Can Science Determine Moral Values?

Discussion of Skeptic magazine and Letters to the Editor
FredLewis
New Member
Posts: 5
Joined: Wed Mar 02, 2016 6:57 pm

Can Science Determine Moral Values?

Postby FredLewis » Wed Mar 16, 2016 12:34 pm

It might be interesting to know how participants in the Trolley Problem would act if they had a choice of either pushing the heavy man or throwing themselves onto the tracks.

User avatar
TJrandom
Has More Than 7K Posts
Posts: 7649
Joined: Sat Aug 23, 2014 10:55 am
Location: Pacific coast outside of Tokyo bay.
Contact:

Re: Can Science Determine Moral Values?

Postby TJrandom » Wed Mar 16, 2016 1:34 pm

Are you the fat man?

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
Has No Life
Posts: 11148
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am

Re: Can Science Determine Moral Values?

Postby bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Wed Mar 16, 2016 1:50 pm

Isn't the hypothetical well know because of the well known answer?
Real Name: bobbo the existential pragmatic evangelical anti-theist and Class Warrior.
Asking: What is the most good for the most people?
Sample Issue: Should the Feds provide all babies with free diapers?

User avatar
ElectricMonk
Persistent Poster
Posts: 3313
Joined: Thu Mar 26, 2015 6:21 pm
Custom Title: His Beatitude

Re: Can Science Determine Moral Values?

Postby ElectricMonk » Wed Mar 16, 2016 1:51 pm

The trolley test is bull - all it shows is what people think they ought to say, with no connection to their actual utilitarianism.
I've come up with a set of rules that describe our reactions to technologies:
Spoiler:
1. Anything that is in the world when you’re born is normal and ordinary and is just a natural part of the way the world works.
2. Anything that's invented between when you’re fifteen and thirty-five is new and exciting and revolutionary and you can probably get a career in it.
3. Anything invented after you're thirty-five is against the natural order of things.
- Douglas Adams

User avatar
OutOfBreath
Veteran Poster
Posts: 2064
Joined: Sat Jan 22, 2011 1:38 pm
Custom Title: Persistent ponderer
Location: Norway

Re: Can Science Determine Moral Values?

Postby OutOfBreath » Wed Mar 16, 2016 2:06 pm

ElectricMonk wrote:The trolley test is bull - all it shows is what people think they ought to say, with no connection to their actual utilitarianism.

There's some truth to that. Even if I could rationalise killing fewer overall, I couldn't have persuaded my arms to actually do the push. And I would in no way have the "perfect information" that it would work.

So, theoretically, yes. In practice, no.

Peace
Dan
What is perceived as real becomes real in its consequences.

"Every judgment teeters on the brink of error. To claim absolute knowledge is to become monstrous. Knowledge is an unending adventure at the edge of uncertainty." - Frank Herbert

User avatar
Poodle
Has More Than 8K Posts
Posts: 8245
Joined: Sun Jul 31, 2011 9:12 pm
Custom Title: Regular sleeper
Location: NE corner of my living room

Re: Can Science Determine Moral Values?

Postby Poodle » Wed Mar 16, 2016 4:18 pm

I had to look up what the fat man thing was all about.

It seems straightforward to me. Assuming I KNOW that the fat man wouldn't bounce out of the way and would certainly stop the truck and die, then it would be straightforward murder if I pushed him - the circumstances are irrelevant.

This being the case, I would try to talk the fat man into jumping voluntarily. The dilemma is now his.

User avatar
Gord
Real Skeptic
Posts: 29477
Joined: Wed Apr 29, 2009 2:44 am
Custom Title: Silent Ork
Location: Transcona

Re: Can Science Determine Moral Values?

Postby Gord » Wed Mar 16, 2016 7:56 pm

Poodle wrote:I had to look up what the fat man thing was all about.

It seems straightforward to me. Assuming I KNOW that the fat man wouldn't bounce out of the way and would certainly stop the truck and die, then it would be straightforward murder if I pushed him - the circumstances are irrelevant.

This being the case, I would try to talk the fat man into jumping voluntarily. The dilemma is now his.

What if you eat the fat man, then jump in front of the trolley out of shame for having eaten the fat man?

Problem: Solved!
"Knowledge grows through infinite timelessness" -- the random fictional Deepak Chopra quote site
"You are also taking my words out of context." -- Justin
"Nullius in verba" -- The Royal Society ["take nobody's word for it"]
#ANDAMOVIE

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
Has No Life
Posts: 11148
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am

Re: Can Science Determine Moral Values?

