, Mormon, Orthodox Jewish, Conservative Jewish, Reform Jewish, Sunni, Shi'ite...

To start with, and that's just with THAT God...

What about Zeus and his rules?
Or Odin's rules?
Or those of Ganesh?

So, aside from gods and books...where would universal morality come from?

The closest answer I can think of is *maybe* some sort of genetic pre-disposition towards certain kinds of actions, ie, the same way maternal instinct is strong, and so perhaps the statement "Parents should care about their newborn children" would be universal...and maybe a few other ones...

But what else, I can't think of enough to really justify some sort of objective, over-arching moral code...?
Yellowjacket (835 D(B))
12 Feb 12 UTC
"Again, what does this demonstrate except that universalism is false?"

I don't think it's FALSE, per se. I just think it's arrogant. Once a we assert that there is only one true morality, the clear next assertion is that OUR morality is the only valid one. And Putin, we both know the type of person who does that :)
Putin33 (111 D)
12 Feb 12 UTC
I wasn't replying to you.
Yellowjacket (835 D(B))
12 Feb 12 UTC
I know, I was agreeing with you. In principle, anyways.
Sicarius (673 D)
12 Feb 12 UTC
relative
fulhamish (4134 D)
12 Feb 12 UTC
Do people think that evil exists?
Yellowjacket (835 D(B))
12 Feb 12 UTC
My first inclination is to say that only a moral universalist would say yes to that, fullhamish. But thinking deeper, I'd say that what we as "decent" folks consider evil is best defined as a moral stance that cannot become self sustaining. e.g. if everybody were a bank robber, or a serial killer, civilization would crumble.

It is possible for individuals who ascribe to psychopathic or sociopathic moralities to prosper in a society where a more conventional morality dominates, but these moralities could never become dominant themselves. Thus they are evil.

Buy that argument?
Imperator Dux (603 D(B))
12 Feb 12 UTC
Relative- but then again, everything can be considered relatively
Putin33 (111 D)
12 Feb 12 UTC
"Do people think that evil exists?"

Moral categories "exist" in every society in every era. That doesn't make them timeless or universal. What is 'evil' or 'good' is socially constructed over time. For example, nowadays people agree that sexual conduct with 12 year olds is *evil*. Ages ago, marrying 12 year olds without their consent was par for the course.
Morality is constant across neither space nor time. It's nowhere near universal.
Octavious (2701 D)
12 Feb 12 UTC
@ Putin

I wouldn't say that core universal morals were timeless, purely because humans have not existed for all that long. I would say that core morals have existed for as long as there have been humans. Indeed, I could argue that the time humans evolved from more basic animals was the time when core universal morals came into existance.

(just incase there is any confusion the universe I am using is the human universe and not the infinite time and space universe)
Putin33 (111 D)
12 Feb 12 UTC
Ok, what moral values do Stone Age Man have in common with Information Age Man?
gregoire (100 D)
12 Feb 12 UTC
thucydides - you nailed it. we are structurally unable to name them, but we can strive for it. what we come up with is political/legal/social/metaphysical, and it points in the right direction, but we can't ever get the letter of the law right. so we have universal morality but it is "empty" such as a placeholder. it's the right place (in other words, universal morality is the truth of the matter) but it's always going to be filled by transient, temporal formulations. but isn't that part of what keeps us going? knowing we have a destination, and able to circle around it, but not really able to lock it down?
orathaic (1009 D(B))
12 Feb 12 UTC
"The first is the question of morality evolving in time; that's not what "universal" implies. Universal means "uniform over space", the question whether morality is "eternal" (yes or no evolving over time) seems a wholly different matter."

YJ said : "I disagree on principle. Maybe it's the physicist in me, but space and time are really the same thing."

Agreeing entirely with YellowJacket, though maybe that's the physicist in me, I did mean in the first place Universal, as in valid for all time and space.

@ "Do people think that evil exists?"

I morality is relative, then evil is defined relatively aswell. That leaves no 'absolute' or 'pure' evil.

As for this 'genetic'/'natural' behaviour. Genes do not control our behaivours. Genes define possible behaviours (fixed behaviour patterns) and our environment shapes when we display each behaviour.

