• 2 days ago
"What is the purpose or goal of doing ethics? How is universal preference - as defined in Universally Preferable Behaviour - different from an indicative conditional?"

Listen to the full show here: https://fdrpodcasts.com/3133/selfharming-monks-who-listen-to-bad-music-call-in-show-november-18th-2015

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, multiple interactive multi-lingual philosophy AIs trained on thousands of hours of my material, as well as targeted AIs for Real-Time Relationships, BitCoin, Peaceful Parenting, and Call-Ins. Don't miss the 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
Transcript
00:00What is the purpose slash goal of doing ethics?
00:04How is universal preference as defined in the book universally preferable behavior on page 33 and 34?
00:12different from an indicative
00:14Conditional use a bunch more questions, but that's good to start off with all right so nice to meet you. How you doing?
00:20I'm doing fine. How are you?
00:22Well, thanks
00:24Let's start with the first question. What is the point of doing ethics? Is that right?
00:30Yep
00:32Well, I think skits actually frustrated and it likes to be done just kidding
00:39Okay, tell me what you mean by
00:41By doing ethics. I assume we're not talking about roofing ethics. This is a seduction based scenario. What do you mean by doing ethics?
00:51It's a little hard to explain
00:53It's it's sort of the notion when someone I guess does something like I guess theology
00:59I guess what I would
01:01Know no. No, what do you what do you dragon theology?
01:04Yeah, I know I'm giving an analogy
01:08Sort of explain
01:09So if someone does that and I say to them, what's the goal of doing it?
01:14I I would imagine to give an answer of the sort that you're trying to understand. I guess what God is, right?
01:20but then in doing ethics, I
01:23Suppose I guess why would someone I guess want to figure out or at least why would you even conceive of a notion?
01:29That there are certain behaviors people ought to act I guess in accordance with
01:35Rights, right. I mean, it's an old question and
01:40It goes a little something like this
01:44Good people don't need an ethical theory to be good. I
01:49Don't wake up in the morning seething with a mad desire to
01:54Torture animals and set fire to buildings and so on but I'm like, ah
01:59Evil blocked by UPB. Damn it. If only I hadn't developed that theory I could unleash all the anglo-saxon
02:07pointy-headed evil in the world
02:09And so good people don't need a system of ethics to be good and bad people
02:16Won't become good because they've heard a good system of ethics
02:19So it kind of leaves ethics as they used to say when I was a kid at sixes and sevens
02:24Which means it's kind of like halfway in between a useless place and another useless place. Is that something to do with what you're asking?
02:32Yes, but
02:34Well, then if you if you sort of explain it that way then it seems like a sort of I guess pointless endeavor
02:39Because even if you do do a job
02:41The people that I guess you're that would take it already don't need it and the people that do need it won't take it
02:48like we're waiting for Luigi the pockmarked mafioso hitman to call into the show and say I
02:54Decided to stop shooting people because I read UPB that to me
02:58I gotta think that'd be kind of a killer scoop in the world of philosophy now to be fair we have
03:05We have got people out of the military
03:07We've got people to convince others to get out of the military got people out of abusive relationship
03:10So, you know all of that is is great
03:13but I
03:16Think that there is a very important
03:19foundational fundamental reason as to why we would
03:22Do do ethics and I can give you a little rant about that and then you can tell me what you think if that helps
03:28Sure
03:29All right
03:31so I
03:32Have not instructed say my daughter on a complicated system of ethics because she is an incredibly nice person
03:39To begin with and not nice like oh, can I offer you some more tea?
03:45Would you like anything from my savings account?
03:47You know not not a sort of one of these drippy people but a really nice person who also knows when it's time to be
03:52Firm and oh, you know, I like to think that I've modeled some of that behavior and so on
03:57so I
03:58Don't need a system of ethics for her because you know
04:03She's been treated gently and kindly and respectfully and and peacefully her whole and it negotiated with her whole life
04:08So she doesn't need a system of ethics. However, I am going to I am instructing her in ethics as a whole
04:15I don't need to instruct her in ethics for her to be a good person, but I need to instruct her in
04:21ethics because of other people
04:24Okay, right that the question is not will ethics made make a good person good or a bad person. Good. No ethics is
04:33self-defense against bad people
04:37Right that that's the missing part, you know
04:40we look at individuals in isolation not as an aggregation or not as a social collective or as
04:45sort of social atoms that continually try to influence each other and
04:51So you need like why outside of hunting right and and and that why do people have guns
04:59Right, well, why do people have guns they have guns because bad people have guns, right?
05:04Yeah, it's self-defense against bad people. You didn't just own a gun if you lived in a desert island
05:10Yeah, I don't maybe want to shoot a coconut out of the air or something but wing a turn and eat it but we have
05:16Ethics as self-defense against those who's the evil people their greatest power at the redefinition of ethics, right?
