Core Values

Off Topic
41

[quote]DBCooper wrote:

[quote]batman730 wrote:
DB,

Regarding equating humility with weakness and subserviance: I completely disagree. Humility is extremely useful. It’s an effective inoculation against overconfidence and complacency, both of which can get you killed both literally and figuratively. Humility allows you to see your where your weaknesses lie, own them and begin to work on them without needing to wrestle with your ego. It allows you to be realistic with yourself because were all flawed and fallible. If pride makes you blind to this, you will be less effective in your life. Nemisis follows hubris and all. That’s not a human construct, it’s a description of a natural process at work that would happen whether or not one believed it would. In fact, it usually DOES happen to people who don’t believe it does.

The harder you push your limits the more likely you are to be exposed to people who are more talented than you, to have failures, setbacks and other “humbling” experiences. If those experiences don’t teach you that you are not perfect, invincible or even that big a deal then you are just not that bright IMO. Some of the most capable, competent people you will ever meet will often be the most humble, especially if their area of competency involves significant physical risk where overestimating your capabilities can have disastrous consequences.

Humility has the added benefit of causing you to tend to under-promise and over-deliver which I find to be extremely useful both in professional and personal settings. The guy who thinks he’s awesome and talks a great game will always come up short more often because reality doesn’t care how great you think you are. This is true so often that in my experience the more a guy talks himself up, the less I actually expect him to accomplish and I am rarely disappointed.

I don’t think humility is an artificial construct thrust upon us by our theoretical “betters” so much as it is the logical and intelligent conclusion to any honest self-assessment.[/quote]

All you’ve done is explain why humility is a virtue when it is in our best interests. Sure, humility is a virtue when it is good for me. Again, master morality.[/quote]

Most commonly held virtues also happen good for us, IMO just as most vices are self-injurious. I find this to be unsurprising.

Integrity/Fortitude is good for us because it allows us and those around us to trust ourselves to see things through in the face of adversity and hold true to our values and beliefs.

Wisdom is good for us because it helps us to understand the world and our place in it. It also helps us do fewer dumb things.

Fairness is good for us because human beings are wired with an innate sense of justice and equity. Whether this is a result of the design of a Creator or just a random fluke of evolution is irrelevant. If we treat others unjustly, it will cause us problems.

Temperance is good for us because it prevents us from destroying ourselves with our own excesses. Again, whether some Higher Power wills it or not, it’s a good idea.

Self-sacrifice is good for us because we need others in our lives, both for practical and mental health reasons. Altruism provides a tremendous survival benefit for us as a species and pays us emotional and personal dividends.

So whether or not there is any absolute morality, it is generally to our benefit to behave as though there was, so who cares? Having a code allows us to make the right (or more advantageous in the long term if you prefer) when our impulses in the moment may run in another direction. A very similar code will be applicable to 99.99999% of people as similar consequences will flow from similar actions. It may not be absolute morality, but it’s close enough to make no practical difference.

42

[quote]batman730 wrote:

[quote]DBCooper wrote:

[quote]batman730 wrote:
DB,

Regarding equating humility with weakness and subserviance: I completely disagree. Humility is extremely useful. It’s an effective inoculation against overconfidence and complacency, both of which can get you killed both literally and figuratively. Humility allows you to see your where your weaknesses lie, own them and begin to work on them without needing to wrestle with your ego. It allows you to be realistic with yourself because were all flawed and fallible. If pride makes you blind to this, you will be less effective in your life. Nemisis follows hubris and all. That’s not a human construct, it’s a description of a natural process at work that would happen whether or not one believed it would. In fact, it usually DOES happen to people who don’t believe it does.

The harder you push your limits the more likely you are to be exposed to people who are more talented than you, to have failures, setbacks and other “humbling” experiences. If those experiences don’t teach you that you are not perfect, invincible or even that big a deal then you are just not that bright IMO. Some of the most capable, competent people you will ever meet will often be the most humble, especially if their area of competency involves significant physical risk where overestimating your capabilities can have disastrous consequences.

Humility has the added benefit of causing you to tend to under-promise and over-deliver which I find to be extremely useful both in professional and personal settings. The guy who thinks he’s awesome and talks a great game will always come up short more often because reality doesn’t care how great you think you are. This is true so often that in my experience the more a guy talks himself up, the less I actually expect him to accomplish and I am rarely disappointed.

