There isn't a standard differentiation between "ethics" and "morals" in the literature. They are used interchangeably.

That looks a bit dangerous. I'm not brave enough to depend on people to catch me after a toss that high.

I think you'll find that it's much easier to find a compelling narrative for people to become attached to than to turn them all reasonable, and that attempting both is not outside the realm of possibility. So, the best thing we can say about Sagan's argument is that it helps stupid people be nicer. Which is pretty much what I started out saying. I don't disagree with the conclusion that we should be nice, the argument just annoys me because it's hilariously invalid. Not at all. Compelling emotional narratives are also helpful incentives to those of us who are way smarter than the unwashed masses outside our ivory towers. You can't turn off emotions, you might as well have as many positive and helpful influences and perspectives as possible. The Pale Blue Dot argument is an appeal for people to stop missing the forest of the universe for the trees of petty bullshit.

Goddamm shit just got real... So my friend is fucknuts over this girl he works with. Only problem is she has a boyfriend in the marine corp she's all lovey dover over, however my friend and this girl have been hanging out alot and they're getting closer and closer and she's kinda leading my friend on. This is gonna be a fucking train wreck....

Not at all. Compelling emotional narratives are also helpful incentives to those of us who are way smarter than the unwashed masses outside our ivory towers. You can't turn off emotions, you might as well have as many positive and helpful influences and perspectives as possible. I AM RATIONAL I AM MAKE LOGIC Alternately, I don't believe that attempting to trick myself into believing the right thing on a shitty basis is a good strategy for getting at the truth. The Pale Blue Dot argument is an appeal for people to stop missing the forest of the universe for the trees of petty bullshit. I'm pretty sure that if you spell out what you mean less vaguely it will be clear how stupid it is.

Goddamm shit just got real... So my friend is fucknuts over this girl he works with. Only problem is she has a boyfriend in the marine corp she's all lovey dover over, however my friend and this girl have been hanging out alot and they're getting closer and closer and she's kinda leading my friend on. This is gonna be a fucking train wreck.... Back away unless you want the crazy train to swallow you up.

There isn't a standard differentiation between "ethics" and "morals" in the literature. They are used interchangeably. Yes, also in English, much like "theory" and "hypothesis" and "wild guess" and "bullshit." For the record, I use "morals" to identify notions of intrinsic right and wrong, and "ethics" to identify codes of behavior understood to be strictly chosen, with most morals coming from religions or things which resemble them.

No, that's her thing, not my thing. My thing would have been popping the annoying whitehead on her shoulder blade, but she wouldn't let me. Is it her thing or is it her culture's thing which she is complying with? Dunno. I've had guys clean my ears at hair cutting places, and II had another girlfriend who never really brought it up. It's a little odd to assume that people are somehow spiritually unwilling robots going along with cultural programming. I don't think it's at all out of the realm of possibility that people internalize the stuff they're taught, and actually take pleasure in going through the routines. It's not just, "my culture says do this so I must do this".

YOU TWO! QUIT DEBATING in the.... Debate and Discourse [chat] thread.... ohhhhhhhhhhhh.

Goddamm shit just got real... So my friend is fucknuts over this girl he works with. Only problem is she has a boyfriend in the marine corp she's all lovey dover over, however my friend and this girl have been hanging out alot and they're getting closer and closer and she's kinda leading my friend on. This is gonna be a fucking train wreck.... Back away unless you want the crazy train to swallow you up. See, I dont even know what to do aside from back up. I mean i could talk to my friend about it, but whats the point of crushing his spirit? And I could confront the girl about it, but A.) She'd probably just go "Oh just because i'm hanging out with him, and drinking with him, and dancing with him, doesnt mean i'm leading him on!" and B.) a sizable chunk of people she works with hate me... so yeah, Im boned.

Plus the Marine guy? He is gonna take this harshly most likely. Like, stalk and possibly hurt this guy harshly. Don't fuck around on Marines.