05:24Yeah, the redefinition of ethics. I mean I've talked about this before in the show and just touching it briefly here
05:29The question of guilt if you can make people feel guilty in particularly European case elected people
05:34It creates a situation of discomfort, which they will then pay to be alleviated off
05:39so if you can convince someone that they have in a white privilege or
05:44patriarchy or that they're responsible for slavery or they profited from
05:49Colonialism and so on like people always say this in the comments whenever I talk about Europe and the rest of the world
05:53Well Europe got all of its money from pillaging
05:57So on it, yeah, that's right because nobody pillaged before Europe came along boy
06:03Everybody was just it was one giant robot city of infinite blitz before Europe came along and took a giant dump on the glorified
06:10Hippie kumbaya group hugs of everybody's sharing and cooperation
06:16So, of course every culture and pillaged and and raped and and slaughtered and murdered and conquered and all that when when it could
06:23But there was something quite different about the Industrial Revolution and some
06:27still
06:28Existing vestiges of human freedom that Europe developed, but if you can make people feel guilty
06:34Then they'll give you stuff right and so but you make good people feel guilty
06:40by
06:41applying collective
06:44Standards of bad behavior like that. They're bad because they're in a category. The category is bad, right?
06:51So if you're a Catholic then
06:53If you're born, you're born into original sin and you're tainted with the disobedience of Adam and Eve you didn't have to do anything
07:00And that's the key thing corrupt people will convince you you didn't have to do anything
07:05In order for you to be guilty. It is not an individual action on your part that has caused the guilt
07:13That the bad behavior that you are guilty of it's because you're part of a category
07:18You're a white male. So you're privileged
07:21You're a European. So you profited from slavery and colonialism. There's just this whole category
07:27that you must feel guilty because you are part of a particular category and
07:33Therefore you must give people things in order to make that guilt go away. And of course, it's basically emotional blackmail and
07:41I don't know how we could break that word down
07:44But it's emotional blackmail and and the way that it it works is appeasement brings more demands
07:51appeasement brings more demands and
07:55You know, maybe that's why Charlie Sheen went positive with his HIV statistically playing off all these blackmailers
08:01Although he did actually but so there's this general
08:06collective guilt that people can try and impose upon you and
08:11So they'll say basically
08:14Particularly and they won't say it explicitly
08:15It has to be just generally implied and so on and with a a weight of
08:20Historical passive aggression behind it, which is a clear warning that if you defy they're gonna escalate until you comply the verbal attacks or whatever
08:28So there's this general
08:30you are part of this race category and
08:34therefore you are
08:36bad or
08:37You are part of some other race category in which case you're good. You you are a victim
08:43You can't be racist yourself and you're always right in any conflict and so on, right?
08:48Yeah
08:48or there are Asians who nobody talks to talk about because they don't fit the mold of white racism because they generally do better in
08:53white countries than white people did
08:55so
08:57Why should we care
09:00About ethics in that situation. Well, it's self-defense
09:04against racism in this case, right because obviously to say
09:08white people or white males are
09:11Our
09:12collective recipients of
09:14institutional privilege
09:16Which they get by oppressing other people
09:19Well, of course the rational response is okay. Well, I haven't oppressed any black person. No. No, it doesn't work that way
09:26You don't have to actually do it. You just
09:29You know the numbers have to deviate in some manner
09:32You know like that
09:32There are fewer blacks making more money or fewer blacks in college or fewer blacks in in high levels of occupation and so on and therefore
09:40Oppression clings to you like I don't know
09:44Some media experts won't take no for an answer. Like what? Like why don't rights?
09:49Like why is that?
09:51That's pretty good. That's pretty good
09:53so
09:54so of course the
09:57Lunatic thing here is that when people say well, you know white males are wrong
10:03White males are oppressors and isn't any other they're making a collective judgment about race
10:08Somehow I'm sorry. It's hard to say this is a straight man
10:10They're making a collective judgment about race that is somehow supposed to be anti racist, right?
10:14Yeah, I mean I can't think of anything. I literally cannot think of anything that I could say
10:23about
10:24blacks or Asians as an aggregate I
10:29Mean even the categories are kind of fuzzy
10:33so I
10:35Like I couldn't honestly say well blacks or this or Asians or that
10:38you know, but people can say this about you know, why it's the last legitimate group left to hate on the planet and
10:43So why would you need ethics you need ethics because you need self-defense against manipulations
10:49Or you know the idea that well, the government is here to protect you from
10:53Aggression from the initiation of force. It's like oh, how is this government funded by aggressing against you and initiating force? Hmm. I
11:01Think like if you if there was no government and you put this forward in a philosophy course
11:06You wouldn't even get past the intro to philosophy stuff, right?