I don’t think humility is an artificial construct thrust upon us by our theoretical “betters” so much as it is the logical and intelligent conclusion to any honest self-assessment.[/quote]

All you’ve done is explain why humility is a virtue when it is in our best interests. Sure, humility is a virtue when it is good for me. Again, master morality.[/quote]

Most commonly held virtues also happen good for us, IMO just as most vices are self-injurious. I find this to be unsurprising.

Integrity/Fortitude is good for us because it allows us and those around us to trust ourselves to see things through in the face of adversity and hold true to our values and beliefs.

Wisdom is good for us because it helps us to understand the world and our place in it. It also helps us do fewer dumb things.

Fairness is good for us because human beings are wired with an innate sense of justice and equity. Whether this is a result of the design of a Creator or just a random fluke of evolution is irrelevant. If we treat others unjustly, it will cause us problems.

Temperance is good for us because it prevents us from destroying ourselves with our own excesses. Again, whether some Higher Power wills it or not, it’s a good idea.

Self-sacrifice is good for us because we need others in our lives, both for practical and mental health reasons. Altruism provides a tremendous survival benefit for us as a species and pays us emotional and personal dividends.

So whether or not there is any absolute morality, it is generally to our benefit to behave as though there was, so who cares? Having a code allows us to make the right (or more advantageous in the long term if you prefer) when our impulses in the moment may run in another direction. A very similar code will be applicable to 99.99999% of people as similar consequences will flow from similar actions. It may not be absolute morality, but it’s close enough to make no practical difference.

[/quote]

I disagree with virtually everything you’ve put forth here. Unfortunately, I don’t have time to address any of this in detail since it’s my favorite day of the week (snatch-grip high pull day) and it’s time to hit the gym. I’ll go into detail about why I disagree later.

43

Altruism is tricky- [quote] Much debate exists as to whether “true” altruism is possible. The theory of psychological egoism suggests that no act of sharing, helping or sacrificing can be described as truly altruistic, as the actor may receive an intrinsic reward in the form of personal gratification. The validity of this argument depends on whether intrinsic rewards qualify as “benefits.” [/quote]

Because we are human.

44

[quote]DBCooper wrote:
@Pat and Cortes:

You guys both argue that moral relativism is a myth, meaning that morality is definite and absolute instead. I know that you guys are Christians, and I assume this is the source of what you hold up as absolute morality. Tell me something. How do reconcile “thou shalt not kill” with the right to self-defense? How do you reconcile “thou shalt not kill” with your support of war, any war? Have you ever told a lie in your professional lives that was in pursuance of something good for you, your company, your paycheck, your earning potential, etc? How do reconcile that with “thou shalt not lie”? Has there ever been a time where you knew without a doubt that lying in a particular scenario was not bad at all, not immoral in that specific setting?[/quote]

Thou shall not murder.

And murder is a very specific kind of killing.

45

[quote]DBCooper wrote:

It would only be “good” for the person sick enough to commit such an act. [/quote]

Well, he wouldn’t be “sick,” then, would he? According to you, his morality dictates baby rape is okay. That just makes him different.

46

[quote]DBCooper wrote:

What about killing babies? Is that immoral in an absolute sense? What about an animal that eats her young? Is she immoral? Of course not, since she lacks the capacity to even begin to comprehend what is right and wrong. So, does that mean that a sociopath is incapable of moral or immoral action since he, too, is incapable of distinguishing between right and wrong?[/quote]

I will be happy to address all of this, but first I have a crucial point to make that everything else hinges upon.

48

[quote]Chushin wrote:
<swooosh!>

That was the sound of GL’s thread being whisked away…>[/quote]

Haha. I’d be happy to do this elsewhere. I’ve gone through this particular argument so many times on PWI it’s become rote to me.

49

OP:

Responsibility. To God, to family, to country/community, to oneself. Accepting our responsibility to these things in every situation improves the human condition.

50
  1. God/Faith
  2. Family
  3. Integrity
  4. pursuit of knowledge
  5. Personal/Career growth
51

530×520 54.4 KB

[quote]Gambit_Lost wrote:
Today I’m taking a little time to contemplate my core values. I’m trying to work it out with myself right now and I thought that getting the input, ideas, and humor from T-Men and T-Vixens might be a good idea.

