Soon we’ll use science to make people more moral

[Deletedaccount1]

This is the most totalitarian thing that I've ever heard.

[Orange Joe]

Violent people can be found in jails and on medication in mental facilities. Would you advocate releasing them? Some methods are simply necessary when your average joe hasn't learned how to be civilized, and turns into savagery instead.

You realize you are the only one talking about violent actions. The article mentions using these things for "lesser" unmoral actions.

[Azadina]

You realize you are the only one talking about violent actions. The article mentions using these things for "lesser" unmoral actions.

And what are these lesser ones?

[kail]

On paper it sounds like a great idea, but it contradicts the concept of free will if you are reprogrammed to behave unlike your normal self. At most, such treatment should strictly be voluntary. If someone acknowledges their mental illness, I don't see a problem with administrating effective treatment.

[spinner981]

Spinner, what is your personal solution to the Trolley problem?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trolley_problem

What is the most moral way you can go about approaching this problem?

Personally I have thought about the Trolley problem a bit. It's more of a thought experiment than a question of moral truth or values. Morality for me, is not necessarily measured in the absolute preservation of life, but rather the presence or absence of moral wrongdoing. In the situation of the trolley problem, if you are faced with two decisions, each leading to death of different numbers of people, I don't believe you would inherently be making a moral decision when choosing one track or the other.

If we phrase the question a different way, making the five men out to be unrepentant mass-murderers, and the one person being a human child or baby, the situation changes for many. We are placing value within human life based off of various factors.

This doesn't solve the problem of which track we should choose however. Personally, if I only had the information that one track would result in 5 deaths and the other in only 1 death, I would choose the track that would result in 1 death. But like I said, I don't believe this is a moral decision. Humans do things that result in the deaths of others all the time, either due to incompetence or a lack of information or simply accident. Some are considered manslaughter, while others are not considered so. If I were to tell somebody to meet me at a particular coffee shop, and while running late I found out that a gas leak had caused the coffee shop to explode and the person I was supposed to meet up with had died, I don't believe that I would be a murderer. Now, if I somehow knew that gas leak would happen, and I deliberately told them to meet me at that coffee shop in particular so that they would die, while the law might not pin me as a murderer, I think I would still be at fault for murder.

I believe that morality isn't entirely determined simply by what happens, but has to deal with intention and 'the heart' as well.

If we are choosing which track, and while choosing we realize our great hatred for humanity and decide to take the track with 5 to kill as many as possible, I think that would be morally wrong. But I don't think that choosing the track with 1 would be inherently immoral, because rather than having the intention to kill, you have the intention to save, and killing the 1 is necessary to save the 5. We has no desire to kill the 1, to end their life, so I don't believe it was morally wrong. Similarly, if we were not able to act fast enough to change lanes and killed the 5, I don't think that would be immoral. However, the situation begs the question of who would be in the wrong here, if anyone. Perhaps the track with the 1 was scheduled to have maintenance done on it, and the track with the 5 was not. Would the 5 be in the wrong for forcing you to choose the other track and kill the 1?

I believe morality is more complex than simply boiling it down to a net gain or loss of life, or a net gain or loss of harm/suffering. But I also believe it is more simple than the implication of moral gray areas and how those apply.

Like I said earlier, I don't believe this is a question of morality, but rather just a thought experiment. I believe that morality is more than simply just choosing for the deaths of the 1 or the 5. However, I still stand by my answer of changing tracks to the track containing the 1, not because I view it as the preferred decision in terms of morals/ethics, but simply because it saves the most lives. But like I said, I don't believe it is inherently a moral decision.

Edit: Of course, I could be wrong. Humans tend to do that.

[dextersmith]

Bending people to your will is immoral. Every group has their own standard of morals; think about how women are treated in the Middle East, Catholics vs. gays and premarital sex, life vs. choice, or a terrorist's morals.

[spinner981]

Bending people to your will is immoral. Every group has their own standard of morals; think about how women are treated in the Middle East or a terrorist's morals.

Doesn't any system of law attempt to bend people to their will though?

[dextersmith]

That shit is scary, we will all have to obey masters or get cured!

Big Brother from 1984.....

[Aehl]

I was watching the BBC show Psychopaths, I think that was the name, it was a science show and they were talking about the only way to "fix" a psychopath would be to add some kind of chip to his brain that would turn the psychopath into a normal human being.