So it is a combination of cultural and genetic factors which determines if/when we display aggressive behaviour. It is genetically coded to fight, but when it is appropriate to fight is modulated or controlled by our environment. (learned by children in the schoolyard, for example)

That said, there are some biological things which by physical necessity must fit into certain very specific solutions. eg: a slice of potato will curve like a double saddle (see: http://taiziola.net/portfolio/projects/7/large/1.jpg ) when heated. This is a physical solution to the problem of differing tensions along the edges contrasted with the main body of the slice... there is no other possible solution.

So in some sense, there are physical constraints which universally determine things (ie this is a pure mathematical problem for which one solution universally exists) - hoping this isn't too vague...

I don't think these particularly apply to human morality. I can't imagine any examples.
orathaic (1009 D(B))
12 Feb 12 UTC
I can imagine a human society where individuals who reproduced without permission were put to death by their peers. (as in bee colonies, where on the queen is the only individual allowed reproduce)

or where individuals who would not commit suicide when signalled to were considered one of the biggest threats to a community (as in the human body, where individual cells which do not undergo apotheosis are cancerous, and potentially fatal to the organism)

Of course i see our means to controlling such things as reproduction or even suicide as different (in each of the above cases communication and signaling is done via chemical signals) but while the specifics of how a human culture could implement such a scheme may vary, i can't view them as inherently 'evil' or 'immoral' just a system which is constrained to exist by certain fundamental physical rules....
Regarding the initial question, there are at least three terms that have to be defined to a greater precision.
Fasces349 (0 DX)
12 Feb 12 UTC
define morality:
Morality (from the Latin moralitas "manner, character, proper behavior") is the differentiation among intentions, decisions, and actions between those that are good (or right) and bad (or wrong). A moral code is a system of morality (for example, according to a particular philosophy, religion, culture, etc.) and a moral is any one practice or teaching within a moral code. The adjective moral is synonymous with "good" or "right." Immorality is the active opposition to morality (i.e. good or right), while amorality is variously defined as an unawareness of, indifference toward, or disbelief in any set of moral standards or principles.

In this sense morality is definitely relative, each person has a set of morals that, although may be similar to others, will have differences.

A perfect example of this is the ends vs means question. While many people view reaching a moral end through immoral means to be immoral, others view it as immoral to not try to reach that moral end. (we had this debate in one of Obis philo questions of the week a while back)

Another one is politics: The communists feel that it is immoral to have lots of wealth when others have none, and the capitalists fee it is immoral to give wealth to those who didn't earn it. For those sets of ideals, most people vote based on moral thinking. The left votes one way because they feel the other side is immoral and the right vote one way normally because they feel the left is immoral (In my case I try to exclude myself from the morality debate, which is actually very ironic cause when playing diplomacy my morals dictate my actions, when debating politics I ignore moral thinking. I guess when it comes down to it, if I ever become a leader, would I really be as machiavellian as I hope to be, given how I refuse to be in diplomacy) or because they think we can't afford to be moral (whether that is true is also debatable).
orathaic (1009 D(B))
13 Feb 12 UTC
your definition of morality, far from defining a relative quality, seems to me to beg the question.

Now it becomes is there some Universal good (or right) and bad (or wrong).

Not really that helpful if you axe me.
kreilly89 (100 D)
13 Feb 12 UTC
Morality is objective, and therefore universal. However this doesn't mean it is universally accepted, and therefore can't form the basis of Temporal Law in a pluralistic society. Instead the basis of Law should be Social Contract Theory, and the role of Law to uphold Freedom equally and when restricting it to do so equally and only to ensure the security of the society as a whole.
Putin33 (111 D)
13 Feb 12 UTC
Why are We randomly Capitalizing words? I haven't heard a single argument here from the universalists supporting the theory that morality is objective/universal. Just assertions that it is, and qualifiers that it either it can't fully be known or that it's not accepted so can't be the basis of organizing a society.

But why do people believe it is objective/universal to begin with? On what basis is this claim made?

