Petty morality can be a dangerous thing. If the only thing preventing you from an action is what you perceive will result from it, then you will often miss the big picture.
True, the goal of morality should be based on the consequences, but we cannot see every possible implication of our actions and we never will. Even worse, it will always lead to "double standards." Thus, it is crucial that we form our own carefully constructed world-view. A good world-view should not be a mere collection of facts, but should also include a consciously constructed set of morals that we know will lead to better consequences.
So, instead of unconsciously thinking "I will kill this insect because it makes me feel better, but not this one because it is pretty," train you mind to look at your actions based on a wider ranging implications.
Basically, I'm saying that there are common patterns in morals. Once you can identify these, similar situations will not require you to think of the consequences. You will already know what they will be, even if you don't know the specifics.
I don't want to advocate closed-mindedness either. When those morals come into question, then question them. Having the wrong morals is almost worse than having no morals.
[QUOTE=mars7a;27794381]Well butterflies don't break into my house.[/QUOTE]
Laughed.
Do you wake up in the morning and find the door kicked in by those damn delinquent moths?
[QUOTE=BrainDeath;27790139]What? Consequences are everything, I don't burn down orphanages because the consequences would involve dead babies and a ruined building.[/QUOTE]
the world isn't black and white
I disagree. How can universal causation exist otherwise?
Problem with black and white is though that you have to be very specific when seeing the world in black and white, without losing the big picture. Most people cannot do that.
Cockroaches eat your food and spread disease. I don't hate cockroaches, I just don't want them in my house fuckin up shit. I'll try to direct him to the door or catch him under a bowl or cup or something first, and if they're dicks about it then stepping on them is really the only option. And I actually love moths, although if I saw one in my house I'd try my damnedest to direct him out the front door, both for his own protection and the fact that they eat through clothes.
e: ok, that's why people hate cockroaches a moths but not butterflies, butterflies don't spread disease, eat your food and make holes in your clothes.
I don't see anything wrong with moths. I just dislike insects that seem to be there just to annoy you or make your life more difficult. Such as mosquitos, gnats, flies, cockroaches. If they don't get in my face, then I like them.
i am as scared of butterflies as i am of moths
which is a lot i am a chicken :(
[QUOTE=MakoSkyDub;27789761]OP[/QUOTE]
This is a very interesting question. To work off your example, I personally don't swat away moths, because I find them nice because they are soft and tickly (inb4 gaybows). And that wasn't really pre-programmed into me, I kinda found out the coolness of moths by myself. Colorful things are typically nice, and yet not always, wasps and bees, etc, even yet, some people DO like wasps and bees, be it for their color or not. So I don't think it's the color or beauty or whatever, it's a culmination of experiences with whatever object it is that makes you think what you think of it.
[QUOTE=MakoSkyDub;27790080]If consequences dictate your course of action, then for all intents and purposes you have no morals at all.[/QUOTE]
morality is subjective.
Honestly I like moths better, and really don't rate butterflies any better.
We are the dominant species of this planet. We can do whatever the fuck we want to other organisms. They're nothing against us.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