  1. Family (including Marriage)
  2. Discipline
  3. Education
  4. Health and Fitness
  5. Service

PS Somewhat randomly, I found myself with more time than I had anticipated for the next 3 weeks or so. Having a little extra time, I decided to try to do something more useful than watching “Orange is the New Black” or reading another WEB Griffin book. So I found The Art of Manliness’ “30 Days to a Better Man” series. This task was the first article in the series. I plan to follow this along with Shugart’s “28days, 14 missions”. Anyway, that’s where this is coming from. [/quote]

Orange is the new black is awesome. and not just for the lesbian shit going on. Started watching yesterday…on episode 6 now.

Core values eh? Seems like as good a time in my life as any to evaluate and redefine. So things I value the most are:

  1. Power

  2. Self

  3. Knowledge

  4. Beauty

  5. Justice

  6. Respect (given and received)

  7. Self

52

[quote]Teledin wrote:
Self-reliance
Loyalty
Knowledge
Interdependence
Balance

Hard selection but if any of the above are out of whack it seriously kills my buzz.[/quote]

Good call on self reliance-would be top of my list too.

53

[quote]Cortes wrote:

[quote]DBCooper wrote:

As far as whether or not life is a zero sum game, I think your business’ competitors might have something to say about your example. Perhaps life isn’t a true zero sum game, but it has many, many characteristics of one. For every example you can provide showing that it is not a zero sum game, I can provide one showing that it is.
[/quote]

You don’t own a business, do you?

My strongest competitor in my town is a lion. Fierce as hell, tireless, and I CONSTANTLY underestimate him. And you know what? I thank God for him every day. Without him, I’d have rested on my laurels and worked at well below my potential for the past six years. However, because he IS so strong, I work FAR harder than I ever would to keep up and I know he is doing the same, and the final result is that BOTH of us are making a LOT more money than we would have otherwise, and a LARGE number of people who would otherwise have not been able to benefit from the excellent service we provide are now able to. That is a win-win-win for us and our community.

Zero sum, like some contrived Biblical absolute proscription on all killing, is a fairy tale. [/quote]

Great post! True for so many areas of life.

And great debate guys.Most intersting thread I think Ive seen on here.Looking forward to further expansion on the differing beliefs.

54

[quote]Cortes wrote:

[quote]DBCooper wrote:

What about killing babies? Is that immoral in an absolute sense? What about an animal that eats her young? Is she immoral? Of course not, since she lacks the capacity to even begin to comprehend what is right and wrong. So, does that mean that a sociopath is incapable of moral or immoral action since he, too, is incapable of distinguishing between right and wrong?[/quote]

I will be happy to address all of this, but first I have a crucial point to make that everything else hinges upon.[/quote]

Let me ask you this: what, in your mind, makes the raping of a baby (or anything else for that matter) “bad”? What is the prerequisite that must exist for anything to be “bad”?

55

[quote]orion wrote:

[quote]DBCooper wrote:
@Pat and Cortes:

You guys both argue that moral relativism is a myth, meaning that morality is definite and absolute instead. I know that you guys are Christians, and I assume this is the source of what you hold up as absolute morality. Tell me something. How do reconcile “thou shalt not kill” with the right to self-defense? How do you reconcile “thou shalt not kill” with your support of war, any war? Have you ever told a lie in your professional lives that was in pursuance of something good for you, your company, your paycheck, your earning potential, etc? How do reconcile that with “thou shalt not lie”? Has there ever been a time where you knew without a doubt that lying in a particular scenario was not bad at all, not immoral in that specific setting?[/quote]

Thou shall not murder.

And murder is a very specific kind of killing. [/quote]

Murder is unlawful killing. No matter what other qualifications are placed on a killing to make it “murder” the common thread between all definitions is that it is unlawful. So, who makes laws? Since murder must depend on laws to exist, what about when there were no laws? What about justice? Do you think that killing someone who raped your wife and daughter is immoral? It certainly is murder, and if murder is immoral, then exacting that sort of revenge is also immoral.

56

[quote]DBCooper wrote:

[quote]batman730 wrote:

[quote]DBCooper wrote:

[quote]batman730 wrote:
DB,

Regarding equating humility with weakness and subserviance: I completely disagree. Humility is extremely useful. It’s an effective inoculation against overconfidence and complacency, both of which can get you killed both literally and figuratively. Humility allows you to see your where your weaknesses lie, own them and begin to work on them without needing to wrestle with your ego. It allows you to be realistic with yourself because were all flawed and fallible. If pride makes you blind to this, you will be less effective in your life. Nemisis follows hubris and all. That’s not a human construct, it’s a description of a natural process at work that would happen whether or not one believed it would. In fact, it usually DOES happen to people who don’t believe it does.