Page 2 of 8
FirstPreviousNextLast
 

227 replies
Yellowjacket (835 D(B))
19 Feb 12 UTC
Curse you!
How Diplomacy totally fxxxed my enjoyment of other games
16 replies
Open
Viktyr L. Korimir (174 D)
21 Feb 12 UTC
Newbie World Diplomacy IX Game
http://webdiplomacy.net/board.php?gameID=81115

Four days for signups. Please don't leave me hanging-- I'm dying to try this variant.
0 replies
Open
DiploMerlin (245 D)
20 Feb 12 UTC
How do I join a game?
I've tried joining games, but when I put in my user password it says it's wrong. The password lets me log into the website but not individual games. Am I using the wrong password?
6 replies
Open
HITLER69 (0 DX)
21 Feb 12 UTC
obvious meta-gaming?
http://webdiplomacy.net/board.php?gameID=81132&msgCountryID=0
5 replies
Open
Lando Calrissian (100 D(S))
21 Feb 12 UTC
Gunboat 1000 D
2 more people in under 3 hours?
gameID=80337
35 replies
Open
semck83 (229 D(B))
19 Jan 12 UTC
Team Texas!
All here for Texas in the WC!
68 replies
Open
YanksFan47 (150 D)
20 Feb 12 UTC
Live Match
If anyone is interested in a live match, a 5 minute per phase at the Ancient Mediterranean will be starting in about 10 minutes. It is called Live Mediterranean-7.
0 replies
Open
ulytau (541 D)
20 Feb 12 UTC
Did anyone looked for the survey on integrating the GR?
It's here:

tinyurl.com/ghostratingsurvey
0 replies
Open
obiwanobiwan (248 D)
19 Feb 12 UTC
OK...I Have To Know..."The Hunger Games?" Really? ...WHY?
This book has been getting acclaim for a while now, and that's usual for a lot of aimed-at-young-adult books series...

But now I hear some of my fellow Poly Sci and English majors and even a couple professors professing the merits of the work? ...Has anyone read this? Can someone tell me why (or what you think of it?)
40 replies
Open
Bob Genghiskhan (1233 D)
19 Feb 12 UTC
Going from draws to wins
I may be overestimating my capabilities, but I like to think I'm pretty good at the opening phases of the game. I think I have a pretty good sense of tactical possibilities, and at least adequate diploming skills. So I find myself being cut in on a lot of draws. But the next step, going from inclusion in a draw to wins, is one that seems to escape me. So, I'm wondering what people who get a high percentage of wins are doing to get them.
14 replies
Open
Praed (100 D)
20 Feb 12 UTC
Fast game, Classic, Full press
One day left and I need 4 more players. 12 hour phase so only frequent visitors and reliable players please. Thanks.
http://webdiplomacy.net/board.php?gameID=80842
p/w rocket
0 replies
Open
YanksFan47 (150 D)
20 Feb 12 UTC
Live Mediterranean
Is anyone interested participating in a live match at the Ancient Mediterranean?
0 replies
Open
kalle_k (253 D)
19 Feb 12 UTC
Retreats from countries in CD/when no retreat orders are given
How does it work with retreats if the country is i CD/no retreat order is given, does the unit disband then or does it retreat to, randomly selected, adjacent province?
12 replies
Open
alexanderthegr8 (0 DX)
19 Feb 12 UTC
quick 61
please join our game quick 61
3 replies
Open
warrior within (0 DX)
19 Feb 12 UTC
WorldCup Group A Gunboat 1
pass?
4 replies
Open
doomer (0 DX)
19 Feb 12 UTC
why game not starting?
http://www.webdiplomacy.net/board.php?gameID=81037
3 replies
Open
steephie22 (182 D(S))
12 Feb 12 UTC
searching for a shootergame where you're captain of a big squad
more details inside...
28 replies
Open
SocDem (441 D)
19 Feb 12 UTC
Cheating? (muti-tasking)
http://webdiplomacy.net/board.php?gameID=81030
i suspect but hope it does not
1 reply
Open
abgemacht (1076 D(G))
19 Feb 12 UTC
Help us track down a bug.
If you've ever been marked as "Resigned" in error at the end of a game, please link the game in this thread.
2 replies
Open
Sicarius (673 D)
19 Feb 12 UTC
wow craigslist
http://toledo.craigslist.org/zip/2858935998.html
6 replies
Open
mittag (391 D)
19 Feb 12 UTC
GreaseMonkey script to provide GhostRating on profile pages
If you want to see the GhostRating on profile pages, you can now use my GreaseMonkey script. Located at: http://etum.nl/greasemonkey/webdipgr.user.js

You can easily customize it to your wishes. Distributed under the GPLv2.
10 replies
Open
Dharmaton (2398 D)
29 Dec 11 UTC
Word Association !
You know the rules ;)
823 replies
Open
Page 860 of 1419
FirstPreviousNextLast
Back to top