In this episode, we discuss the importance of defining terms in debates to avoid disagreements and promote productive discussions. We delve into the debate between principles and consequentialism, explore varying viewpoints on equality, and address the impact of educational opportunities on small towns. We also examine arguments surrounding the welfare state, emphasize the significance of logical consistency, and emphasize the role of defining terms and logical reasoning in productive discussions.
GET MY NEW BOOK 'PEACEFUL PARENTING', THE INTERACTIVE PEACEFUL PARENTING AI, AND AUDIOBOOK!
https://peacefulparenting.com/
Join the PREMIUM philosophy community on the web for free!
Also get the Truth About the French Revolution, the interactive multi-lingual philosophy AI trained on thousands of hours of my material, private livestreams, premium call in shows, the 22 Part History of Philosophers series and much more!
See you soon!
https://freedomain.locals.com/support/promo/UPB2022
GET MY NEW BOOK 'PEACEFUL PARENTING', THE INTERACTIVE PEACEFUL PARENTING AI, AND AUDIOBOOK!
https://peacefulparenting.com/
Join the PREMIUM philosophy community on the web for free!
Also get the Truth About the French Revolution, the interactive multi-lingual philosophy AI trained on thousands of hours of my material, private livestreams, premium call in shows, the 22 Part History of Philosophers series and much more!
See you soon!
https://freedomain.locals.com/support/promo/UPB2022
Category
📚
LearningTranscript
00:00Well, alrighty. Yeah. Good morning, everybody. Hope you're doing well
00:04Having an interesting back-and-forth free domain dot locals.com. I hope you would join the community
00:09Having an interesting back-and-forth regarding the nature of principles. Oh the good stuff
00:15Oh the good juicy moral stuff and
00:20he writes
00:21Manuel writes the nature of principles after debating Stefan and some from this community about what consequentialism actually is
00:27I got the impression that there's a big misconception
00:29About what principles actually are so let's go through the logic
00:34So I gotta say the beginning is I'm annoyed at the beginning. That doesn't mean anything
00:39I'm just telling you what my emotional experience. This doesn't mean you're objectively annoying or anything like that
00:43But I'm annoyed at this beginning
00:46because if you want to debate consequentialism, this is sort of my
00:50Feeling around it if you want to debate consequentialism fantastic
00:55But if you want to debate consequentialism and you haven't got agreement on what
01:00Consequentialism is that's kind of on you
01:03Right. So if you know anything about debate
01:06What you need to do is it get agreement that everyone's using the same terms to mean the same thing
01:12otherwise
01:13You're debating
01:15Which is the best citrus fruit and some people think you're referring to grapefruit and some people think you're referring to oranges
01:22You have to be specific in your definitions if you can't get agreement on definitions you can't get agreement on outcomes.
01:30I mean if somebody said to you
01:33How much will you pay for this for my car? How much will you pay for my car?
01:38Well, who can answer that question? Maybe a car is a brand new Maserati
01:44Maybe it's a 30 year old Lada that's currently up on cinder blocks and rusting in an Arkansas back ditch
01:51Right how so you can't figure out the price of something if people don't know what it is
01:56And you can't figure out the agreement on anything if people don't know what you're talking about
02:00Now if other people have a mistaken impression, right? Let's let me give you some an example, right?
02:06So imagine this scenario you put a sign out front of your house
02:11car for sale and
02:12underneath it you have a picture of a Maserati or Lamborghini some Maserati expensive car and
02:19Then people come and say gosh, I really want this Maserati and you say hey, you know, it's a hundred thousand dollars
02:26And they're like, holy crap. That's a quarter million dollar car hundred thousand dollars as a steal. They give you the hundred thousand dollars and
02:33Then they say great. Can I have the keys to the Maserati and you say Maserati? No. No the car you just bought is this
02:4130 year old
02:43Chevy Nova with no wheels. Oh
02:46People would be like no. No, no, hang on
02:49You had a sign that said car for sale yet a picture of a Maserati and you say well, yeah
02:53I mean, that's that's the car I want to buy
02:56So I'm selling my old junker so I can buy a Maserati because that's way cooler than an old junker
03:01Right, so you understand you if you haven't defined what is the car for sale?
03:06You can't agree on a price and the people are gonna I don't know take your they're gonna want to take their hundred thousand
03:11dollars back and if you don't give it to them, they're gonna I
03:15Don't know beat you up go to the police try and get you throw to jail for fraud trying to get their money back like
03:20They're not gonna take the old
03:21Chevy Nova up on cinder blocks
03:25so you can't agree on a price if you haven't defined or if there's disagreement about what the car is or
03:31Another example if you put a picture online and you say diamond
03:35Ring for sale. It's a picture of a diamond ring and you say it's a thousand dollars
03:40Maybe it's a five thousand dollar ring and people are like wow, that's great
03:43they come and give you a thousand dollars and then you give them a picture of the ring and
03:48They're like no I want the ring you say no
03:51What was for sale is a picture of a ring?
03:54like if you look closely at the at the online listing you can see the little outlines of the piece of paper that
04:01I took a picture and
04:02The picture is for sale and people would say well, no, I don't want I don't want the picture
04:07I want the diamond ring you say no. No, no, that's not for sale. That's an heirloom
04:10My grandmother gave that to me, right so you you understand you're just heading for conflict if
04:17People don't have the same definitions of what they're talking about
04:21so you
04:24Start a debate, which is great. You know, this is this is not a big criticism. I'm just sort of pointing out how to have
04:31productive debates and how not to waste time
04:34so you say after debating Stefan and some of this community about what consequentialism actually is I got the impression that there's this
04:40Big misconception about what principles actually are. So let's go through the logic, right? So you start the debate, which is great
04:46It's always welcome, but in order not to annoy people and waste their time
04:51Right. Can you imagine like?