Postby bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Wed Mar 16, 2016 9:33 pm

Poodle wrote:I had to look up what the fat man thing was all about.

It seems straightforward to me. Assuming I KNOW that the fat man wouldn't bounce out of the way and would certainly stop the truck and die, then it would be straightforward murder if I pushed him - the circumstances are irrelevant.

This being the case, I would try to talk the fat man into jumping voluntarily. The dilemma is now his.

Are you keeping the distinction between murder and homicide clearly in mind when calling it murder? Most people don't. Of course, the argument in court would be extreme circumstances, protection of others, temporary insanity ...all kinds of defenses to a charge of murder.

I don't even see any hypocrisy in not jumping oneself. When just about everyone would do the same, that IS the morality of the hypothetical choice.
Real Name: bobbo the existential pragmatic evangelical anti-theist and Class Warrior.
Asking: What is the most good for the most people?
Sample Issue: Should the Feds provide all babies with free diapers?

User avatar
TJrandom
Has More Than 7K Posts
Posts: 7649
Joined: Sat Aug 23, 2014 10:55 am
Location: Pacific coast outside of Tokyo bay.
Contact:

Re: Can Science Determine Moral Values?

Postby TJrandom » Wed Mar 16, 2016 10:53 pm

Gord wrote:
Poodle wrote:I had to look up what the fat man thing was all about.

It seems straightforward to me. Assuming I KNOW that the fat man wouldn't bounce out of the way and would certainly stop the truck and die, then it would be straightforward murder if I pushed him - the circumstances are irrelevant.

This being the case, I would try to talk the fat man into jumping voluntarily. The dilemma is now his.

What if you eat the fat man, then jump in front of the trolley out of shame for having eaten the fat man?

Problem: Solved!


Just ask the fat man to move and thus tilt the tracks, so that the trolly starts to roll in the other direction.... :oldman:

User avatar
Poodle
Has More Than 8K Posts
Posts: 8245
Joined: Sun Jul 31, 2011 9:12 pm
Custom Title: Regular sleeper
Location: NE corner of my living room

Re: Can Science Determine Moral Values?

Postby Poodle » Wed Mar 16, 2016 11:32 pm

bobbo_the_Pragmatist wrote:... Are you keeping the distinction between murder and homicide clearly in mind when calling it murder? Most people don't. Of course, the argument in court would be extreme circumstances, protection of others, temporary insanity ...all kinds of defenses to a charge of murder.

I don't even see any hypocrisy in not jumping oneself. When just about everyone would do the same, that IS the morality of the hypothetical choice.


I'm in the UK, bobbo. We have murder, voluntary manslaughter and involuntary manslaughter (and culpable homicide only in Scotland). The situation described could never be involuntary manslaughter. The other two ... it depends upon how the Criminal Prosecution Service feels that day.

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
Has No Life
Posts: 11148
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am

Re: Can Science Determine Moral Values?

Postby bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Wed Mar 16, 2016 11:44 pm

Shirley you have insanity? I've seen it in the pits of Parliment???? No defense of self or others?

We better check the Magna Carter because we have that here in the USA which is based on English Common Law so surely you have it there being Home base and all?

So====you have a mental block in your mind regarding the distinction. Every death in the UK is a murder of some sort?

Remind me to push fat men onto roads, only in America. You know---both our road system and getting fat are based on the Roman Model? Those Eye Talians have a lot to answer for.
Real Name: bobbo the existential pragmatic evangelical anti-theist and Class Warrior.
Asking: What is the most good for the most people?
Sample Issue: Should the Feds provide all babies with free diapers?

User avatar
Gord
Real Skeptic
Posts: 29477
Joined: Wed Apr 29, 2009 2:44 am
Custom Title: Silent Ork
Location: Transcona

Re: Can Science Determine Moral Values?

Postby Gord » Thu Mar 17, 2016 10:52 am

Murder is a form of homicide.
"Knowledge grows through infinite timelessness" -- the random fictional Deepak Chopra quote site
"You are also taking my words out of context." -- Justin
"Nullius in verba" -- The Royal Society ["take nobody's word for it"]
#ANDAMOVIE

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
Has No Life
Posts: 11148
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am

Re: Can Science Determine Moral Values?

