Universal moral principles 3 solar jamboree
This is part of a larger series of blogs written by me and @DivineMarquis.
I'll list them for you here:
No Lives Matter 1: All Universal Moral Principles Are But Idle Fancy
Universal moral principles 2 electric boogaloo
No Lives Matter 2: From the Margin to the Edge
The Marquis starts his latest rebuttal by claiming that individuals make choices based on "marginal decision making" rather than morality. He accuses mankind of simply seeking quick gratification. With the notable exception of investment which he describes as delayed gratification.
"In short, every individual is less concerned with what is “morally right” (right here being a conclusion they have personally developed) and more concerned with what is most satisfactory to the five senses."
Even if this is completely true, it in no way contradicts the existence of universally applicable moral codes or the idea that one of these codes peaks higher than all others in getting desirable results. All it really means is that morality needs to be sold as an investment and a good moral code should focus on creating an incentive structure with desirable results. This can be done fraudulently (or stupidly if the preacher is sincere) with the ridiculous concepts of heaven and hell. Or honestly/intelligently with examples of people who live morally and thrive because of it. This can also be done culturally with myths, fairy tales and inspiring art.
But it's not completely true. I mean yes gratification explains a lot of human behavior but why do some people abstain from drugs? Why do ALL children cry when one of them is given a bigger slice of pie? (You would think the lucky one would smile?) Why are patreon and subscribestar a thing? Why do some people return a found wallet without taking the money? Why do some societies have higher trust than others?
"The Sadean mantra do whatever you want, without regards to whom you hurt." Doing what you want requires resources and freedom. Both can be hard to acquire and keep, if you have the wrong or no morals and values.
"This is human nature in a single sentence." Morality is about overcoming human nature.
After this @DivineMarquis rips me a new one for offering a bit of apologia for student debt in the previous blog. I still believe universities and government are dishonest about what they sell and therefore partially to blame,(seriously search for social justice in science class) but I didn't mean to diminish the responsibility of the debtors.
Either way many of these people won't be able to pay their debts; They should but they can't.
De Sade then points these students "a true moral sense" when they "cannot find gainful employment". " The morals they proclaim are charity, kindness, and altruism. And they can do this because they are idle."
Then De Sade says of the hard working who want to keep what they have earned for themselves and their family. "They are not idle, so they cannot afford to be moral."
This line of reasoning only works if you defer to the idle as authorities on the subject of morality. In other words he confuses compassion and cuckery for morality. I would argue that it is the productive who should be seen as knowledgeable on morals not the idle. It seems to me that their way of life works so it should be spread both by breeding and if possible converting.
Here is Penn Jilette telling the story of how a great man named Tim got him out of the left using morals against socialism.
Then the Marquis lays out some facts about feminism, divorce and alimony and how the current mess is the legacy of a worthless white knight named John Stuart Mill and the morality of the idle.
This is all true...at least I think it is. But he contrasts this with "Mary Wollstonecraft’s proposal, which was to simply give women the equal rights of men and abolish marriage."
Marriage serves a purpose. It exists to create quality children by providing 2 parents, stability, a male role model and resources to those children. Mary is quite correct that this would be the way for women to be equal but it would also destroy civilization in a generation or 2. Just as divorce is currently doing.
"(for those who are interested, Wollstonecraft believed in a mix of parental concern for children and the Saint-Justian concept of the State raising all children)" Based on the dismal statistics for bastards parents genuinely concerned for their children would stay together in marriage. And the state SUCKS.
"Not only is morality for the idle, but it is also often an easy solution for a complex problem." No you're thinking of compassion. Morality is more like a guardrail that keeps you from falling to the depths of human depravity. And a plan of self improvement that makes you more capable and prosperous so you can deal with problems better.