04:54with with with regarding
04:56The diamond ring or the picture of the diamond ring
04:59Well after selling this trying to sell this this picture of the diamond ring. I got I get the impression. There's a big
05:06misconception about
05:09What is actually for sale it's not the diamond ring it's the picture it's not the Maserati it's the
05:13Chevy Nova up on cinder blocks
05:15It's your job to define the terms
05:19As you start a debate, it's your job
05:22To define the term. So if I'm talking about property rights, I talk about owning yourself and owning the effects of your actions
05:29Being responsible for yourself being responsible for the effects of your actions
05:34When I talk about free will I talk about our capacity to compare proposed actions to ideal standards when I talk about
05:42Morality, I talk about universally preferable behavior. I mean I put a lot of work into defining the terms
05:50so if you are engaged in how long ago is this this is a
05:57Message from four days ago, and I think the debates been going on for a week or two
06:00So if you're having a debate about consequentialism and
06:05You say well, I get the impression. There's a big misconception about
06:09What principles actually are so you have to define consequentialism and you have to define?
06:15principles and
06:16If you're in the debate for a week or two and you haven't defined core terms and got agreements not enough to define them
06:23You have to get agreement
06:24like honestly
06:2795% of debate is
06:30Getting people to agree on definitions
06:33right
06:3595% and this is like this is in life as a whole
06:4095% of disagreement is about definitions
06:44not logic
06:45right, so if free will is our ability and you'll see after I
06:50Defined my terms and have good arguments for them. Then the amount of conflicts go down
06:57So one of the reasons I did my series on free will many years ago a three-part series on free
07:01Well, you can find that at FDR podcast.com. One of the reasons I did that was because
07:06We had a whole bunch of determinists and compatibilists
07:10Compatible come they were compatibles compatibilism. I really feel like she should know the word, but I can't remember it's been like 15 years
07:19Compatibilism which is where there's kind of like a mix of free will and determinism, you know
07:23Like a mix of up and down north and south thing and it's opposite. I
07:28Get the impression that there's a big misconception about what principles actually are
07:33Okay, so you need to define your terms if you define your terms
07:39then
07:40there is no disagreement or there's less disagreement so for instance when you go into a
07:46Job with any complexity generally you have a contract sign a contract that's defining your terms defining your terms
07:53Is avoiding conflict that doesn't mean they'll never be any conflict people can cheat or whatever you get into a game you define the rules
08:02Right you define I mean the card game war which is not really a game
08:06Right, but you just put down a card the highest card wins
08:10Rock paper scissors. It's all about defining the rules defining the terms what wins in rock paper scissors. I
08:16Mean heads or tails, right? So in life as a whole you define terms
08:22In a marriage you have marriage vows
08:25Which is the debt and of course all the legal stuff, but the core of it is the marriage vows and so you define terms
08:33when you
08:34Work for a place you get a contract that says I'll pay you
08:3975 grand a year
08:41Here are your responsibilities you get two weeks vacation
08:45You get this sick leave allocation you get this
08:50Health care in the States
08:52Maybe we'll pay for your health care and you get
08:54The Social Security or some sort of a retirement plan even outside of Social Security, which is I guess a legal thing
09:00So you have all of these
09:02Define your terms your salary your responsibilities this that and the other right then some will even say you will be required to travel
09:09So you can't say well, I had no idea. So you just define your terms. I
09:12Mean you wouldn't just start working for a place
09:15Work there for a month and
09:17Then say well, you know
09:19There seems to be some disagreement about what I'm here for what my responsibilities are and what my salary is
09:24Right, you would like define all of that. You just look look at what works in your life. What works in your life is
09:30Where you define the terms upfront and you get agreement. I
09:36Mean, there's a standard called value in the marketplace
09:40There's a standard called value in the marketplace
09:45Which is salary and you go through a an interview process and you negotiate
09:51Salary, right and then you agree on the salary. It's put in writing you sign it and that's what you get paid. I
09:58Mean, it's funny
10:00my my first car I
10:03Didn't have a CD player which was very expensive back of the day
10:07I had a tape deck which actually turned out to be great because I could get a little portable player
10:13Loaded up this is before portable players had internet access at a Rio 500 way back in the day with the princely sum of
10:2164 megs of memory. I
10:23remember later upgrading to a player that did WMA files which were half the size I could get quite the songs and
10:30Literally, I would so sad
10:32I mean, I would spend 15 minutes sometimes loading up the right songs to go for a workout
10:37I had a gym outside
10:39Anyway, so I was it was good that I had a tape deck because I could
10:42Plug in my portable player. I could listen to music and audiobooks and so on
10:46Had a tape deck now
10:48one of my favorite album albums when I was younger was an album by a solo album by John Anderson called animation and
10:55Some of the songs are a bit chaunty and dull, but some of the songs are just absolutely fantastic. I mean just beyond
11:02Amazing now the musicianship and the vocals and the songwriting was just I mean to me top-tier and I
11:08Think it should be a better-known album, but I can understand why it's not he's a bit of an acquired vocal taste
11:13You have to like Mickey Mouse on helium
11:15But I mean the song animation about the birth of his child is just absolutely beautiful
11:21But anyway, so long story short now, it's too late for that now long story long
11:25I was at a garage sale now
11:29I've always been a little curious about the whole garage sale thing
11:33I find it hard to go buy a garage sale without even poking my head in just because there are real gems in there
11:39now I
11:41Did not have a record player at this time and I was never a big one for buying cassette tapes
11:48so I did not have a
11:51cassette tape of
11:53John Anderson's solo album animation from 1982 or something like that
11:59Boundaries is a great song
12:01so
12:02Anyway, I go to this
12:05Garage sale and in the garage sale I see right up front
12:09John Anderson animation 50 cents. I guess they'd got tired of it. And
12:15So obviously I grabbed my 50 cents and I paid and I enjoyed the album for quite some time afterwards
12:22It's one of these albums. You have to sing along with two octaves lower if you're lucky
12:27So now of course the price was agreed now
12:31I would have paid a lot more than 50 cents like not much more because I could always I guess find someplace to buy the
12:38And of course, I'd actually forgotten about the album
12:40I'd forgotten about the album which I bought secondhand at a record store down on Queen Street. I
12:46Would have paid more
12:49Because I was hit with a sudden stab of oh, I've you ever have this way you hear a song on the radio
12:53You're like, oh my god
12:54I love this song like I was listening the other day to some random songs on the Internet and the song by Harlequin called
13:00Innocence came up. Well, it's all you ever pleaded and I was just like man. That's a great song
13:06okay, and honestly, I've not thought about that song probably in
13:1035 years and
13:12Put it on repeat a little bit great song
13:15so we so
13:18the definition of the value of that
13:21Tape of John Anderson's animation was 50 cents and we agreed on that and
13:27You've seen this before right?