The harder you push your limits the more likely you are to be exposed to people who are more talented than you, to have failures, setbacks and other “humbling” experiences. If those experiences don’t teach you that you are not perfect, invincible or even that big a deal then you are just not that bright IMO. Some of the most capable, competent people you will ever meet will often be the most humble, especially if their area of competency involves significant physical risk where overestimating your capabilities can have disastrous consequences.

Humility has the added benefit of causing you to tend to under-promise and over-deliver which I find to be extremely useful both in professional and personal settings. The guy who thinks he’s awesome and talks a great game will always come up short more often because reality doesn’t care how great you think you are. This is true so often that in my experience the more a guy talks himself up, the less I actually expect him to accomplish and I am rarely disappointed.

I don’t think humility is an artificial construct thrust upon us by our theoretical “betters” so much as it is the logical and intelligent conclusion to any honest self-assessment.[/quote]

All you’ve done is explain why humility is a virtue when it is in our best interests. Sure, humility is a virtue when it is good for me. Again, master morality.[/quote]

Most commonly held virtues also happen good for us, IMO just as most vices are self-injurious. I find this to be unsurprising.

Integrity/Fortitude is good for us because it allows us and those around us to trust ourselves to see things through in the face of adversity and hold true to our values and beliefs.

Wisdom is good for us because it helps us to understand the world and our place in it. It also helps us do fewer dumb things.

Fairness is good for us because human beings are wired with an innate sense of justice and equity. Whether this is a result of the design of a Creator or just a random fluke of evolution is irrelevant. If we treat others unjustly, it will cause us problems.

Temperance is good for us because it prevents us from destroying ourselves with our own excesses. Again, whether some Higher Power wills it or not, it’s a good idea.

Self-sacrifice is good for us because we need others in our lives, both for practical and mental health reasons. Altruism provides a tremendous survival benefit for us as a species and pays us emotional and personal dividends.

So whether or not there is any absolute morality, it is generally to our benefit to behave as though there was, so who cares? Having a code allows us to make the right (or more advantageous in the long term if you prefer) when our impulses in the moment may run in another direction. A very similar code will be applicable to 99.99999% of people as similar consequences will flow from similar actions. It may not be absolute morality, but it’s close enough to make no practical difference.

[/quote]

I disagree with virtually everything you’ve put forth here. Unfortunately, I don’t have time to address any of this in detail since it’s my favorite day of the week (snatch-grip high pull day) and it’s time to hit the gym. I’ll go into detail about why I disagree later.[/quote]

Sorry for the delay in responding.

  1. I don’t think it’s a coincidence at all that most commonly-held virtues are also good for us. I don’t know what vices has to do with any of this. Regardless, my point is only strengthened by your argument here. What is moral is what is good for us, perhaps not collectively, but on an individual basis. I make my own morality because I deem what is good for me to be moral.

  2. “Fairness is good for us because human beings are wired with an innate sense of justice and equity”
    I don’t know what to say about this one. I suppose you’re the neurological expert if you know how we’re “wired”. An innate sense of justice and equity? If we’re all wired with a sense of equity, then why do we spend so much time trying to avoid equitable circumstances? How often do we REALLY seek equity in our lives, especially if it means less for yourself so that others may have more? How often do we REALLY seek justice if it comes at our own expense? If we were wired this way, all of us, the world would not be what it is today. I think the fact that we have these massively detailed systems of law and government pretty much destroys any argument that we are wired with a sense of equity and justice. Either that or, despite our atavistic sense of those virtues, we ignore them on a regular basis.

  3. I agree that we cannot live outside of society and that interaction with others is good for us. But you’re really starting to make my point for me with all these virtues you’re listing off. Of course self-sacrifice, temperance, fairness and so forth are virtues. You’ve said yourself now on several occasions that they are virtues and that they are good for us. THAT is what makes them virtuous, in my opinion. How often do we pursue these virtues at our own expense? If the fair thing to do is not good for me and so I do not act fairly, is this immoral? And if it IS immoral, doesn’t that mean that acting in one’s own self-interest rather than out of purely altruistic reasons is immoral as well? And if acting out of self-interest is immoral, and it can be agreed upon that disregarding self-interest is damaging to one’s life, does this “morality” eventually celebrate death and not life?