Postby bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Thu Mar 17, 2016 11:01 am

Exactly, which read backwards means that not all homicides are murder---the current brain fart position of Poodle.
Real Name: bobbo the existential pragmatic evangelical anti-theist and Class Warrior.
Asking: What is the most good for the most people?
Sample Issue: Should the Feds provide all babies with free diapers?

User avatar
Gord
Real Skeptic
Posts: 29477
Joined: Wed Apr 29, 2009 2:44 am
Custom Title: Silent Ork
Location: Transcona

Re: Can Science Determine Moral Values?

Postby Gord » Thu Mar 17, 2016 11:09 am

Okay, but did you read the link?
"Knowledge grows through infinite timelessness" -- the random fictional Deepak Chopra quote site
"You are also taking my words out of context." -- Justin
"Nullius in verba" -- The Royal Society ["take nobody's word for it"]
#ANDAMOVIE

User avatar
Poodle
Has More Than 8K Posts
Posts: 8245
Joined: Sun Jul 31, 2011 9:12 pm
Custom Title: Regular sleeper
Location: NE corner of my living room

Re: Can Science Determine Moral Values?

Postby Poodle » Thu Mar 17, 2016 11:26 am

bobbo_the_Pragmatist wrote:Exactly, which read backwards means that not all homicides are murder---the current brain fart position of Poodle.


Quite right, bobbo. That's why I told you about it. Under English Law, not all homicides are murder. All murders, however, are homicides. If you tell me what you don't understand about that, I'll attempt to explain it to you. I blame the banana juice.

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
Has No Life
Posts: 11148
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am

Re: Can Science Determine Moral Values?

Postby bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Thu Mar 17, 2016 11:38 am

Poodle, you are going to have to explain that to me. The Fat Man is thrown into the roadway and you call it murder with no allowance for any other outcome. BEFORE charges are even leveled. No presumption of innocence? The first Bobby on the scene may have relatives in the protected crowd of people and give our hero a medal???

so yeah--how do you get to murder ignoring as if they don't even exist the other forms of homicide?

I am getting a slight buzz off the banana wine and it goes well mixed with my ice tea formula. It seems to me it freezes inbetween the hardness of beer and wine and yet alcohol does not drain off of the ice...its more hard set within the ice if that makes any sense. ie--no cold distillation and I have to wonder if running a hot still is worth it. Can't wait for my jydrometer to get here. A fun hobby for sure.
Real Name: bobbo the existential pragmatic evangelical anti-theist and Class Warrior.
Asking: What is the most good for the most people?
Sample Issue: Should the Feds provide all babies with free diapers?

User avatar
Poodle
Has More Than 8K Posts
Posts: 8245
Joined: Sun Jul 31, 2011 9:12 pm
Custom Title: Regular sleeper
Location: NE corner of my living room

Re: Can Science Determine Moral Values?

Postby Poodle » Thu Mar 17, 2016 11:59 am

bobbo_the_Pragmatist wrote:Poodle, you are going to have to explain that to me. The Fat Man is thrown into the roadway and you call it murder with no allowance for any other outcome. BEFORE charges are even leveled. No presumption of innocence? The first Bobby on the scene may have relatives in the protected crowd of people and give our hero a medal???

so yeah--how do you get to murder ignoring as if they don't even exist the other forms of homicide? ...


Ah, but the original statement of the facts - the setting up of the moral dilemma - tells us everything we need to know. Any argument or justification which may subsequently come up in a court of law isn't relevant. The facts, as stated, are clear. I know them all before the event and, in that event, I knowingly and intentionally take an action which can only result in the death of the fat man in a situation where the fat man was threatening no one in any way. He is an innocent bystander, and I decide to take his life. I am sane, I have not lost my temper, and there is prior intent to kill. Open and shut case - black and white - clear as a bell. It's murder. The extenuating circumstances MAY serve to reduce my sentence, but there's no other possible verdict.

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
Has No Life
Posts: 11148
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am

Re: Can Science Determine Moral Values?

Postby bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Thu Mar 17, 2016 12:22 pm

So---you are totally untouched by any moral dilemma? Ha, ha. For whatever reason, you see only one position. You might think about that some.

Meanwhile......as it is a moral dilemma....presenting a conflict of interests upon contemplation, you will have one vote on a jury of 12, or what have you.

The defendant obviously lacks the moral component of murder meaning the unjustified taking of a human life. THE WHOLE POINT of the dilemma/hypothetical is that there IS a justification. the defendant was not motivated to take a life at all but rather was motivated to save the lives of many.