Dunno. I've had guys clean my ears at hair cutting places, and II had another girlfriend who never really brought it up. It's a little odd to assume that people are somehow spiritually unwilling robots going along with cultural programming. I don't think it's at all out of the realm of possibility that people internalize the stuff they're taught, and actually take pleasure in going through the routines. It's not just, "my culture says do this so I must do this". True, but Stockholm Syndrome happens too. I'm simply not comfortable with people who fall into their given roles like that, and I tend to try to push them into trying to break out of it. So far I've only seen good come of doing so.

Plus the Marine guy? He is gonna take this harshly most likely. Like, stalk and possibly hurt this guy harshly. Don't fuck around on Marines. I'm not worried about some pussyfoot marine trying to hurt my 300 pound behelmoth of a friend. I mean just the other week he accidently dislocated this guys shoulder, and that was just a complete accident while grab assing. Seriously, I could derail this whole [chat] with my rantings on the marine's being former a former soldier and all. His vengence on my friend is the worst of my worries. It's my friend getting his heart slammed and then run through a meat grinder i'm worried about.

Not at all. Compelling emotional narratives are also helpful incentives to those of us who are way smarter than the unwashed masses outside our ivory towers. You can't turn off emotions, you might as well have as many positive and helpful influences and perspectives as possible. I AM RATIONAL I AM MAKE LOGIC Alternately, I don't believe that attempting to trick myself into believing the right thing on a shitty basis is a good strategy for getting at the truth. It's odd that you bring up tricking when I made no mention of anything of the sort. It's as if you think emotions don't actually affect us, that they aren't real, that they're somehow false. If doing certain things makes me happy, there's no tricking involved. If taking a certain fact of existence into consideration makes me less inclined to certain destructive activities, that's not tricking. Tricking involves selling a falsehood. This is not needed. I'm not an astronomer or cosmologist, but I'm reasonably certain the bulk of what Carl Sagan said in that speech was true. It wasn't a lie. There was no tricking involved. If seeing commonalities or common plights or common goals brings people together, unless those commonalities or plights or goals aren't true, it's not tricking anyone.

It's odd that you bring up tricking when I made no mention of anything of the sort. It's as if you think emotions don't actually affect us, that they aren't real, that they're somehow false. If doing certain things makes me happy, there's no tricking involved. If taking a certain fact of existence into consideration makes me less inclined to certain destructive activities, that's not tricking. So long as you base your approach off of some aesthetic idea of what sounds nice, then it follows that you're not basing it off the fact of the matter. If you're systematically insensitive to the fact of the matter, then you open yourself up to being systematically wrong. I'm reasonably certain the bulk of what Carl Sagan said in that speech was true. It wasn't a lie. There was no tricking involved. The irrational step is not to note that the universe is very large. The irrational step is to transition from that observation to some sort of ethical conclusion. I don't know why you are so eager to defend a terrible argument. Appreciate it as poetry if you'd like, but it ain't rational.

MrMister, when someone has poor eyesight, do they find the most perfect, distortion-free glass to peer through so that their vision is not further degraded or do they find curved glass that bends the light all wrong but in such a way that it corrects for their deficiency? Carl Sagan wasn't trying to be straightforward and logical. He was trying to apply a corrective lens to the incorrect and out-of-proportion way that people seem to view the events in their day to day lives. I'm so happy for you and your perfect vision. Now stop hating on people who need glasses.

That Sagan speech always gave me the uncomfortable feeling that people would use that reasoning to justify their most horrible actions, on the basis that the greatest evils of man are, relatively speaking, unimportant in a vast universe.

Plus the Marine guy? He is gonna take this harshly most likely. Like, stalk and possibly hurt this guy harshly. Don't fuck around on Marines. I'm not worried about some pussyfoot marine trying to hurt my 300 pound behelmoth of a friend. I mean just the other week he accidently dislocated this guys shoulder, and that was just a complete accident while grab assing. Seriously, I could derail this whole [chat] with my rantings on the marine's being former a former soldier and all. His vengence on my friend is the worst of my worries. It's my friend getting his heart slammed and then run through a meat grinder i'm worried about. Head it all off by sleeping with her first.

