How do revenge and morality tie in together?

@layman,

I've already commented on that. "Revenge" is not an action, therefore it is morally neutral. If, on the other hand, an action is motivated by revenge, then that action may be considered either moral or immoral (or morally neutral).

1 Reply

@joefromchicago,

Quote:

Revenge" is not an action, therefore it is morally neutral

Hate is not an action either, but we have hate crimes. What is your contention, exactly? If I "think" a "bad" thought, I have committed an "action" (the act of thinking).

I'm not saying any particular thinking is immoral, just that your emphasis on an "action" doesn't seem to differentiate between any one thing and another.

Suppose I am overheard talking to a friend about my intention to kill the President? Can I be arrested for that?

1 Reply

@layman,

layman wrote:

Quote:
I'm sorry that you felt the need to disagree with an impression that you erroneously formed.

Ya think? Care to comment on this observation?

Quote:
Revenge is a "motive." Many brands of what you call "concepts" which motivate an action are considered to be relevant to moral judgments.

Can you just give it a rest? It looks like you are trying to pick a fight.

1 Reply

@glitterbag,

Quote:

Can you just give it a rest? It looks like you are trying to pick a fight.

Hmmm, not sure I follow, Glitter. Give what a rest? Is disagreeing "picking a fight?" Is wanting to discuss something "picking a fight?" Is posting on this board "picking a fight" (you need participate in any discussion to be here--you can just keep your mouth shut). Are you trying to "pick a fight" with me now?

2 Replies

@layman,

It doesn't seem that you want to discuss anything, if you don't realize how unnecessarily combative your remarks are, I don't think I have the magical solution for that chip on your shoulder.

I wasn't aware that rules of participation had changed, but since you have been here 10 months and Ive only been here for 13 years, perhaps I've missed some new procedure. In case you've forgotten, the sites founders and moderators set the tone. So let me suggest to you that you can't tell people to "shut their mouth" and you are fighting a losing battle telling me when I can and cannot participate.

That was a rookie move, and you know it.

1 Reply

@glitterbag,

Quote:

So let me suggest to you that you can't tell people to "shut their mouth" and you are fighting a losing battle telling me when I can and cannot participate.

What!? I didn't tell you any such thing. I simply asked you a question about what "picking a fight" was. I asked you if simply making a post was picking a fight. I asked you for an explanation of what you were concerned about, but got none (beyond your unadorned declaration of what you perceive "unnecessary combativeness" to be).

On the other hand you did, in effect, tell me to shut my mouth:

Quote:

Can you just give it a rest?

1 Reply

@layman,

layman wrote:

Quote:
Revenge" is not an action, therefore it is morally neutral

Hate is not an action either, but we have hate crimes.

Yes, but then you're making the common mistake of confusing morality with legality. They're not the same thing. In any event, we don't have hate thought-crimes. Thoughts without deeds are not criminal.

layman wrote:

What is your contention, exactly? If I "think" a "bad" thought, I have committed an "action" (the act of thinking).

I disagree.

layman wrote:

I'm not saying any particular thinking is immoral, just that your emphasis on an "action" doesn't seem to differentiate between any one thing and another.

I disagree.

layman wrote:

Suppose I am overheard talking to a friend about my intention to kill the President? Can I be arrested for that?

It depends on what country you're in, I suppose, but then you're making the common mistake of confusing morality with legality. They're not the same thing.

1 Reply

@layman,

I didn't try to muzzle you and I didn't tell you to shut your mouth. That was your remark to me, and I simply said I decide when I want to comment.

As far as picking a fight, you seem to rephrase what other poster have written as if it were a contradiction. You should take another look at your comments with a critical eye. Perhaps you might be able to see the areas where I think you are unnecessarily abrasive, perhaps not. I can only tell you how your statements struck me.

1 Reply

@glitterbag,

Quote:

I didn't tell you to shut your mouth. That was your remark to me..

You repeat this allegation. I've told you otherwise. Would it be possible for you to show me where I said that? Maybe I mistyped, I dunno.

0 Replies

@layman,

layman wrote:

Is wanting to discuss something "picking a fight?" Is posting on this board "picking a fight" (you need participate in any discussion to be here--you can just keep your mouth shut). Are you trying to "pick a fight" with me now?

This where you said no such thing, did you forget what you said?

2 Replies

@joefromchicago,

Quote:

It depends on what country you're in, I suppose, but then you're making the common mistake of confusing morality with legality. They're not the same thing.