"The Terminal Man?

[dextersmith]

Doesn't any system of law attempt to bend people to their will though?

You can't protest laws if you're brain washed.

[spinner981]

You can't protest laws if you're brain washed.

Or in shackles for breaking them. Of course, this comes from the assumption that protestors wouldn't be killed on the spot. I guess that is part of being spoiled by living in a nation where that doesn't happen.

That said, I don't think that the ability to protest would matter very much in regards to certain laws.

[dextersmith]

Or in shackles for breaking them. Of course, this comes from the assumption that protestors wouldn't be killed on the spot. I guess that is part of being spoiled by living in a nation where that doesn't happen.

That said, I don't think that the ability to protest would matter very much in regards to certain laws.

You'd have a lawyer to fight for you if you were in shackles.

[dextersmith]

That said, I don't think that the ability to protest would matter very much in regards to certain laws.

Like slavery?

[spinner981]

You'd have a lawyer to fight for you if you were in shackles.

How does this make the situation different though? If you did what the law said you shouldn't do, you can only really get out of punishment by lying really well. This doesn't mean that the law isn't still trying to bend you to its laws.

Like slavery?

Slavery. Murder. Rape. I was about to say theft, but then I remembered a thread from the other day about lawmakers in europe or someplace legalizing theft in the face of 'great need' or something.

I could see how making people feel empathy if they can't would be good, but anything besides that is just tampering to make someone's moral compass fit better with yours.

I think whatever the process would be, it should align with the will of the person; whether they would get this operation or whatever or not. Locking somebody up for murder is one thing, but altering a person's brain to make them think things that they didn't think before? That's going too far imo.

[Talsar]

i don't see any problem with a voluntary implementation of this. and if one were in place i would volunteer today.

[primalmatter]

Violent people can be found in jails and on medication in mental facilities. Would you advocate releasing them? Some methods are simply necessary when your average joe hasn't learned how to be civilized, and turns into savagery instead.

Civilization is savagery.

You sleep at night without being afraid of harm because violent men are out committing violence on your behalf...

[Damajin]

Whenever I think of these type of things being done I always come back to this song:

Watch the man of sience working
See him twist and torture life
Just dissecting, never caring
Wields his scalpel like a knife

See the social planners planning
How to bend us to their mold
For our own good they'll direct us
All they're asking is control

Icarus your wings are melting
never will you reach the sun
Thought you feel your spirit free soaring
Your proud wings shall come undone
Your proud wings shall come undone

See the test-tube babies forming
All alike in even rows
Mutant robots in the making
Numbered tags upon their toes

For the dictocrats convenience
See them catalogue our lives
Hear computer giants ticking
Thought police control our lives

Icarus your wings are melting
never will you reach the sun
Thought you feel your spirit free soaring
Your proud wings shall come undone
Your proud wings shall come undone

The push to make people X, Y, or Z has always been used to control, oppress and suppress. It's cast as a moral thing, a necessary thing, a good thing but it never has been, the redeeming quality of past efforts is that it has never approached the level it does now, of literal programming that threatens to in essence Template society and say that anything other than some approved list of social traits and viewpoints will be permitted and everything else seen as a threat to the system and thus eradicated, all in the name of the moral code.

[dextersmith]

How does this make the situation different though? If you did what the law said you shouldn't do, you can only really get out of punishment by lying really well. This doesn't mean that the law isn't still trying to bend you to its laws.

Being gay used to be an arrestable offense but people who weren't brain washed fought for change. You can also get out of punishment through mitigation.

Law isn't always morally good. What's different is, law prohibits action but doesn't reprogram the fundamental qualities of people. It prohibits the harm of children but doesn't change the pedophile's desires and urges. What this guy proposes can turn any reluctant individual into a vegan or religious nut in accordance with his philosophies.

[Wildtree]

Guys....... Stop shitting your pants. Those stains, they're nasty.

Of all people, you - at a forum that's dedicated to Blizzard games - should be able to handle the term Soon™ a lot better...

[ItachiZaku]

My moral compass shifts according to that I am pointed at. I'm pretty ok with people and the world, until it's something that's criminal or what I would feel to be inappropriate. I don't support prison reform, or rights for illegal immigrants etc