13:30Where people get in there haggling and they're haggling is they're trying to agree on the definition called value if they can't agree on the definition
13:37called value
13:39Then the transaction does not occur. So if this guy had said, oh that's mislabeled. It's actually
13:44$500 I'd have been like, okay. Well, I'm not paying that
13:48Right, I'm not paying a thousand times
13:51What I you know, and if he'd said oh that's mislabeled. It's actually $2. I mean, okay. Well, whatever right, but it was labeled 50 cents and
13:59I
14:00Paid my 50 cents and was very happy. So of course, we were both happier. He unloaded some tape
14:05he never listened to I got a nice slice of nostalgia to enjoy and
14:10Like a lot of things in your life, I have no idea where that tape is now
14:14I have no idea. I don't have a cassette player anymore
14:17Of course who does but it's one of these things that I enjoyed for quite some time
14:21And I could not tell you for the life of me where it is now
14:25So there's a this definition to look at the things in your life that work. It's where you agree on definitions and
14:31The things in your life that don't work where there's a whole bunch of conflict is
14:35Where you don't agree on definitions. I mean one of the most fundamental definitions is
14:41What does equality mean right people can't agree on that
14:45so
14:46One side generally on the right argues that equality is a quality of opportunity
14:53other people on the left in general say that equality actually means equality of outcome and
15:00People on the right say we accept that
15:05Equality of opportunity leads to inequality in outcomes and
15:09The people on the left say we don't accept that
15:13Inequality. So equality of opportunity leads to inequality of outcomes because all inequality of outcomes are
15:22Unjust immoral bigoted racist whatever right sexist, you name it and
15:26that's in general in general the
15:31People on the right who tend to be more religious more conservative and more free market say God gives people different gifts
15:38I mean, you've heard this before I've certainly heard this
15:41from from people
15:43God gave me these gifts or I'm fortunate to have these gifts. I've been given these gifts or
15:48When I wired up somebody's house
15:50With a network when I was in my teens and I said what a beautiful house. He had a huge giant mansion
15:57He said yes, God has been good to me. So God gives people different gifts
16:01therefore equality of opportunity leads to
16:05disparity of outcome and
16:06Of course, I mean Christianity in particular is founded upon the most significant disparity of gifts
16:13That's conceivable, which is the gift of being the Son of God able to perform miracles rise from the dead
16:20so that's kind of an inequality of
16:23gifts that are given and
16:25because
16:27Jesus was obviously brilliant and innovative and
16:31staggeringly charismatic and
16:34Performed miracles right according to the Bible performed miracles
16:38We accept that there's disparities in the gifts that people are given. So God
16:44Scatters his gifts widely
16:46across
16:47the world and therefore there's going to be disparities in outcome and of course the foundational moral journey of the Christian is
16:55the opportunity of salvation without the guarantee of salvation
17:00So you exercise your free will in the pursuit of virtue and if you achieve virtue you go to heaven and if you
17:08Become evil you go to hell. I mean it really is the ultimate
17:12Inequality of outcome. I guess if
17:15The leftists were in charge of a universal religion
17:19Everyone would kind of end up in a vaguely pleasant brain fog limbo wouldn't be heaven
17:24it wouldn't be hell everyone ends up in the same place and
17:27So because conservatives and people on the right recognize a
17:31choice and
17:32Value and the entire religious moral journey is founded on inequality of outcome heaven versus hell
17:39They accept in the free market that it's going to be inequality of outcomes based upon equality of opportunity
17:46however people on the left who tend to be more material tend to be more secular and
17:53They view they're willing to accept some inequalities of outcome, but not that much
18:00So because they're more physical. I mean you look at people you say okay, there's going to be some variation of
18:06height
18:08Among people right? There's going to be some variation of height and at the wildest extremes
18:14You know people might be half as tall as other people, right?
18:19Got some seven-foot guy you've got some guy who's maybe got some
18:24Growth problem in three and a half feet or something. So at the very extremes
18:29people will be
18:30twice as tall and
18:32So they'll say okay. Well, so in the in the material world
18:37The disparities are not that great
18:39now because in Christianity the soul is the foundation of the personality and the soul is
18:45Capable of just about anything and
18:47You exercise your gifts and and and the gifts are widely distributed and with different levels of intensity and so on
18:53The disparities in outcome are acceptable no matter how great because the disparities and outcome
19:00between
19:01Heaven forever and hell forever is the greatest possible disparity that can be imagined
19:07it's
19:08infinite extremes for infinite time and
19:12And Christianity, of course the people who study Christianity who learn about Christianity there are
19:20significant differences in quality
19:22Among the church fathers st. Augustine and other theologians. They just have incredible abilities to explain and
19:31Encourage and inspire and preach and so on and of course the preacher is up there doing his thing. He's better at it
19:37Hopefully then the congregation
19:40whereas if you kind of drudging along in a pretty sort of sad low-rent world and
19:45You don't really know anyone who's got any real quality because anybody with any quality gets out, right?