I think your logic necessarily leads to a celebration of death, or other less drastic results regarding our lives, rather than life. Without life, there is no morality. Morality did not exist on this planet before humans came along. Was it immoral for a dinosaur to prey on smaller, weaker dinosaurs in order to eat and survive?

Also, let’s dispense with the whole altruism-as-a-virtue thing. Altruism doesn’t exist, and it certainly doesn’t exist when we do “altruistic” things out of self-preservation. That isn’t what altruism is about.

57

[quote]DBCooper wrote:

[quote]Cortes wrote:

[quote]DBCooper wrote:

What about killing babies? Is that immoral in an absolute sense? What about an animal that eats her young? Is she immoral? Of course not, since she lacks the capacity to even begin to comprehend what is right and wrong. So, does that mean that a sociopath is incapable of moral or immoral action since he, too, is incapable of distinguishing between right and wrong?[/quote]

I will be happy to address all of this, but first I have a crucial point to make that everything else hinges upon.[/quote]

Let me ask you this: what, in your mind, makes the raping of a baby (or anything else for that matter) “bad”? What is the prerequisite that must exist for anything to be “bad”?[/quote]

It doesn’t matter what I think. I’m not being evasive or coy. It just doesn’t matter.

What I’m trying to establish is that you are a moral absolutist just like I am.

You know, in your heart, that certain acts are inherently evil. Your qualification with the word “sick” demonstrates that.

Just because something can be explained away as the result of something else does not negate the inherent wrongness of the act itself.

58

[quote]Cortes wrote:

[quote]DBCooper wrote:

[quote]Cortes wrote:

[quote]DBCooper wrote:

What about killing babies? Is that immoral in an absolute sense? What about an animal that eats her young? Is she immoral? Of course not, since she lacks the capacity to even begin to comprehend what is right and wrong. So, does that mean that a sociopath is incapable of moral or immoral action since he, too, is incapable of distinguishing between right and wrong?[/quote]

I will be happy to address all of this, but first I have a crucial point to make that everything else hinges upon.[/quote]

Let me ask you this: what, in your mind, makes the raping of a baby (or anything else for that matter) “bad”? What is the prerequisite that must exist for anything to be “bad”?[/quote]

It doesn’t matter what I think. I’m not being evasive or coy. It just doesn’t matter.

What I’m trying to establish is that you are a moral absolutist just like I am.

You know, in your heart, that certain acts are inherently evil. Your qualification with the word “sick” demonstrates that.

Just because something can be explained away as the result of something else does not negate the inherent wrongness of the act itself. [/quote]

I’m not so egotistical to think that just because I feel a certain way, that feeling is an absolute that has existed far before humans did and will continue to exist far after we are gone.

So I ask you again, what is it that makes raping a baby absolutely “bad”?

59

To be clear, you’re asking a different question before we’ve firmly established the first. We need to determine that a morality does indeed exist first, then we can determine whence it arises.

Otherwise, it will be like arguing Bible quotes with an atheist.

60

[quote]DBCooper wrote:

[quote]Cortes wrote:

[quote]DBCooper wrote:

[quote]Cortes wrote:

[quote]DBCooper wrote:

What about killing babies? Is that immoral in an absolute sense? What about an animal that eats her young? Is she immoral? Of course not, since she lacks the capacity to even begin to comprehend what is right and wrong. So, does that mean that a sociopath is incapable of moral or immoral action since he, too, is incapable of distinguishing between right and wrong?[/quote]

I will be happy to address all of this, but first I have a crucial point to make that everything else hinges upon.[/quote]

Let me ask you this: what, in your mind, makes the raping of a baby (or anything else for that matter) “bad”? What is the prerequisite that must exist for anything to be “bad”?[/quote]

It doesn’t matter what I think. I’m not being evasive or coy. It just doesn’t matter.

What I’m trying to establish is that you are a moral absolutist just like I am.

You know, in your heart, that certain acts are inherently evil. Your qualification with the word “sick” demonstrates that.

Just because something can be explained away as the result of something else does not negate the inherent wrongness of the act itself. [/quote]

I’m not so egotistical to think that just because I feel a certain way, that feeling is an absolute that has existed far before humans did and will continue to exist far after we are gone.

So I ask you again, what is it that makes raping a baby absolutely “bad”?[/quote]

I’ll answer yours as soon as you give me a firm answer to mine.

I’m not asking about your feelings. I’m asking if you believe the act is wrong in any case. Yes or no? I’m not trying to trick you.

*edited typo