Your absolutely right. But not in the direction you seem to be implying by asserting my supposed "confusion." Moral judgments are generally far more extensive, and more restrictive, than laws.

People may be accused of thinking "immoral thoughts," but we (thankfully) have no laws against that.

1 Reply

@glitterbag,

Quote:

This where you said no such thing, did you forget what you said?

No, although I do see that I omitted an intended word. But that does NOT say what you say it does. Not sure how or why you think otherwise.

I don't have to make any posts on this board (that really goes without saying). But, if I do, is that "picking a fight?" That was an observation designed to elucidate the question It was not any kind of command in any sense.

Put another way, should I try to avoid any appearance of disagreement or conflict? Do you want me to follow the old adage: If you can't say something
nice, or flattering, then don't say anything at all?

1 Reply

@layman,

layman wrote:

People may be accused of thinking "immoral thoughts," but we (thankfully) have no laws against that.

Such accusations are completely meritless, unless you are suggesting that those people who accuse others of having "immoral thoughts" are correct. If you are, then you'll need to explain your position better. If not, then I am once again left baffled by your comments.

1 Reply

@glitterbag,

(you need not participate in any discussion to be here--you can just keep your mouth shut).

I meant to include the word "not," but "you" was not meant to refer to you, personally. It was simply intended to mean "a person" (i.e., any person, but if anyone specific, then me, not you). I guess I should have said "I need not..."

1 Reply

@joefromchicago,

I can tell someone that I have spent a lot of time thinking about doing X (some "bad" thing, like, say, screwing my sister). That will often be condemned as "immoral" even though everyone understands that I haven't done it).

I might well be advised to "stop thinking such things, because those are "immoral thoughts."

They would be "correct" about what my thoughts are, because I told them. No real mystery there, is there?

I'm told that catholics are required to confess "impure thought" to priests, so that their "sins" in that respect can be atoned for.

1 Reply

@layman,

You can't expect others to read your mind, and I don't know what word was omitted. Do you really expect me to believe your clever remark can't be interpreted as you telling me to 'shut my mouth'. I can't imagine those three words being used as anything other than insulting and disrespectful. It DOES say what I said it does. Im astounded you don't want to acknowledge it. You can protest all you want, but I call bullshit.

1 Reply

@layman,

layman wrote:

They would be "correct" about what my thoughts are, because I told them. No real mystery there, is there?

I asked whether you thought such accusations were correct, not whether they were "correct." Unless you're saying that they're the same thing, you'll have to explain the difference.

layman wrote:

I'm told that catholics are required to confess "impure thought" to priests, so that their "sins" in that respect can be atoned for.

I'm not sure if that's correct. The Catholic church, for instance, doesn't consider homosexuality to be sinful - only homosexual acts.

1 Reply

@layman,

layman wrote:

(you need not participate in any discussion to be here--you can just keep your mouth shut).

I meant to include the word "not," but "you" was not meant to refer to you, personally. It was simply intended to mean "a person" (i.e., any person, but if anyone specific, then me, not you). I guess I should have said "I need not..."

You must think I'm unfamiliar with the English language, that was a poor excuse for an explanation. There is no reason to explain further, I don't want you to embarrass yourself anymore than you already did. Frankly you disappointed me, I thought you were smarter than that. Have a nice life Mr. Doubletalker

1 Reply

@glitterbag,

Quote:

You must think I'm unfamiliar with the English language...

No, actually I thought otherwise. I would have thought you could distinguish a parenthetical comment, meant to elucidate a question, from an imperative. Sorry if I gave you too much credit.

If you are that insistent upon taking offense, and that ready to repeatedly call someone a liar, then I can see how you could find almost anything "offensive" and tantamount to "trying to pick a fight."

1 Reply

@joefromchicago,

Quote:

I asked whether you thought such accusations were correct, not whether they were "correct." Unless you're saying that they're the same thing, you'll have to explain the difference.

The topic was, as I understood it, what connection, if any, is there between "revenge" and "morality." That's all I've been addressing. I didn't suspect that my personal moral views were the topic, sorry.

I suppose I would say that, yeah, if you're thinking about doing something immoral, then you are thinking "immoral thoughts." That's why I don't agree with what appeared to me to be your attempt to completely expel internal states from any discussion of "morality." I got the impression that you were trying to say that there is, and can be, no possible connection between "concepts" and morality (in general, not my personal morality).

1 Reply

How do revenge and morality tie in together?

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know