19:49I mean one of the things that's happened is in the past when you had a small town
19:55people would stick around that small town for reasons of your familiarity and for reasons of
20:03access to
20:04Grandparents and in-laws and childhood friends and community and church
20:08They're so smart some super smart guy in a small town would become maybe the town doctor or the town lawyer
20:13Maybe the town mayor or some town artists or something that the but he wouldn't be gone. So people would be intimately familiar
20:19Within that small town of differences in ability, but of course what's happening now this process would be going on
20:25since
20:27since the late
20:281950s really
20:30You I mean you can I so the GI Bill had a big problem and that it brought a lot of people into the educational
20:34system who wouldn't have the intellectual chops to succeed there in the past, but you know, one of the one of the
20:42Benefits thrown at returning troops in America was a GI Bill to go higher education kind of guaranteed which amount of flooded people came in
20:48Who weren't high quality therefore the standards had to be lowered and get all of this kind of stuff, right?
20:52More people doesn't raise the standards
20:55More people just lowers the standards I
20:57Mean if you want them to win, right?
21:01so since the
21:031950s in particular what's been happening is
21:07the
21:08universities have been
21:11scouring for smart people and
21:14So they would go through all the small town
21:16They'd identify the top one or three or five percent of smart people
21:21Based upon high school transcripts and interviews and essays and all that kind of stuff and then they might offer them scholarships or the government
21:28would offer them
21:29Scholarships or the government might offer them free tuition or subsidized tuition or loans or something like that
21:35so what happens then is all of the smart people get scoured out of
21:40the small towns and then the small towns kind of collapse right to be this is one of the since where some of the fentanyl
21:46stuff is coming from and
21:47because you're taking all
21:50The stars in a sense out of the sky at night
21:56nobody knows
21:57the dimensions of the heavens
21:59But you ever done this thing where you lie on your back. It's a beautiful clear night
22:03Maybe you're in the country or something like that and you look at the stars and then you get a sense of 3d depth and
22:09Just how enormous the universe is it's really quite a bone and soul chilling experience
22:14But if there are no stars in the sky, then there's nothing to measure the depth of the heavens
22:20just a blank
22:22so
22:23because of
22:24government programs
22:26The smart people are taken out of communities and therefore everybody in the community who remains
22:33doesn't have access or doesn't have direct access to
22:37Quality people and I don't mean morally quality just like gifts intellectual abilities, right and all the staggering stuff
22:44Where you look at the very top-tier performers and it's it's just mental, right?
22:48I mean if you look at if you ever been to a like a little bar or something like that go to an Irish pub
22:53and there's usually some guy in the corner strumming away and
22:56singing some
22:57songs and
22:59You know
22:59maybe he's paid a hundred bucks for the night or something like that and then you compare that to like
23:03Taylor Swift or when the Eagles were in their peak or Queen or something like it's just it's insane, right?
23:09The difference in in quality that or the difference in value for sure is is just mental
23:14But if you grow up without knowing like I remember
23:17Reading some comment somebody did a video of
23:21The old Billy Joel song scenes from an Italian restaurant. Someone did a video for it and somebody underneath it wrote
23:28Yeah, you know, we all grew up together. I actually knew Billy Joel when he was younger
23:31We also sit in the street corner
23:33singing away and Billy Joel was always just like hey
23:35I'm gonna be a musician and like he just sang the best and it was you know
23:38That was his that was his thing like nobody else could even come close and he does have a wonderful voice
23:44so people
23:45Can't see much quality in their lives
23:49Because the smart people are scooped out and go to another area. They go through a portal into somewhere else and
23:56Everyone who's left behind is kind of
23:57dredging along and and therefore the inequality of outcome seems kind of strange because you don't know anyone really who's that different and this process
24:04Happens over and over again, right? Because we know that IQ is significantly genetic
24:09So when the smart people get scooped out
24:12You're you're hollowing out the whole intelligence base of the community
24:15I mean, obviously there's you know, lots of variation and the dice gets rolled but in general right 80% genetic by late teens
24:22That's sort of the latest research or at least it was a couple years ago when I last checked on these things probably even higher
24:26now and
24:27so you scoop out the smart people and within a generation or two, it's really hard to find smart people in these communities and
24:35I know this to some degree personally
24:39Having grown up in a pretty terrible
24:43community
24:44where there just really weren't that many smart people around if any and
24:48everybody
24:50you could sort of
24:51See where everybody was gonna end up and and then it's like another dimension where the smart people are and it just feels weird
24:59so
25:01Definitions are everything
25:03Definitions are everything
25:05So if you've been engaged in the debate for a couple of weeks and you say well
25:08We don't even we haven't even agreed what principles are
25:11Then you are signaling that you don't know how to debate
25:15you don't know how to debate and
25:19That's fine. I mean look, I mean it's a learning curve. It's a learning process
25:23Children are born learning how to argue but debating takes a little more time
25:28So you say I got the impression there's a big misconception about what principles actually are
25:33So now you've stuck a couple of weeks into the debate you're defining your terms and
25:37That's what I mean, but it's kind of annoying and look this just a learning thing
25:40Which you have to do this up front
25:42So you say one definition of consequentialism consequentialism is an ethical theory that asserts the moral rightness or wrongness of actions is
25:49determined solely by their
25:51outcomes or consequences
25:53Right, and he says that definition is correct
25:55But there's a misconception attached to that namely that consequentialism contradicts principle based morals that assumption is incorrect
26:03Because principles already are defined by consequences
26:07okay, so that's interesting so you're saying that consequentialism says judge an action by its outcomes and
26:14Now you're saying that principles also judge
26:18The right or wrongness of a proposition by its outcomes. So you're saying that consequentialism and
26:26principle
26:27It's the same thing so then you say definition of principle
26:30Here's a quote a principle is a fundamental truth or proposition that serves as the foundation for a system of beliefs or behavior
26:36or a chain of reasoning
26:38so you say that
26:40Consequentialism cut you say it's it's incorrect to think that consequentialism contradicts principle based morals that assumption is incorrect because principles
26:48Already are defined by consequences
26:50now
26:52again, this is
26:54You know and I say this, you know when I was learning to play the guitar
26:57I put my fingers in the wrong place all the time
26:59This is rank amateur hour and and it's funny when it comes to debate. Everyone thinks that they're an expert, right?