It's odd that you bring up tricking when I made no mention of anything of the sort. It's as if you think emotions don't actually affect us, that they aren't real, that they're somehow false. If doing certain things makes me happy, there's no tricking involved. If taking a certain fact of existence into consideration makes me less inclined to certain destructive activities, that's not tricking. So long as you base your approach off of some aesthetic idea of what sounds nice, then it follows that you're not basing it off the fact of the matter. If you're systematically insensitive to the fact of the matter, then you open yourself up to being systematically wrong. I'm reasonably certain the bulk of what Carl Sagan said in that speech was true. It wasn't a lie. There was no tricking involved. The irrational step is not to note that the universe is very large. The irrational step is to transition from that observation to some sort of ethical conclusion. I don't know why you are so eager to defend a terrible argument. Appreciate it as poetry if you'd like, but it ain't rational. You're talking about basing an approach off of an aesthetic idea when I have mentioned that a compelling narrative is something that can be used while attempting to make more people more rational. The Pale Blue Dot framing is not mutually exclusive to other approaches to changing minds or opening eyes. I'm not defending a terrible argument. It's just a framing, pure and simple. There's no argument to defend. I sense that your issue has something to do with this portion of the speech: Our posturings, our imagined self-importance, the delusion that we have some privileged position in the Universe, are challenged by this point of pale light. Our planet is a lonely speck in the great enveloping cosmic dark. In our obscurity, in all this vastness, there is no hint that help will come from elsewhere to save us from ourselves. Am I right? If not, what? In this passage at least, I don't see this as an argument. I see this as purely an attempt to add perspective.

I sense that your issue has something to do with this portion of the speech: Our posturings, our imagined self-importance, the delusion that we have some privileged position in the Universe, are challenged by this point of pale light. Our planet is a lonely speck in the great enveloping cosmic dark. In our obscurity, in all this vastness, there is no hint that help will come from elsewhere to save us from ourselves. Am I right? If not, what? In this passage at least, I don't see this as an argument. I see this as purely an attempt to add perspective. Yes, that bit of speech is the part that grates on me the most. The fact that we are a point of pale light in the vastness of the universe does nothing to rationally challenge our posturings or our self-importance. If you want to to challenge those things rationally, then you need to do it on other grounds. Whatever perspective gets added by considerations of scope--ourselves as a pale point of light--it is, as I said earlier, a trick. And the reason I use the term 'trick,' to which you objected, is because if you are being rational, then the introduction of that perspective should not change your views. If it is changing your views, then it is because you've been tricked into thinking it's relevant even though it isn't.

That Sagan speech always gave me the uncomfortable feeling that people would use that reasoning to justify their most horrible actions, on the basis that the greatest evils of man are, relatively speaking, unimportant in a vast universe. Indeed. Holocaust? Whatever. Tiny speck of light. This is why believing things for the right reasons is important.

I'm so happy for you and your perfect vision. Now stop hating on people who need glasses. You are terrible at analogies. And I may be a hater, but I'm hating on stupidity.

No, that's her thing, not my thing. My thing would have been popping the annoying whitehead on her shoulder blade, but she wouldn't let me. Is it her thing or is it her culture's thing which she is complying with? Dunno. I've had guys clean my ears at hair cutting places, and II had another girlfriend who never really brought it up. It's a little odd to assume that people are somehow spiritually unwilling robots going along with cultural programming. I don't think it's at all out of the realm of possibility that people internalize the stuff they're taught, and actually take pleasure in going through the routines. It's not just, "my culture says do this so I must do this". well it's okay if you only do it with women right?

dammit answer me!

I leave you in good hands!