Its a DILEMMA, seeing only one side ignores the other. We have all the facts...... just not the shared values.

Just look.
Real Name: bobbo the existential pragmatic evangelical anti-theist and Class Warrior.
Asking: What is the most good for the most people?
Sample Issue: Should the Feds provide all babies with free diapers?

User avatar
Poodle
Has More Than 8K Posts
Posts: 8245
Joined: Sun Jul 31, 2011 9:12 pm
Custom Title: Regular sleeper
Location: NE corner of my living room

Re: Can Science Determine Moral Values?

Postby Poodle » Thu Mar 17, 2016 12:34 pm

The dilemma is in the wording, bobbo, and is intended to be. In reality, you cannot possibly KNOW that the truck will hit the people tied on the line, as that event is in the future. There could be a sudden shout of "Cut - that's a wrap", the truck slamming to a halt and the film crew releasing the "victims". Richard Branson's latest space vehicle test could have gone wrong and a large flying vehicle could have slammed into the truck, knocking it off the line. The Royal Marines could have been exercising in the vicinity and a loose rocket-propelled grenade could blow the truck up. The truck may plough into the first person on the line and the other four could be pushed out of the way by the body of the recently deceased.

The dilemma presupposes that there is a certainty in the future when, in fact, there is not.

Turn it around a little - YOU are the fat man. Are you going to jump?

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
Has No Life
Posts: 11148
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am

Re: Can Science Determine Moral Values?

Postby bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Thu Mar 17, 2016 1:39 pm

A clear and express failure to engage the hypothetical.

There are reasons for that...... none of them good.
Real Name: bobbo the existential pragmatic evangelical anti-theist and Class Warrior.
Asking: What is the most good for the most people?
Sample Issue: Should the Feds provide all babies with free diapers?

User avatar
Poodle
Has More Than 8K Posts
Posts: 8245
Joined: Sun Jul 31, 2011 9:12 pm
Custom Title: Regular sleeper
Location: NE corner of my living room

Re: Can Science Determine Moral Values?

Postby Poodle » Thu Mar 17, 2016 2:18 pm

Yes - but would you jump?

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
Has No Life
Posts: 11148
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am

Re: Can Science Determine Moral Values?

Postby bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Thu Mar 17, 2016 2:59 pm

The Trolly hypo that I know has no one jumping. I first heard a variant/original of this when studying existentialism inlcuding the famous phrase from Sarte: "We were never more free than during the Nazi Occupation." That hypo ofcourse is Sophies choice: choose who lives and dies or they both do, and variations thereon. Existentialism hold that you do not make a choice to kill and thereby the choice and moral opprobrium lays on other people. Ha, ha===>Reality/pragmatism is that two die as a result of your own failure to exercise your will. Something other strains of existentialism champion as the main effect of the meaninglessness of the Universe.

Fun to dither with. If by would I jump you mean would I kill myself to save five others?====> of course not. And I would not expect anyone else to either. Its the nature of man.
Real Name: bobbo the existential pragmatic evangelical anti-theist and Class Warrior.
Asking: What is the most good for the most people?
Sample Issue: Should the Feds provide all babies with free diapers?

FredLewis
New Member
Posts: 5
Joined: Wed Mar 02, 2016 6:57 pm

Re: Can Science Determine Moral Values?

Postby FredLewis » Fri Mar 18, 2016 2:43 pm

ElectricMonk wrote:The trolley test is bull - all it shows is what people think they ought to say, with no connection to their actual utilitarianism.


There may be some truth to this but surely there are people whose action in reality would be the same as their hypothetical action. It would also be useful to study the relationship between hypothetical action and actual action if a humane experiment could be devised to do so.

User avatar
ElectricMonk
Persistent Poster
Posts: 3313
Joined: Thu Mar 26, 2015 6:21 pm
Custom Title: His Beatitude

Re: Can Science Determine Moral Values?

Postby ElectricMonk » Fri Mar 18, 2016 3:52 pm

The trolley test supposes perfect knowledge - the one thing we never have in real-life moral questions. And not only knowledge of all the relevant facts of the situation, but also the outcome of our actions. This makes it really nothing more than mental masturbation (for those who like that sort of thing).