27:06You haven't studied debating you haven't studied
27:08Philosophy you haven't studied rhetoric. You haven't studied principles. I mean, so
27:13When you say well, this assumption is incorrect because principles already are defined by consequences
27:19Well, that's just a statement I mean you're taking a radical position here
27:24Which is that people think that you use principles and you stick by principles regardless of the consequences
27:31Right. I mean again foundation of Christianity is Jesus sticking by his principles
27:36Even though he is tortured to death, right?
27:40beatings whippings crown of thorns
27:43Crucifixion I mean he sticks by his principles that the
27:46the consequences of Jesus sticking by his principles as is the case for Socrates and Plato and Aristotle and
27:53Galileo and all the other people who suffered for their principles the consequence of sticking by their principles was absolutely horrible for them
28:01right
28:02Absolutely horrible for them. Of course in my own minor way. I
28:06Have suffered for sticking by my principles or by objective principles. I really don't have much of a choice
28:13That's kind of the gig, right? But you know people who stick by their principles
28:17It's it's pretty tough
28:20so
28:21the war between judge something by its outcome
28:25versus
28:26Judge something by its principles is kind of strange
28:31Right. So the principle would be that say don't steal
28:35But
28:36consequentialism would say or the for the individual consequentialism would say well, wait a minute if I
28:42steal something I
28:44Get that thing for way less time effort and energy than if I had to work to earn it
28:50right, so if I if I make
28:53simplify the effort if I make
28:55$25 an hour and I want to get a thousand dollar cell phone. I have to work for 40 hours, right?
29:01That's a whole week of work plus plus rights. I have to work for 40 hours to get
29:07that phone
29:08but if I just case some store wait until it's crowded and
29:13Somebody's between me and the camera and I just pocket that phone. I get it in an hour as
29:19opposed to 40 hours
29:21Right. So it's it's two point five percent of the effort
29:25That's two point five percent of the effort
29:28It's ninety seven point five percent easier to steal the phone than it is to work to buy the phone
29:36So if people say I won't steal the phone, I won't steal anything because stealing is wrong. That's principles
29:43consequentialism for an individual could be
29:47That it's way easier for me
29:50to steal the phone than it is to buy it now, of course the consequentialists would have an answer to this as they
29:56Such an obvious objection and of course the consequentialist would say
30:01That it's a bad for society because if you steal the phone, nobody will make phones
30:06Nobody will have stores and it's generally bad for society as a whole
30:13But that's not how
30:15Morals work right because no such thing as society as a whole
30:18There's no such thing as society as a whole. There are individuals who act and make choices
30:25Right no animal in the rainforest acts for the benefit of the rainforest as a whole
30:30now you can say of course that individuals will sacrifice themselves for the benefit of their local group as a whole like
30:39Lions will like the female lions who hunt and kill zebras will share their food with the males who guard the
30:45Outskirts and their offspring who can't hunt for themselves yet and so on. So yeah for sure that that can happen
30:52But in an active predator-prey relationship the
30:57The predator does not defer
31:00his predations for the sake of the benefit of
31:05the ecosystem as a whole
31:08individuals act
31:10to their own benefit now, of course if people are
31:13Principled then they say well, I get to heaven or my conscience is at ease or I'm a good person or I'm following my
31:19Values if I don't steal if I have a value called don't steal and I follow that I feel good
31:25And and yes, there is that benefit that it's good for society as a whole. But again people don't
31:30There is no such thing as society as a whole individuals act
31:34Right. It's like this this is old and it's stuck in my head for like 40 years right or more
31:38There's an old Monty Python skit where a guy gets arrested and he says well
31:44It's a fair cop, but society is to blame and the cop says agreed. We'll be charging them to right. That's funny
31:51Society is to blame. We'll be charging them to we'll be charging society with your crimes like that doesn't mean anything
31:58So if your solution to the problem of principle based morals versus consequentialist based
32:04Morals is to say that they're the same thing without going through a pretty intense
32:11Argumentation, but if you're just saying well, no, I'm telling you that they are the same thing with no arguments with no evidence
32:18And with no sense of the complexity and also with no sense of the history of the complexity of these kinds of arguments
32:24judged by principles versus judged by effects is
32:27Huge in society. So people who are pro-welfare state at least at the beginning say well the effect of
32:33The welfare state is to lower the poverty rate because we're taking for the rich and we're giving to the poor. So the effect is good
32:40Whereas the principle people say well, no because the welfare state is
32:46Initiating the use of force to transfer property. It's unjust. It's immoral and so on, right?
32:50now, of course the poor people want free money as most of us do and
32:54rich people want to keep their money, but those who want money and
32:59Poor vastly outnumber those who have money and are very wealthy
33:02And so in a democracy the poor just vote to take away the property of the rich and eventually everybody ends up broke
33:09So, of course some people who argue for principles will also talk about consequentialism
33:15so people say thou shalt not steal this moral and
33:18It gets you to heaven and it makes your conscience at ease and you you don't live
33:23Hypocritically because you don't want people taking your stuff. So you don't take other people's stuff
33:26You affirm your common humanity and all this sort of stuff. That's great
33:30And but they also say and the consequences of people stealing is bad for
33:35The economy as a whole, you know, and we can see all of this happening in various places in America now where the stores are
33:42Closing down because the level of theft is so high which of course is just heartbreaking
33:48for
33:49the poor people in these communities who now have to take like I
33:54Don't know three buses to to go and get some groceries. It's just it's just it absolutely terrible
33:59So saying no, no, no, you don't understand people. I'm debating with you
34:04You don't understand it
34:06Consequences or consequentialism and their principles are the same thing
34:12You're just making an assertion that literally is a thing and its opposite are the same
34:19Which is logically impossible
34:21Unless you just redefine everything that North and South are the same direction
34:26Well, I just got to redefine South to equal North like you haven't done anything other than baffle gab and annoy people
34:32Who get drawn into this kind of stuff and I've sort of been floating around the edge of this debate
34:36you know just for this sort of very
34:38Very sort of reason right?