11:12Oh, is that right Naomi Campbell is half black half Asian
11:19Tiger Woods, I mean obviously he's half mammal half foliage. So that's really confusing
11:25But it's it right half black half Asian, all right, I guess that's what the internet tells me
11:32It does I'm not sure why you have Google Alerts for half black half Asian Michael
11:38But I'd really like you to forward me those links if you don't
11:41God's Photoshop
11:46So, I think that we study ethics for the same reason that you carry a gun in a bad neighborhood
11:51If it's legal right in that there are other people out there who are gonna try and do you harm?
11:56Through appealing to ethical norms or standards and you need a way to defend against them so that they'll not be able to trigger
12:04Guilt in you, right? So that would be my sense. What do you think? Yeah, that's it seems pretty good
12:11And it also it's sort of interesting because if you put it that way then it's of like evil people do ethics
12:17So they can I guess acquire more power and get away with doing this
12:21And so the good people have to do it in order to defend themselves
12:25Dude, you uh, you know, you just finished the show. I'm gonna go for a smoke. That's that but that was stone genius
12:31Yeah, absolutely, right. I couldn't agree with you more. So because we agree we know they're right
12:38Oh, yeah, and getting to the second question which really has to do with the book on page 30
12:44I
12:47Should I just read the part are you currently calling from a shower?
12:51No, it's just I'm close to a kitchen. Oh
12:55Okay, it's not the end of the world. But if there's any way the person could
12:59Wash their feet later
13:02I'll take a burger
13:05You have to remember you have to talk something about bad taste of music
13:08Let me have that pickup artist about that. All right
13:11so do you want me to quote from the book and
13:15I I'm saying can I just read those parts? Yeah. Yeah. Yeah
13:20and
13:21you know on page 30 you define universal preference and then again in page 33 to 34 and
13:27The there's a slight difference in the definitions you put forward and I'm not sure which one I guess we should go by
13:35So the first one says when I speak of universal preference
13:38I'm really defining what is objectively required or necessary assuming a particular goal
13:43and on page 33 to 34
13:47It's defined as does when I talk about universal preferences
13:52I'm talking about what people should prefer not what they always do prefer to use a scientific analogy to truly understand the universe
13:59People should use the scientific method
14:01This does not mean they always do so since clearly billions of people consult ancient fairytales rather than modern science for answers
14:08So there's a slight difference in those definitions. I'm not sure
14:13It's the same and I'm just confused
14:16Well, I don't see this light difference, but that'd be because it's my book. Maybe I'm not as objective about it as you are
14:24So let's go through the first one and just make sure we understand it go through the second
14:28Sure, and then see if we can find the difference. So sorry the first quote again
14:32When I speak of a universal preference, I'm really defining what is objectively required or necessary assuming a particular goal
14:41Okay
14:43So it's the sentence is here when I speak of you. Sorry, you've read it. I just want to give the whole paragraph
14:47Yeah, when I speak of a universal preference
14:49I'm really defining what is objectively required or necessary assuming a particular goal if I want to live
14:54I do not have to like jazz, but I must eat eating remains a preference
14:58I do not have to eat in the same way that I have to obey gravity
15:02But eating is a universal objective and by at a binding requirement for staying alive since it relies on biological facts that cannot
15:09Be wished away. Yes, right
15:11so so there are three categories here, right one is
15:15Preferences that are not central to living like liking jazz or not liking jazz. Yeah
15:21But still a choice obviously second is preferences essential for living that are a choice like whether you eat or not
15:27and the third is
15:31Things that are not open to your choice like whether you can choose to obey gravity or not, right? Yeah
15:38Okay
15:39Universal preference objectively required or necessary now, we always have to assume a particular goal
15:44You I don't think you can have a preference that is in any way universal
15:51That can avoid the need for a particular goal
15:57So I just that's why we have to assume a particular goal, otherwise there can't be any
16:03universality
16:05in in the in the preferences
16:07Okay, and because sorry because if it's not tied into anything objective or out there
16:12Or a goal that is preferred then it is just a subjective preference like I like jazz which can't really be part of philosophy then
16:20So, okay. We got universal preference if you want to if you want to
16:24Assume a particular goal now the way this works in in ethics at least as far as I see is
16:29that if you are claiming that
16:31That
16:34You are putting forward an ethical theory or an ethical proposition then it has to fall into the categories of universal
16:40Preferable and behavior, right? That's sort of my argument and for those who want the book. It's um
16:45It's a free domain radio.com slash free. You can get audiobook or PDF or HTML or or any of those sort of things and
16:56So that
16:57The first aspect is pretty clear if you at least to me right then again I make the whole case in the book
17:03But if you say that something's ethical then it has to be universal because if it's not universal
17:09Then it's a personal or subjective preference like I like jazz or I like ice cream if it is universal
17:14Then it has to be something that can be preferred like you can't have as your universal system of ethics
17:19Defying gravity. I mean you can but it'll be a pretty short-lived movement with a lot of splatter marks
17:25And and so it has to be universal it has to be preferable and it has to be behavior not thoughts because thoughts can't be
17:33verified objectively and
17:35This is why there's no such thing as thought crimes outside of Missouri
17:39University so
17:41So that's the first sentence. I'm not saying that's that perfect
17:43But that's the first paragraph and you give me the second again. The second one is on is at the end of page 33
17:50Which is does when I talk about universal preferences, I'm talking about what people should prefer not what they always do prefer
17:58Yes, okay and
18:00Why are these so one I'm saying?
18:02Okay, if you have a particular preference, there's objective ways to achieve it
18:06And then when I talk about universal preferences
18:09I'm talking about what people should prefer well
18:11not what they always do prefer because if people always did prefer something you wouldn't need a system of ethics because it would be
18:17Involuntary like there's no system of ethics that involves obedience to gravity because obedience to gravity is involuntary
18:23So it has to be something about that people have a choice about preferring if that makes sense
18:27And that's why I say I'm talking about people should prefer not what they always do prefer
18:32Yeah, I understand that but I'm saying the difference I guess I perceive is that the previous one sort of denotes
18:40Assuming some certain goals, but this one doesn't necessarily include such a clause
18:47You
18:51When I talk about
18:52Universal preferences, I'm talking about what people should prefer not what they always do prefer
18:56To use a scientific analogy to truly understand the universe people should use the scientific method doesn't mean they always do they consult Bibles and stuff
19:04There is no way to achieve truth about the universe without science
19:07But people are perfectly free to redefine truth as error and content themselves with mystical
19:11nonsense
19:14So I don't include the goal thing here, but I don't deny the goal thing here does that make sense yes
19:20Like I'm not. I'm just so I've said okay. Well. We need a goal and
19:24Here I say okay. Well. I'm making sure that people understand that it is preferable in other words people can prefer it
19:30But they don't always prefer it and again. I can't think of anything in this life that people always
19:35Prefer I mean I maybe you can I've given myself this thought exercise a couple of times
19:41But you know what what are people always prefer sex no they're amongst some money. No they're amongst
19:47Life no there are suicides. You know good music. No, there's Nickelback. Oh, I don't even know
19:53I don't even have any particular opinion about Nickelback
19:56But they're just a band that people like to make fun of and who am I to not follow the crowd so
20:01I can't think of anything that people
20:06Always prefer
20:07so
20:09I'm not
20:14I'm not denying the preference part here or the the goal part here, but I don't think it denies it now if I said well
20:22You know you don't need a goal or a goal is bad or whatever that would be in contradiction
20:26To the earlier part, but the fact that I don't remind people of the goal here when I'm talking about something else
20:30I don't think is a contradiction it may be somewhat incomplete, but again you can't pull everything
20:36I'm not saying that together
20:37I'm not saying I was just getting the idea that is it the same thing and
20:41Now you're sort of confirming that it is in fact the same thing
20:46Yeah, I mean if you I mean it is almost a tautology, but not quite I think which is to say
20:51That I mean if if you if people accept that that ethics have to be universal universally preferable behaviors
21:00Then the behaviors have to be universal and preferable and behaviors right I mean
21:04It sounds like a tautology, but it's not because I do go through the reason as to why
21:10Ethics has to conform to these three standards that it's universal that is preferable and that is behavior
21:16So it's not quite a tautology, but once we accept that so if people want to put forward an ethical theory
21:22Ethical theories are binding on other people. Yeah, right. I mean otherwise
21:26They're not ethical theories it has to be something that can you go to jail for it?
21:30Do other people have the right to defend against it do they have the right to shoot you if you violate it
21:34Don't you know break into their house, or you know gnaw on their leg or something like that and
21:39so if ethics is something which is
21:43enforceable upon others and binding upon others then
21:48There must be a mechanism by which that can be established and proven and again people can act against it
21:52But the purpose to me of ethics is to give people the right of self-defense
21:58Intellectually right because if you can defend yourself intellectually for the most part you won't need to defend yourself physically the physical
22:05Defense is always the end result of a lack of an intellectual defense right like I mean the the sort of quote compatibility between
22:12Western European
22:15Female friendly maybe over friendly cultures and say something like Islam
22:20Well, there's a lack of intellectual clarity and defense about that first and as a result
22:24There's a need for a physical defense, which is not achievable because people aren't allowed to have weapons
22:28So I hope that makes some kind of sense
22:31Yeah, that makes sense
22:32And now given that given that definition my I guess question then is always how is it different from an indicative conditional?
22:40Which is the if-then statement?