If you sprinkle the test with ethnic minorities as the victims/saved ones, the test at least shows you the level of hypocrisy of the participants.

in case anyone has some spare time, this is somewhat on topic:
http://verybadwizards.com/episodes/6
listener discretion advised.
I've come up with a set of rules that describe our reactions to technologies:
Spoiler:
1. Anything that is in the world when you’re born is normal and ordinary and is just a natural part of the way the world works.
2. Anything that's invented between when you’re fifteen and thirty-five is new and exciting and revolutionary and you can probably get a career in it.
3. Anything invented after you're thirty-five is against the natural order of things.
- Douglas Adams

User avatar
Gord
Real Skeptic
Posts: 29477
Joined: Wed Apr 29, 2009 2:44 am
Custom Title: Silent Ork
Location: Transcona

Re: Can Science Determine Moral Values?

Postby Gord » Fri Mar 18, 2016 8:48 pm

ElectricMonk wrote:in case anyone has some spare time, this is somewhat on topic:
http://verybadwizards.com/episodes/6
listener discretion advised.

Is that an hour long??
"Knowledge grows through infinite timelessness" -- the random fictional Deepak Chopra quote site
"You are also taking my words out of context." -- Justin
"Nullius in verba" -- The Royal Society ["take nobody's word for it"]
#ANDAMOVIE

User avatar
Poodle
Has More Than 8K Posts
Posts: 8245
Joined: Sun Jul 31, 2011 9:12 pm
Custom Title: Regular sleeper
Location: NE corner of my living room

Re: Can Science Determine Moral Values?

Postby Poodle » Fri Mar 18, 2016 10:03 pm

FredLewis wrote:
ElectricMonk wrote:The trolley test is bull - all it shows is what people think they ought to say, with no connection to their actual utilitarianism.


There may be some truth to this but surely there are people whose action in reality would be the same as their hypothetical action. It would also be useful to study the relationship between hypothetical action and actual action if a humane experiment could be devised to do so.


How definite is "surely"?

I'm with EM. I see no point in setting up a situation, gifting the subject with impossible knowledge, and then attempting to draw meaningful conclusions. It's an amusing aside, but that's all.

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
Has No Life
Posts: 11148
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am

Re: Can Science Determine Moral Values?

Postby bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Sat Mar 19, 2016 10:45 am

Ummmm...."failure to engage the hypothetical" running rampant on this one.

Are you all really such an unimaginative lot? Unable to engage in any introspection at all??

.........................and THEN...... poo pooh those who do?????

Well....thats a blast of reality more heinous and revealing than any hypothetical: "Imagine you are asked a question that can be avoided by complaining it requires perfect knowledge: what would you do?" Ha, ha.

What would you do??? Can't instill any "values" into my kiddies because I don't have perfect knowledge. Thats the ticket!

Its called empathy, honesty, introspection. If you can't do it....................... maybe you should practice. Who know what might result?
Real Name: bobbo the existential pragmatic evangelical anti-theist and Class Warrior.
Asking: What is the most good for the most people?
Sample Issue: Should the Feds provide all babies with free diapers?

User avatar
Poodle
Has More Than 8K Posts
Posts: 8245
Joined: Sun Jul 31, 2011 9:12 pm
Custom Title: Regular sleeper
Location: NE corner of my living room

Re: Can Science Determine Moral Values?

Postby Poodle » Sat Mar 19, 2016 11:18 am

bobbo_the_Pragmatist wrote:Ummmm...."failure to engage the hypothetical" running rampant on this one ... Its called empathy, honesty, introspection. If you can't do it....................... maybe you should practice. Who know what might result?


No - it's refusal to engage the impossible in anything other than a mildly amused manner. The entire premise of the 'moral dilemma' is prescience to an impossible degree. There's nothing anti-empathic or dishonest about it.

Let's add just a little extra. What if the fat man was replaced by a fat member of an alien race which had just successfully and violently invaded the Earth, and killing him to save five humans would result in 1000 revenge killings in Turkmenistan (except if it's Tuesday which happens to be the aliens' Be Kind To A Human Day)? Oh gosh, what a moral problem!

You may think that my extension takes the 'problem' beyond the bounds of the ridiculous. I agree - but that has already been done in awarding an amazing ability to see into the future in the original situation.

Moral values are real. We do not establish them by considering fantasies.

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
Has No Life
Posts: 11148
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am

Re: Can Science Determine Moral Values?