34:40I'm just trying to sorry I lost the
34:42Text you know just when I find it again
34:45so principles are
34:47universal and to be followed regardless of
34:50consequences
34:52now you could argue that
34:55Christianity or other religions with a heaven and a hell and I know that there's various flavors of Christianity some of which have different
35:01Emphasis or on heaven and hell but just to take the general the general trend
35:05So, of course, you could argue that
35:07Christianity is a mix of principles and consequentialism the consequentialism being of course heaven and hell
35:12that if you if you steal you go to hell and that's that's a big consequence and
35:19I would argue of course that
35:22There are negative consequences to immorality
35:26But we cannot view
35:29Consequences as the definition definition of morality and immorality good and evil can't use consequences
35:36because that's like using pleasure as
35:39the standard of action
35:41now
35:42pleasure as the standard of action is
35:45a subjective and relativistic measure
35:48So for instance if somebody takes a drug that knocks him out
35:53We would consider that a bad bad habit, right? However, if someone takes a drug that knocks him out because he's
36:00Getting surgery right anesthesia. We would say that's a good thing if somebody takes opioids
36:06to feel good
36:08We consider that a bad habit
36:10But if somebody takes opioids because they're recovering from some incredibly painful surgery and it's a pain management strategy
36:17Then we would consider that a good thing
36:19Even the costs and benefits over the course of life
36:23Change considerably. It was important for me to
36:29Find a partner in life until I found my partner in life now
36:34I'm not looking and perfectly content with with what I have it was important me when we when when I was younger
36:40It was important for me to get formal education now
36:44It's not
36:46It was important in life when I was younger for me to cast about and find the right fit for my various talents
36:52Now I wake up and I do this because it's great fun. And I hope it's I think I know it's a value to the world
36:57So now I don't do that anymore
36:59It's important to save your money
37:02When you are 20, it's not important to save your money on your deathbed
37:07It doesn't mean like waste it like crazy, but you obviously you don't have the same right when you're when you're 90
37:13It's not as important to save your money
37:16deferring gratification
37:18Some people really like to run a lot when they're younger and some people regret that later because it gives them bad knees
37:24There's a Tiger Woods thing. I wish I hadn't run so much. My knees are hell
37:28so costs and benefits in the pleasure principle changes a lot over the course of
37:33your life
37:34so it's a relativistic and subjectivist measure and of course different people are
37:40wired to do to get different degrees of happiness from different things, right? Everybody knows the story of
37:46One person who's like, oh, yeah, you know, I remember when I was five
37:49I was taken to see the Rockettes in New York by my mother and I just fell in love with these beautiful women on stage
37:56And I I just want to become a dancer and that's all I wanted to do and and then they become a dancer right now
38:01other people other kids
38:03Go to see the Rockettes and they're bored. I
38:06Mean, I remember when I was a kid
38:08We had an album of a guy
38:10talking about
38:12Various principles and ideas and arguments and I was like, yeah, I could do that. Like it was turned very excited by that
38:17All at the same time. So different people are turned on and excited by different things. Where's the universality in that?
38:25You can't have a pleasure principle. It's subjective. It's relativistic. It changes over the course of your life. It's not objective true universal
38:32There's no proof beyond reasonable doubt about what is
38:36What is good for you? I mean we would say that somebody who kills himself is
38:41Probably not acting in a very positive or good way particularly to his family unless unless
38:47Let's say we can always create a scenario
38:50right unless
38:52He's he's captured and they're gonna kill his family unless he kills himself. He cares more for his family than his own life
38:57So that's what he does
38:58We would say that's a tragic and heroic story rather than this guy was just bad and wrong
39:03And this is not the way to do it not the way to live all this kind of stuff, right?
39:07Now principles on the other hand are universal and not based upon
39:13consequences in fact, in fact
39:16universals are there because
39:19Principles will give you negative consequences, right?
39:22So and in a sense we have principles because being principled gives you negative consequences like on a on a regular basis
39:29Right. I mean we have diet and exercise because it generally is more pleasurable to sit on the couch and eat cheesecake
39:35Right, so because diet and exercise cause us discomfort
39:39We know that we need principles
39:43principles are there because
39:45Certainly the short-term consequences are highly negative
39:48For pursuing principles and again, that's sort of personal. So so if in personal experience with this, so we have principles we follow
39:56objective and universal standards of value and morality we do all of that because
40:01It's going to be the consequences of following those principles are often going to be quite negative
40:08so principles and
40:10consequentialism
40:12There's some overlap, but they're very distinct things. So I mean, this is sort of my arguments for it
40:18We can debate this back and forth, but you see I don't just say they're not the same thing
40:22I say they're not the same thing and here's why and
40:25Here's why if you break a contract you can win, right?
40:31I mean cell phone companies will give you a cell phone for virtually no money, but you have to
40:37Stay with them for two years or whatever it is, right?
40:39So if you take the cell phone cancel your contract don't give back the cell phone
40:42You just got a virtually free cell phone the consequences of that are plus for you, but they're negative
40:47For the cell phone company negative for everyone else. He's got a subsidizer cover-up that costs and that kind of stuff, right?
40:52so and you know the sort of famous story from from India about
40:56The Cobras, right? So the Cobras
40:59So when the Raj was in full swing back in the day and when the British ran India
41:06There was an excess of Cobras around there's too many Cobras
41:10So, of course what the British did was they said the British government in its usual governmental way
41:16status gonna state and
41:18They said oh, well, we'll pay a bounty for every Cobra you bring in right every dead Cobra you bring in will pay a bounty
41:25Right, so
41:27Then of course what happened?
41:28well, inevitably people began breeding Cobras and killing them and bringing them to the British and
41:34then the British realized this and then discontinued the program and
41:39Then what happened was of course all the people who were breeding the Cobras and selling them to the British or getting the bounty
41:45Then said well, there's no point having these Cobras because I'm not gonna make any money from them
41:48So they're just gonna they released the Cobras and you ended up with more Cobras in the neighborhood than there were before
41:57Consequentialism
41:58consequentialism is a form of mysticism because
42:02nobody
42:03nobody can
42:04Determine the outcome of the future because of free will nobody can determine the app
42:09I mean if consequentialism was a thing then central planning would be possible, but it never is because nobody knows
42:15anything to do with the
42:16Outcomes of the future. Nobody knows supply and like without price signals. There is no supply and demand. There is no
42:23negotiation and all of the
42:25potential value in the economy can't be followed because
42:29Central planners don't know like, you know, if the price of gold goes up, sometimes people take old jewelry
42:35They don't use and has been around forever. They take their old jewelry
42:38They sell it because the price of gold has gone up
42:41Of course central planners don't know how much old jewelry people have and right so they just they can't possibly do it
42:46So now you can't you can't know the future. I mean if you say well, I know the good or bad based upon what's in the future
42:54Then you shouldn't be
42:57posting on my
43:00Channel right? You shouldn't be doing any of that, right?
43:03what you should be doing is
43:06you should
43:08Use your knowledge of the future because as a consequentialist
43:10You know
43:11The outcome of things in the future and you should use your knowledge of the future
43:15to play the stock market to buy and sell crypto to amass a
43:19Multi-trillion dollar fortune and then you can do massive amounts of good with that, right? I mean, that's a test, right?
43:25Consequentialism says I know the future but if you know the future
43:29Then you should invest and make money on the future, right?
43:33If you if you know if you can judge the morality of something by its consequences
43:37Then you know what's going to happen in the future
43:39You reject all public choice theory you
43:42Reject the argument that people change their behavior based upon different incentives and you that's one of the reasons you can't predict the future
43:48So you say no, no, no, I can predict the future
43:52Because morality has to be absolute which means you absolutely know what the future is
43:55But if you absolutely know what the future is
43:57Then you know what the price of Apple stock is going to be tomorrow
43:59You know what the price of bitcoins going to be next week
44:01But if you don't know that and of course you don't anybody who says they do is lying
44:07So if you don't know that then you are
44:11you
44:12Lying about consequentialism. I mean just being perfectly frank about this, right?
44:18Consequentialism is total lie. It's a fake. It's a nonsense
44:22It's embarrassing because people are claiming that they can judge
44:26Based upon a certain knowledge of the future
44:29But if they have certain knowledge of the future, they should take they could be multi-zillionaires like they could basically own the world economy
44:35But they never do that, right? I know I know complex moral blah blah blah the future this that and the other
44:40Oh, what's the price of Apple stock gonna be tomorrow? Well, I don't know that it's like, okay
44:44Well, then I don't know like it's just it's just a an annoying waste of time
44:48Completely bizarre to me. All right. So just to end up here
44:51He says he does definition of a principle the principle of the fundamental truth or proposition that serves as a foundation for a system
44:57beliefs or behavior or a chain of reasoning and then he says
45:01Manuel says for example, the moral principle of UPB is that the violation of property rights is bad
45:07Right. I mean most people are just arguing with ghosts or making things up or right because that's not the moral principle
45:14The violation of property rights is bad, but with it, that's just a statement
45:19Right UPB is a method of evaluating
45:23universal principles
45:25Evaluating the accuracy of universal principles morality is universal
45:28So if you make a moral proposition
45:31Can it be universalized?
45:33So if you say stealing is good, can it be universalized?
45:36And of course the UPB put that through that UPB machine and it says nope can't be universalized
45:41Everything which is asymmetric can't be universal
45:43I can't like I literally can't do these arguments again because I've done them about 10 zillion times over the course and you could just
45:48Go look up UPB at FDR podcast.com
45:51So he says for example, the moral principle of UPB is that the violation of property rights is bad
45:56That's a judgment based on the consequence that any acceptance of the violation of property rights will result in the loss of logical consistency
46:04which
46:05Then will result in the loss of certainty of the law
46:08In other words, the principle is made because we want to prevent any logical inconsistency to justify injustice
46:15so I
46:16Don't I don't know really what any of this means
46:18I mean people just put a bunch of baffled gab syllables together with the attempt to sounding smart, but without really communicating
46:25Anything at all
46:26So violation of property rights is bad
46:28I mean, I literally have a whole section on property rights in UPB doesn't quote it doesn't follow the argument doesn't he just
46:35Well UPB says that property rights are good. Therefore. I know what UPB is and I understand like you don't you don't I mean
46:41I came up with UPB like 15 years ago, and I still hiccup and trip over it from time to time
46:46Not because it's so complex
46:48I mean, I explained it to my daughter when she was a couple years old and she got it perfectly fine and has never wavered
46:53But just because we all have this programming about
46:57Morals and ethics and so on right in other words
47:00The principle is made because we want to prevent any logical inconsistency to justify injustice. I don't know what any of that means
47:06It's just if you claim something is universal
47:10But it can't be universal then you're wrong. That's all I don't know what any of this is like this baffled gap, right?
47:18if you claim that something is universal and
47:21It can't be universal then your claim is false
47:26Right. I mean for instance if I say that 2 and 2 make 4 is a universal
47:33Proposal it's a universal truth 2 and 2 make 4 is a universally
47:37Accurate equation 2 and 2 make 4 is universal and then I say except in Indiana
47:43in Indiana 2 and 2
47:46make a forearm
47:47Well, if I say 2 and 2 is universal and then I say except in Indiana
47:52Then I have made a false statement because things can't be universal except in India
47:58Universal means everywhere if you create a geographical exclusion then right it's impossible if I say that
48:07Stealing is UPB
48:08Well, it can't be universalized, right?
48:12It's asymmetrical, right?
48:13Somebody has to want you to not take their property for it to be stealing
48:17But if stealing is UPB then everybody wants to steal and be stolen from at the same time
48:21But if you want to be stolen from it's not theft
48:23So the debt by definition, you don't even need to put the star Indiana in right asterisk, Indiana by definition
48:31It's a false statement. It's a self contradictory statement
48:35It is exactly the same as the proposition of a square circle
48:40And
48:41You know all of this has been explained a thousand times before in the show
48:44But I guess this guy is too lofty in his intellect to read or learn anything
48:49So yeah, the principle is made because we want to prevent any logical inconsistency to justify and you know
48:54You just if you say something's universal, but it can't be universalized then you you're wrong
48:59If you say if you say stealing is UPB, but stealing can't be universalized by its definition
49:06It's asymmetrical one person wants the opposite of what somebody else wants
49:09So therefore like if one person wants the opposite of what someone else wants, they can't both want it at the same time
49:16Did you see what I mean?
49:17It's just basic logic
49:20Right. It is the same as saying
49:23One person must head north one person must head south. They both must go north
49:31Right if somebody says to you one person must according to my moral theory one person must go north
49:37The other person must go south
49:39Which is the definition of them both going north, right? You would say that's wrong
49:43That's like that's a logical problem because you've got two people doing opposite things, but then they're supposed to do the same thing
49:49So if you say stealing is UPB, everybody must want to steal and be stolen from at the same time
49:53But that can't happen. I
49:56mean it is a
49:58Logical
49:59Contradiction the contradiction in logic and a contradiction in logic cannot be allowed to stand
50:05Right that which is
50:06Antilogical cannot be valid. I mean this is I
50:11mean math science
50:13Engineering you name it, right?
50:15It doesn't right if if you go to NASA and you say I have a rocket that goes up into the sky and
50:23Down into the earth at exactly the same time
50:27They will say that you're crazy
50:29Because it can't do that. It can't go up and down at the same time
50:32Like can't go up into the sky and down it like you understand
50:35So I don't know what it means
50:37The principle is made because we want to prevent any logical inconsistency to justify and just I don't even know what any of that's just
50:43The word sound doesn't make any sense. So he says so here's a request if you disagree with what I've just explained
50:48Please provide an example of a moral principle. That's not defined by its consequences. Just one. Yeah, well
50:55Stealing can never be universally preferable behavior
50:58Okay, there you go
50:59There's no consequences in that
51:01Stealing can never be universally preferable behavior in
51:04The same way that a guy going north and a guy going south cannot both be going north at the same time a rocket going
51:10Up cannot also be going down at the same time
51:13two and two can't equal four and
51:16door handle simultaneously
51:18Right. I mean honestly just studied basic laws of logic, right?
51:21This is just this is just Aristotle's three laws of logic
51:24This is just basic laws of logic and you just need to you need to provide your definitions
51:28And this arrogance of like provide me this it's like if you haven't thought things through and I do this because it's you know
51:34Generally interesting and and a good training on critical thinking, right?
51:39Rape theft assault and murder can never be UPV. There you go. Well, what are the consequences of that?
51:44I I don't know. It doesn't doesn't matter. It doesn't matter
51:49Two and two cannot equal five. Well, what are the consequences of that?
51:53I don't know and it doesn't matter two and two do not equal five. There's no such thing as a square circle
51:58Well, what are the consequences of that? You can't say there's no such thing as a square circle without thinking about consequences
52:05It's like no, it's a statement of fact. There is no such thing as a square circle
52:11Well, but but but the consequence is that as you want people to stop believing in is no
52:16No, I mean would I prefer it? Yeah, but I don't base my argument on the consequences
52:21I hope that the consequences are that people stop believing in
52:25square circles and that two and two make five and I hope that people stop believing that
52:30stealing can ever be UPV or
52:32The two and two make four except in Indiana. The initiation of the use of force is wrong except for government, right?
52:37It's the same thing. I hope that people will
52:40Believe things that are true and logical and consistent. Yeah, that'd be great
52:44But whether people do or don't accept logic
52:49Has no effect on
52:51the truth of falsehood of a proposition
52:54If a guy is running off a cliff flapping his arms saying I believe I can fly
52:59I will tell him to stop because he can't I
53:03Hope he stops
53:04But whether he stops or not has no effect on gravity
53:09whether people believe or reject
53:13True or false propositions has no effect on the truth or falsehood of those propositions
53:18That would be to say that truth is democratic which would be a violation of UPV truth is universal and therefore
53:24It's not subject to opinions
53:26You can't disbelieve in gravity. You can't disbelieve in logic. You can't disbelieve. I mean, sorry
53:32You can't gravity doesn't change whether you believe in it or not. Truth doesn't change whether you believe it or not
53:37So there you go. I hope this makes some sense and listen
53:40I mean look I appreciate the the effort that you're putting into this
53:43I do I think it's very interesting and it gives me something to to bounce off
53:47But you don't you really don't know what you're doing. Okay, I'm sorry philosophy is just tricky
53:52Are you got a blank slate this stuff and say well, what if I knew nothing and you got a built thing?
53:56I'll be doing this for 40 years, right and
53:58you you don't know what you're doing and I say this, you know, because you're a smart guy good language skills and
54:04I hope that you will learn something from this but right now you're just making assertions
54:09you're equating things that are opposites and
54:12you're getting definitions completely wrong about what UPB is and
54:15you're just I
54:17mean
54:18The image that comes to my mind. I'm sorry. This is unfair
54:21It's like a toddler flinging a bunch of food around saying that
54:25He's a an expert chef, right? I'm Gordon Ramsay. It's like no, but you you just throwing food around you having a food fight
54:32You're not a chef and you're just throwing words around you're not yet at the process of thinking
54:36But I hope that you will think about thinking in the future
54:39All right. Thanks everyone so much free to man comm session eight to help out the show really appreciate that
54:42Have yourself a delightful wonderful beautiful day
54:45Appreciate everyone's comments free to man locals calm to join the community free to man comm session eight to help out
54:50Thanks so much. Everyone. What's up? Take care. Bye