Pyrrho

I find it implausible that habitual lying would make a person a positive influence on others. Does it fit your experience?

True, you said "Imagine a person who's such an effective liar he can get away with anything at any time." But I suspect that it is absolutely impossible for anyone to be that effective at lying. If the liar were asked if he or she was a human being, would it be possible that he or she could fool everyone all of the time?

In point of fact, how well one can get away with lying is not solely dependent upon one's skill at lying, but is also dependent upon the stupidity and gullibility of those to whom one is lying.



But the effects have often been enormous, as when some idiots dragged a man behind their pickup truck on a gravel road until he died, because they believed he was worthless due to being black. (You probably expected an example like the Crusades or Inquisition, which are other fine examples.) The problem is, it can be difficult to predict in advance what stupid destructive thing people are going to do before they do it, in part because people do such outrageously moronic and cruel things that a prediction in advance would likely be ridiculed as being too unbelievable. I mean, really, who would have believed it if someone had predicted in advance any of the examples mentioned above?

Anyway, I'll be very happy to discuss Clifford's essay with you if you wish, after you read it, or while you are reading it if there is some aspect that you want to discuss before proceeding.

chanoc

Taboo - The Results






Results



Your Moralising Quotient is: 0.04.



Your Interference Factor is: 0.00.



Your Universalising Factor is: 0.00.

Fully Permissive!!! Never known that about chickens. Never thought my sister was sexy enough to fuck her. I like my kitty, and would bury it, not eat it, but I am sure it might be tasty to some people. If somebody wants to smoke, let them, second-hand smoking ads are bullshit anyways.

Division By Zero

Moralizing Quotient: 0.08 (average: 0.49!)
Interference Factor: 0.00 (average: 0.22)
Universalizing Factor: 0.00 (average: 0.62)

I said it was "a little wrong" to eat the pet cat, and for the son to break his promise to visit his mother's grave.

Theli

Your Moralising Quotient is: 0.04.

Your Interference Factor is: 0.00.

Your Universalising Factor is: 0.00.
Hmmm...
I don't think I would make a good fundie.
The only thing I judged as alittle wrong was the dead old woman, I think it depends on how he spent his time. Except ofcourse for being pushed of a swing, that one was wrong also.

Feather

0, 0, -1 for me. I just don't see how the completely private actions of one person could be said to be immoral.

But then again I do not believe there is any such as an objective morality. What is moral is entirely dependent on the circumstances and the requirements of groups of people rather than individuals.