Postby bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Sat Mar 19, 2016 12:36 pm

Lets parse:

No - it's refusal to engage /// good, you agree there is a willful refusal...

the impossible //// Gee...the studies usually report how the participant do in considering the hypo. More lack of empathy of the VERY WORST kind: "If I don't do it, or don't like it, .... then its impossible."

in anything other than a mildly amused manner. /// Oh....please accept my own testimony. Once engaged, I'm entirely as serious as I can be. Thats the whole point, the benefit. Its like saying exercise doesn't work and is silly if you refuse to engage the dumbbells. See the parallel or is that impossible too?

The entire premise of the 'moral dilemma' is prescience to an impossible degree. /// Thats just silly. The premise is to provide real world circumstances that can be considered for various issues or elements. The predictive accuracies os what would actually be done is actually very low on the list. There is never ONE hypothestical, but rather a series. Is the same moral consideration present or not etc. EG--the different answers you get if the Group of Five is strangers or family members. If the Fat Man is an innocent or an escaped murderer or the man that rigged the train track/truck or what have you.

There's nothing anti-empathic or dishonest about it. //// Its definitional. What is common is that if you refuse to engage what faculties you have, you have near zero credibility in poo poohing its uses.

What else is a political race? Who are you going to vote for except the contemplation of imperfect knowledge.?

Know what I mean?????.........Ha, ha. In context, of course you don't. But.... you engage none the less.

How come?
Real Name: bobbo the existential pragmatic evangelical anti-theist and Class Warrior.
Asking: What is the most good for the most people?
Sample Issue: Should the Feds provide all babies with free diapers?

User avatar
Poodle
Has More Than 8K Posts
Posts: 8245
Joined: Sun Jul 31, 2011 9:12 pm
Custom Title: Regular sleeper
Location: NE corner of my living room

Re: Can Science Determine Moral Values?

Postby Poodle » Sat Mar 19, 2016 1:21 pm

I can only conclude, bobbo, that we're not reading the same thread.

Look at the thread title. The answer, in this case, is no - because a scientifically achievable situation has not been presented for reasons I have already stated. If the title had been "Can Fantasy Determine Moral Values", the answer may have been 'possibly'. But that's another situation and another discussion.

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
Has No Life
Posts: 11148
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am

Re: Can Science Determine Moral Values?

Postby bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Sat Mar 19, 2016 1:56 pm

Attitudinal self reporting surveys are used all the time.

If you don't want to play....... that is your right. All kinds of variations to answer all the nay-sayers, should the interest to do so be present. Usually, its not. Any test/activity/thought process will have those who refuse to engage..... with an equal number of excuses as to why not.

As with most things in life, you get out in proportion to what you put it.

As alluded to, my earlier study of existentialism presented many moral/life situations along with analysis of what different outcomes might represent. The weight lifting sharpened my own moral compass. Depending on the hypo, I know what I should do, would do, prefer to do, can't answer and so forth. Like any skill, practice makes better.

Or you can look to everything but yourself.
Real Name: bobbo the existential pragmatic evangelical anti-theist and Class Warrior.
Asking: What is the most good for the most people?
Sample Issue: Should the Feds provide all babies with free diapers?

User avatar
Scott Mayers
Veteran Poster
Posts: 2331
Joined: Sun Dec 30, 2012 4:56 pm
Custom Title: Deep

Re: Can Science Determine Moral Values?

Postby Scott Mayers » Sat Mar 19, 2016 2:17 pm

FredLewis wrote:It might be interesting to know how participants in the Trolley Problem would act if they had a choice of either pushing the heavy man or throwing themselves onto the tracks.

How about waiting for the train to pass then push the man over anyways? 8-)
I eat without fear of certain Death from The Tree of Knowledge because with wisdom, we may one day break free from its mortal curse.

User avatar
Poodle
Has More Than 8K Posts
Posts: 8245
Joined: Sun Jul 31, 2011 9:12 pm
Custom Title: Regular sleeper
Location: NE corner of my living room

Re: Can Science Determine Moral Values?

Postby Poodle » Sat Mar 19, 2016 2:53 pm

Bobbo, the question so cunningly disguised in a fairy tale is "Are there any circumstances at all in which you would murder another person?". Not just kill, but murder. To place people in physically impossible situations and then ask if those circumstances affect the answer is drivel, for the very obvious reason that you cannot be in that situation and therefore the question is meaningless - logically, scientifically, philologically, whatever -ally you like. I've already pointed out that just about anything could happen between you pushing that poor, unfortunate fat man to his death and the moment of denouement. The information necessary to make any moral evaluation possible is not there.