22:42Like if this is true, then this must also sort of follow like if you want to find out
22:47The truth about I guess the physical world you should use the scientific method sort of statements
22:54Okay, and just because people indicative conditionals is not always particularly clear for people
23:01So here's something from Plato dot Stanford edu
23:05It was first published one day or Wednesday August 8th 2001. Oh, no, it's been revised since so I assume it's still valid
23:11All right, take a sentence in the indicative mood suitable for making a statement
23:15We'll be home by 10 Tom cooked the dinner attach a conditional
23:20Clause to it and you have a sentence which makes a conditional statement
23:24we'll be home by 10 if
23:26the train is on time or if Mary didn't cook the dinner Tom cooked it and
23:33They go into you know, when you can look this up just indicative
23:37conditionals and it is
23:40people who have a lot of
23:42Time on their hands and I guess enjoy during logic trees rather than going out and helping people in the real world
23:48spend a lot of time on this kind of stuff and
23:52so my
23:53way of saying is is that if you wish me to be bound by your system of ethics, you must establish that your ethical theory is
24:02universally preferable behavior
24:04Okay, right and that's my self-defense
24:08That's my self-defense
24:10You know if people scream at me that I'm privileged and I need to grapple before them
24:14I would question their knowledge of the word privilege
24:17Yes, that does not sound like very privileged behavior to me or or when people say well as a white male
24:23Have you ever experienced racism? It's like
24:26you know, there's a lot of people who don't get hired who are white males because people are trying to hit particular quotas and
24:34so, you know this I
24:36just
24:38Need that defense because people will constantly come at you and try and define
24:42Discomfort into your limbic system so that you'll pay them off, you know
24:45It's like this old it's an old thing in movies where someone injects you with a poison then you have 24 hours
24:52To find the cure or you're gonna die and and so on and and that's what people do is is people will come up to you
24:58And and it's not known. It's every race and every culture and every creed and every rights. It's all over the place
25:04They'll come up to you and say
25:07You're bad
25:09Yeah, and and you'll say well, what did I do? Oh
25:13It's not something you do. It's something you are. It's like what?
25:17so I'm bad because
25:20Reasons no reasons. You're bad because category. I
25:24Don't think a category can be bad. Can I be judged as an individual? No
25:28You can't be judged as an individual because category or whatever, right?
25:32I mean and this this could be the case in many different contexts and
25:37So the defense is
25:39Okay. Well, so you're saying that you have a category of ethics. Is it universal?
25:44Right. In other words, does it apply to everyone equally all the time and in all circumstances? Yeah
25:50Okay, that's the first right. Are you talking about something that people can prefer or not now?
25:54I can't not prefer to be a white male
25:57Look man. I took dance classes in theater school
26:01Trust me when I say world out there
26:03I cannot choose to not be a white male people would actually come to watch me do dance routines because they just found it funny
26:09and basically it was like a fast-fed compilation of failed videos watched on acid and
26:15So, I don't so clearly I can't choose to not be a white male and therefore
26:21The second part right is is not
26:25Valid and it's if it's behavior, right if I'm supposed to have done something that's bad or oppressive to women or minorities or something
26:32Should point to me the behavior that I've done right? So so this sort of social justice warrior stunk
26:38SJW versus UPB one of them is Rhonda Rousey
26:42Well Rhonda Rousey before the last match and then it switches. Anyway, I'm gonna overuse that metaphor but
26:51Analogy so so yeah
26:52Someone comes up to me and says like you're a bad guy because you're a white privileged male who's racist because category or something
26:58Okay, I say well, is it universal?
27:00No, because it only applies to white males. Is it behavior that I've done that has rendered me to be bad?
27:05Well, no because they can't point to any specific behavior that I've done that is racist or exclusionary or something like that
27:11And is it something I can prefer or not?
27:14Well, no because I'm in a biological category that I can't hop out of no matter what my thoughts
27:18maybe I can't will my outie peepee to suddenly become a burrowing anteater any and so
27:26That fails, right?
27:27So this is this is the you know
27:28And people say well, how can you stand up to because I I have UPB
27:32That did it and the cavalry is riding in and when people say well, you're a bad guy because X Y & Z category
27:38It's like okay. I just put it through the UPB mill and it fails at every conceivable level
27:43So that's my self-defense and that's kind of the gift that I try to put out to the world to give people
27:48The self-defense of people coming up to you and saying well, you're bad. You're bad. And by the way, can you give me money?
27:54No, I won't say that you're bad
27:55well
27:55I'll stop saying you're bad for about 12 minutes then I'll come back saying you're even worse until you give me more money and then
28:00Repeat until society collapses, but it is giving people the gift of saying okay. Well, this person's making a moral proposition
28:07Does it pass the test of universally?
28:10preferable behavior and if it doesn't I
28:13Don't have to listen to it at all right that that's my fundamental reason as to why it's not gonna make
28:18bad people good and it's not gonna make good people get better, but what it does is it it blocks it
28:25blocks
28:27the sliding slope that bad people like to create wherein resources flow from the
28:32Simulated overstimulated guilty consciences of good people towards people who say aren't so good. It blocks the resource transfer of
28:40manipulative ethics that grabs resources from good people and deposits them in the lap of bad people so it ends the subsidy for
28:48Bad people from good people and that's my particular goal
28:52Okay
28:54Yeah, I'm just to be sure it's
28:58The question about the I was different from indicative conditional you say it's because of I guess logical
29:03Complications that it was easier to present it this way
29:11Well, I
29:13Mean when I say if you want to achieve a particular goal, or there's a conditional then it's in that category
29:19Right. It's not gravity is right, which is not a conditional. Yeah, and
29:26So whenever there's a if right if you want to do X
29:30ABC is the way to go if you want to head north go that way right if you don't want to head north whatever it
29:35Yeah, so
29:37It is
29:39Within that category, but if you sort of take the long view out
29:45Logic itself is in that category if you wish for your statements to even be potentially true
29:50They have to be internally consistent first and foremost
29:52They have to be logically consistent and secondly they have to be in accordance with empirical reality
29:58So everything that has a value attached to it has that kind of if then statement
30:05You know if you're hungry
30:08Go get something to eat right if you're not hungry, then you don't right
30:11There's no commandment says go get something to eat
30:13Unless you happen to be in Florida and you're American in which case that seems to be their UPV. Oh
30:19So I
30:21Think everything that but but people make the mistake of thinking well because it's conditional if then
30:26Then somehow it's subjective. I
30:29Don't think that's the case at all. There are some if then's which are subjective, you know, if
30:35You like jazz then, you know go and see Yanni play whatever that weird hippie stick is that he
30:42Beats up music with and go do that, right? Yeah, but that's not an ethical statement
30:47aesthetics perhaps another matter but
30:50There are absolutes out there
30:53Which are entirely around if then and they're around choice and preferences and so on, right?
30:59If you want to not have a stomach ache don't eat gravel while listening to Nickelback anyway
31:05It's that but it doesn't mean that they're subjective. Yeah, I understand. Okay, and
31:10Which brings me to?
31:12page 35
31:15premise for
31:18And it says
31:20There's only this really one statement in it that I guess I'm interested in and it's in the last line
31:27Which is that truth is universally preferable to error and that truth is universally objective
31:34Given I guess the definition of universally preferable. We're going with when you say truth is universally preferable to error
31:43It's unclear at least to me what this statement I
31:48Guess means because again going by the notion that it's it's sort of conditional
31:55What I guess the universe universal preference is sort of pseudo conditional then when you say truth is universally preferable to error
32:03As opposed to what?
32:06As opposed to error
32:10Like you you can't say I'm wrong
32:13Therefore, I'm right. That would be too obvious a contradiction, right?
32:17So nobody puts forward an argument that says my facts are wrong. My reasoning is wrong, and I'm just plain wrong
32:24So I'm right that that would never happen, right?
32:26So truth is always perceived as universally preferable to error. And of course it again
32:33it's almost tautological, but if you want to
32:37Achieve the truth then you have to pursue the methodologies that allow you to achieve the truth
32:45And and truth is universally preferable to error in that the way that
32:50Philosophy works is that once you've made once you've admitted to error
32:56then you have to change your
32:59perspective
33:00you have to change your opinion and
33:03Like if I say, oh my podcasts, I'm gonna sell them for a thousand dollars a second, right?
33:10Then I can put that out there if I want and see if the market will bear it and I will find that the
33:15In fact won't bear it and I will not make any particular sales
33:20So I've got I think it's true that people will pay a thousand dollars a second for my podcasts
33:25I can put that out there and find out whether or not it is true
33:31now if it's not true, I don't get to go and
33:34Hold people up with a knife to their ribs and say here listen to these five seconds now
33:38Give me five thousand dollars, right? I mean that would not be valid
33:42So if I have a hypothesis about the value of my podcasts
33:45I put them out of the marketplace and they're not worth that then
33:48obviously, I have to change my hypothesis about what they're worth to people because price is an objective measure of a
33:55transaction of resources for value in the moment or value for value in the moment and
34:00so if I admit that I am wrong, then the rule is that you
34:06Stop putting forward that particular argument you stop holding that particular position
34:10You can revisit it and you can refine it and so on
34:13But if if you go out in science and you try to establish a particular correlation and you can't
34:18Then you can redefine the experiment, but that experiment has been a failure
34:23I mean doesn't or not a failure because you've proven that there's no correlation at least in that
34:27Circumstance. So truth is universally preferable to
34:31Error because that's the deal when it comes to having a debate or having a conversation with someone and you know
34:37I've had hundreds of debates in my life and a couple of dozen probably here on the show and
34:42that's the way it works is that people try to say that my logic is incorrect or my data is invalid and
34:48That way they hope to dislodge me from my particular position and at the same time
34:53I'm trying to show that their logic is invalid or their data is
34:58Incorrect and I'm trying to dislodge them from their position now in my experience very few people
35:04Get dislodged from their particular positions no matter how much
35:08Evidence and reason you bring to the table, which is why I would you know, not usually have these kinds of debates
35:16Unless it was in a public space where I could help other people
35:20You know, I'm not gonna go to a dinner party and chat about the flat earth with someone right?
35:24but if it's a public way of showing, you know, how you can be patient and reasonable and and
35:31hopefully helpful to people who have
35:33Let's say divergent methodologies of achieving truth
35:37then so I think to say that youth is truth is universally preferable is
35:42One of these things that you really can't argue against because either you can say well
35:46Truth is not universally preferable because then you have to say okay. Well, is that a true statement?
35:52No, it's a false statement it's a false statement the truth is not universally preferable it's like okay
35:58Well, you've just disqualified yourself from that position, right?
36:00And if you say it is a true statement that truth is universally preferable
36:04Oh, I'm sorry
36:05If you say it is a true statement the truth is not universally preferable then you've just self-detonated your argument, right?
36:11because you said that I am I
36:15am putting forward a universally true
36:18Argument that truth is not a universally valid or valuable thing in which case why would you why would you bother?
36:24I'm gonna make any sense
36:27By the way, I would like to invite flat
36:30Flat earthers to dinner and just have you know, well, I just I just wanted to mention that. Oh, that would be a lot of fun
36:36yeah, I understand the argument but there is the for instance, there are some people that I guess I've met that you're sort of the
36:45I know that I guess my belief in some sort of higher being might be irrational, but it gives me sort of satisfaction
36:52So I'm fine with it where it seems to them truth doesn't appear to be I guess
36:59universally preferable so it sort of creates
37:02Wait, hang on. Are you saying that people say there isn't a God but I choose to believe one because it makes me feel better
37:08They say they don't care if there is one but believing in one doesn't make them feel better
37:15Well, okay, so then are you saying they're saying that their feelings yes
37:21Have a higher standard of value than sort of empirical or objective truth. Yes
37:26Okay, so then they've put forward a proposition and you'd say does it actually make you feel better and they'd say well, yes
37:33so it's true that
37:36It makes you feel better right because if it was false, you'd hold something else and then they would say
37:42feelings
37:45the highest
37:47Standard of value right and people can say that and and quite often they do and quite often they're in heels
37:55And and so you but again, we're back to this thing
37:58Where's like, yeah people can have some other methodology for I saw really a methodology. They can have some other approach
38:05For for the universal value but feelings can't be you know, we put okay the statement
38:12Whatever makes me feel good is the highest standard of value
38:16Okay. Well, let's put that through you PB. Are your feelings?
38:21Universalizable. Well, clearly they're not
38:24People have opposite feelings
38:26people have no feeling
38:28and and people have
38:30They're asleep and they're having dreams and they're having other kinds of feelings the feelings come and go and so on right so clearly it's not
38:38Universally is it preferable to have certain feelings or other feelings? I don't think that that's entirely the case because
38:46Feelings are not under direct conscious volitional control. You can't order yourself to be happy
38:52Otherwise, you know therapy would just be a boot camp of screening at people to suck it up and be happy dirtbag or something
38:58Like that. You can't order yourself to be happy and
39:01Feelings are not behaviors
39:04Feelings are they may result in behavior, but they themselves are not behaviors. So
39:10The question of well can feelings be the highest standard of value?
39:14Well, I don't see how that that passes none of the UPB and then people may say well
39:20I'm gonna hold it anyway, and it's like, okay
39:22Well, then you just but you're claiming that something is true outside of yourself, which falls into the universal standard, right? There is a God
39:29And that's what makes you feel better because if somebody genuinely did not or accepted that there was no God
39:34Then the positive feelings they would get out of believing in God would vanish to some degree over time, right?
39:40yeah, and
39:41so
39:43They are basing their emotions on a truth claim outside of themselves now
39:47They may avoid examining whether or not there is a God in order to maintain their feelings
39:51They may just want to hang around with other people who believe the same emotional stuff. So they may have all of that
39:57But it doesn't pass UPB and
40:00They are making that containing a contradiction because they're saying well the happiness that I have from believing in God requires that there be a God
40:07out there
40:08otherwise, I
40:10Won't get the same level of happiness
40:12So they're making truth claim outside of themselves and then they're saying but I don't want to examine that truth game and that's fine
40:18you know again, that's just people who say they know something about reality by consulting chicken entrails and
40:24That's again, you don't have to follow the methodology that you claim is valid, but you can't win an argument that way
40:32Yeah, the reason I asked that is because if I substitute I guess the earlier
40:37definition for universally preferable and I say truth is
40:41Going with the definition on page 30 truth is
40:46objectively required or necessary
40:49It would be assuming some particular goal and in their case apparently they're not interested in said girl
40:54No, no, they are though because if somebody says I'm happier when I believe in God
40:59Then they're saying that they need to believe that there's a God outside their head that operates in the universe that they have some relationship
41:06With and who cares about like there's a whole bunch of things that they need to establish
41:10In order to achieve the emotional benefit that they want, right?
41:14Yeah, and so those are truth claims that exist independent of consciousness and
41:19So if they then say well, but I don't care if he exists or not
41:22I mean, you know people can say whatever they want, but there's still implicit
41:28Axioms or or claims there are implicit claims embedded in the proposition that God exists and it makes me feel better
41:35when he or she does exist that is God exists is a
41:41truth claim that is
41:43Outside of emotions and preferences and mere mortal consciousness
41:50Yeah, I understand that but again, I guess I'm having difficulty again if I substitute the definition like I said truth is
41:58objectively required or necessary
42:01I guess it would interpret or necessary to error, which I'm not sure I doubt would I guess substitute
42:07Well, no if if you're making a truth claim about something in the universe, yes
42:14Right, then it is not up to your feelings whether that is true or not. Like if I say I feel happy, okay
42:20well, I
42:21Could make that claim. Maybe you could record it on some MRI or something like that, but I say I feel happy
42:26I'm not making a truth claim about the universe, right? Yeah
42:30But if I say that God exists, I'm making a truth claim about the universe that is independent of my consciousness
42:36Yeah, I'm not proposing a subjective truth like I am happy but an objective truth like God exists, right? Yes
42:44Now if you wish to make an objective truth claim
42:48Then you have to follow the rules of making an objective truth claim because you can't say well
42:54I want God to exist therefore God exists, right? I mean, that's not a valid way of
42:59You know, I guess otherwise
43:00There'd be a whole lot of instant karma Kim Kardashian's appearing in 14 year old boys bedrooms at about 1130 at night, right?
43:07Yes
43:08And so if you're going to make a truth claim that is independent of consciousness
43:12Then you need to submit to the rigor of making that truth claim valid, right?
43:17You know again back to the debate with the flat earther
43:19he says that the earth is flat and you know, we have some questions about that and
43:23And
43:26So he's not making a claim like I have a feeling called the world is flat he think the world is flat
43:31Yeah
43:32and so if you wish to make a truth claim about
43:36Reality, then you have to follow the methodology of reason and evidence for establishing something that exists outside your consciousness
43:41if I say I'm happy, you know, I
43:45Don't think I have to follow an objective method. I could still be lying or whatever
43:48But I'm not sure how many people would care but you don't have to follow that
43:52Objective methodology to report a subjective state of mind
43:55But if you're claiming that something exists independent of consciousness out there in material reality
44:01Then you have to follow the rules which has to be logically consistent and they have to be some
44:05Evidence of the thing itself or at least its effects on nearby matter and that's the rule, right?
44:11I mean
44:12so if you want to say something true about the universe you have to follow the methodology that
44:16Establishes whether what you're saying is true or false. You can't just say it and wish it and will it I mean you can but
44:22Yeah, I
44:23Understand that but I guess the claim isn't about whether or not they want to make a claim of truth
44:28It has to be whether truth is in fact objectively required or necessary
44:32because again a person like again even going back to the example you gave there are some people who do content themselves on mystical nonsense and
44:40Certainly, I'm not sure if they would say truth isn't necessary for them
44:45Something else is apparently and you're fine. Well, you know, this is all hearsay, right?
44:50I mean, we're trying to argue perspectives as crazy people who aren't on the call
44:53So I think I better stop at this point because okay
44:56I don't mind arguing with crazy people directly if there's a good use to it
44:59But I think you and I are both pretty sane people and trying to figure out what crazy people would say under certain conditions
45:04May not be that helpful
45:05Yeah, it's really to get at the point that truth is universally preferable
45:09Which is again assuming it's a conditional truth is universally preferable to error if you have what goal in mind
45:17Well, so for instance if I'm making I'm just gonna say this one last time and move on because I made the same argument five
45:23Times which either means you're not listening or I'm not listening, but it's not about to change, right?
45:26So if you're gonna make it through if you're gonna make a claim of a truth statement external for consciousness
45:31You need to follow that methodology of reason and evidence or you're invalid, right? You're not saying anything in particular
45:37so if
45:40Yeah, I understood that part but the question isn't whether or not you're making a true statement
45:45Why do you even I suppose why do you objectively require a truth statement?
45:52What do you mean why do I what do you mean by the
45:54By the way, if universally preferable doesn't mean objectively required or necessary. Why is truth objectively required or necessary?
46:02Well, it depends what truth you're talking about. If you're talking about I I feel happy, okay
46:06Well that may not be objectively verifiable. But if I'm saying look there's a tree over there. That's something that's objectively verifiable
46:13So if I'm making a statement about objective reality that I want people to accept as true
46:18Then it needs to conform with the principles of objective reality, which means, you know tangible and logically consistent, right?
46:24I can't say it's a tree and an elephant at the same time, right?
46:26Okay
46:27And so if I'm if I if I'm making a truth claim about something external to consciousness then I need to follow up an objective
46:34Methodology, otherwise the claim can be dismissed without further investigation. Okay, I got to move on to the next caller
46:39But great chat. You're welcome back anytime. I certainly do love me a tasty
46:44Ethics egg, which sandwich in the morning. So thanks for your call, man. Okay. Bye