• Philosophy and Spirituality
    Welcome Guest
    Posting Rules Bluelight Rules
    Threads of Note Socialize
  • P&S Moderators: JackARoe | Cheshire_Kat

Technology will replace Morality

yeah fully, and monkeys just intrinsically knew how to stick sticks into ants nests from even before they were monkeys.
 
Look you guys don't agree with me that's fine, I'm here to learn more about this idea, not get a fan base. Just don't make fun of me because you don't agree with the idea or they way it is worded. Those kinds of comments prove nothing.
 
i don't think the thread is a waste of time, since i encourage all such ideas to be expressed. however you need to have an open mind when receiving critical feedback. not all ideas are equally valid, and yours has not held up under the slightest of scrutiny, yet you refuse to either acknowledge this feedback or substantiate a counterargument. the repeated assertion of the one statement has not progressed beyond the first couple of posts of yours.

this is not about agreeing or disagreeing. it is about discussion. you have not shown any willingness or capability to discuss your idea. "it is just cuz it is" is not good enough, yet that is all you've been saying. you can't appeal to obviousness when it clearly is not that obvious.

now i think i have humoured you and your catchphrase (it isn't even a theory) for long enough.
 
I have responded to you all point by point. If you haven't noticed i changed the original post over and over again to update my understanding of it. I observed everyone's criticism,(most of it just saying its bullshit) but it did not sway me as I still have my belief. This thread has just helped be word it better and understand its weaknesses. (I understood that the examples I gave were not clear at all)
But when did you become the complete arbiter of truth to have the power to call this assertion ultimately invalid?

Like I said I have responded to each of you all point by point, but i get no response after i respond, and then someone new comes and gives me a comment. This thread is on this topic and I am willing to discuss it but I am only making my point more understandable, until i see otherwise.

With ALL that said i give you a new way to think of my point. I believe that in the future as society becomes more tolerant of others and their ways of behaving, we will not punish people anymore who have different moral beliefs. Instead, using technology we will understand them and allow them to live they way they want to live but without problems to others. So its like allowing moral relativism by way of technology. I hope that angle is a much better one then the shitty examples i had before. I am being like a really armature futurist here lol
 
If it might help, OP, you could always suggest a title change to clarify your changing perceptions on the idea. I think it's a very useful idea and that it holds some good amount of value in the way our lives are turning as we use more and more technology and less and less natural ways of learning new things.
 
Quantum Perception said:
Whats your problem? Do you do this to everyone you don't agree with?
Click to expand...

You should see how long he insisted on bashing Breaking Bad before realizing it was fruitless. Not that any of us are being decent fruit farmers here. Too much insecticide getting tossed around and your vegan nature is getting offended.
 
the BB thread is hilarious. i still check it from time to time for a laugh.
 
The development of technology takes time. It may be a question of technology once technology advances to that point, but in the meantime a question of morality is still a question of morality. As stated previously, by the time technology does advance to the point of solving a moral dilemma, it will have undoubtedly created several more to replace it. Your statement was that technology equals morality, and I rebutted that statement. I'm not sure what I am missing. Yes, technology can solve some moral problems, but it will never eliminate all need for morality. I also doubt that technology could solve every problem. How would technology affect the abortion debate? Short of quantifying the soul and identifying the exact moment it enters the body, I doubt there is much that could be added. By the time we can identify the soul we will probably be trying to figure out how to convert it into fuel for our flying cars (or some other moral dilemma).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top