The 'moral' answer is, necessarily, "No, I would not push the poor bastard off the bridge". Anything else means you are saying that you would make life-changing decisions on the basis of extremely sparse information. What kind of moral code is that?

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
Has No Life
Posts: 11148
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am

Re: Can Science Determine Moral Values?

Postby bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Sat Mar 19, 2016 4:11 pm

Poodle!====3rd or 4th time: I recognize you refuse to deal with the Hypothetical. It makes you "uncomfortable" and has you nattering on about your justifications and rationale. THATS FINE. A certain % always do..... like I refuse to answer poll questions "either/or" or two choices when my real answer, almost always, is mostly one answer but with substantial caveats. But I don't go further and claim that no one else has the clarity/simplicity of mind to answer. Silly that you do.

If I (and you if you would) answer a question that you would kill a stranger to save five strangers, but not yourself, but you would kill yourself to save 5 family members....... how is that not instructive in personality assessment compared to others who give other types of answers?

I mean really!====you are fudging like someone who has killed in the past and doesn't want to face his devils.... or some kind of engineer.

..........Ha, ha.
Real Name: bobbo the existential pragmatic evangelical anti-theist and Class Warrior.
Asking: What is the most good for the most people?
Sample Issue: Should the Feds provide all babies with free diapers?

User avatar
Poodle
Has More Than 8K Posts
Posts: 8245
Joined: Sun Jul 31, 2011 9:12 pm
Custom Title: Regular sleeper
Location: NE corner of my living room

Re: Can Science Determine Moral Values?

Postby Poodle » Sat Mar 19, 2016 4:32 pm

3rd or 4th time back at you. It ain't fudging to recognise that what people say they would do in a hypothetical but impossible situation is irrelevant and immaterial. Once again, how can your belief in how you would react in a situation you can't possibly get into be instructive in anything but a fantasy world? It has no bearing upon the real world and, in the hope that morality may actually mean something real, no bearing upon what your true moral standpoint is. Nil. Zilch. You learn absolutely nothing from this pointless exercise. It's not about morals at all. It's about market research, and just as instructive.

Anyway - you're not going to see it my way. I've decided to jump off the bridge myself. I am thus next only to the Big JC himself in moral rectitude and you cannot, therefore, disagree with me any longer. Please refer any further discussion to my dad, who will deal with your morals accordingly.

FredLewis
New Member
Posts: 5
Joined: Wed Mar 02, 2016 6:57 pm

Re: Can Science Determine Moral Values?

Postby FredLewis » Sat Mar 19, 2016 10:46 pm

Poodle wrote:3rd or 4th time back at you. It ain't fudging to recognise that what people say they would do in a hypothetical but impossible situation is irrelevant and immaterial. Once again, how can your belief in how you would react in a situation you can't possibly get into be instructive in anything but a fantasy world? It has no bearing upon the real world and, in the hope that morality may actually mean something real, no bearing upon what your true moral standpoint is. Nil. Zilch. You learn absolutely nothing from this pointless exercise. It's not about morals at all. It's about market research, and just as instructive.

Anyway - you're not going to see it my way. I've decided to jump off the bridge myself. I am thus next only to the Big JC himself in moral rectitude and you cannot, therefore, disagree with me any longer. Please refer any further discussion to my dad, who will deal with your morals accordingly.


I do not believe the situation is impossible though it may be unlikely. Hypothetical situations are useful in science. All theories in science were once hypotheses. Thought experiments are hypothetical situations.

What if one of the doomed individuals standing on the tracks was the child of the one who could throw the switch or push the man?

User avatar
Poodle
Has More Than 8K Posts
Posts: 8245
Joined: Sun Jul 31, 2011 9:12 pm
Custom Title: Regular sleeper
Location: NE corner of my living room

Re: Can Science Determine Moral Values?

Postby Poodle » Sat Mar 19, 2016 11:43 pm

Hi Fred ...

The base situation is not impossible. After that point, we seem to disagree. The impossible stuff is the knowledge of the outcome of all the possible events stemming from the base situation. They, of course could go on forever. For instance, I could add that the fat man is the sole provider for 238 destitute children who will all starve to death in short order if he doesn't get home. Or, one of the examples I gave to bobbo, it all turns out to be a film set but I don't find that out until after I've sent the fat man to his death.

What it boils down to is "Would you push this man off a bridge, knowing there is a certainty that he will die a messy death, to prevent a set of messy deaths which may not occur in the first place?" There is only one logical answer, and I think it's identical to the 'morally correct' answer. No, you wouldn't.

If you now extend the problem by insisting that you magically KNOW that the multiple deaths will be the direct result of the survival of the fat man, then you have morphed a genuine moral dilemma into unreality. In that world, the choice is obvious - but it's a world in which moral decisions are somehow preordained and therefore not moral decisions at all, but logical ones. You have changed Captain Kirk into Commander Spock.

I cannot accept that asking such a question tells you anything about the morality of the people asked. What you DO get are the responses people think you're looking for - not at all the same thing.

However, it's an enjoyable thread.

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
Has No Life
Posts: 11148
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am

Re: Can Science Determine Moral Values?

Postby bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Sun Mar 20, 2016 3:17 am

3rd or 4th time back at you. It ain't fudging to recognise that what people say they would do in a hypothetical but impossible situation is irrelevant and immaterial. //// But the whole point is that you are OBJECTIVELY wrong on thinking that some level of ambiguity or impossibility is a large factor in our daily lives and morality.

Once again, how can your belief in how you would react in a situation you can't possibly get into be instructive in anything but a fantasy world? //// You miss the "mechanics" of how these studies are conducted. Its never one question, but a series of questions. I thought of this reading several unrelated issues about sampling and sampling errors. Any measurement can be wrong for various reasons but the same measuring device can nonetheless give accurate trend lines because whatever error is present gets negated leaving "something" valid being measured. Same deal here. Its not what would you do in the first instance, but rather comparing that answer to the followup scenarios.

It has no bearing upon the real world and, /// Of course it does. Used all the time in executive placement: "What would you do if..........."

in the hope that morality may actually mean something real, no bearing upon what your true moral standpoint is. Nil. /// Again, demonstrably wrong.

You learn absolutely nothing from this pointless exercise. //// I do recognize you speak only for yourself.

It's not about morals at all. It's about market research, and just as instructive. //// Huh? Market research on throwing fat men onto the roadway? What product is being sold?

Anyway - you're not going to see it my way. I've decided to jump off the bridge myself. I am thus next only to the Big JC himself in moral rectitude //// JC has his own morality and he is free to urge it upon others. As all self aware/actualized sentient creatures do. The morality of JC however is very defective and not followed by most. Lip service by many, followed by few.

and you cannot, therefore, disagree with me any longer. /// Just look.

Please refer any further discussion to my dad, who will deal with your morals accordingly. /// Don't bring any heavy weights into this argument. My Dad can drink your Dad under the table, and does most nights.

Poodle: the subject is "social science." It doesn't answer all questions, does have its limitations. I think Freud ran into this in an earlier period as did Astrology. You decide.
Real Name: bobbo the existential pragmatic evangelical anti-theist and Class Warrior.
Asking: What is the most good for the most people?
Sample Issue: Should the Feds provide all babies with free diapers?

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
Has No Life
Posts: 11148
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am

Re: Can Science Determine Moral Values?

Postby bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Sun Mar 20, 2016 8:48 am

Well.......... what a coinky dink! Watching PBS Newshour film review of "Eye in the Sky" about drone pilots. Seems the conflict is just as they got the go ahead to target bomb a group of terrorists, some young teen girl set up a bread stand within the kill zone of the drone.

What to do?

Well...some months previously, the USAF had a nice paper and pencil test of what drone pilot candidates thought they would or would not do re collateral damage. How many people who said they would not drop a bomb if any civilians were present do you think got hired compared to other answers provided like "It depends." ((This para is my own--not in the review.)) War: unimaginable reality... right in your face.
Real Name: bobbo the existential pragmatic evangelical anti-theist and Class Warrior.
Asking: What is the most good for the most people?
Sample Issue: Should the Feds provide all babies with free diapers?

toroid
Poster
Posts: 169
Joined: Wed Apr 08, 2015 12:42 am

Re: Can Science Determine Moral Values?

Postby toroid » Thu Apr 07, 2016 4:24 pm

FredLewis wrote:It might be interesting to know how participants in the Trolley Problem would act if they had a choice of either pushing the heavy man or throwing themselves onto the tracks.


It might be closer to truth to ignore the Trolley Problem completely, as well as other highly abstract contructs not connected with reality in any way other than as overintellectualized theoretical concepts. Of course YMMV!


Return to “SKEPTIC Magazine: Letters & Discussions”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest