Are you saying that a moral structure, and the idea that man is of equal VALUE (not of equal talents) is unnecessary, stifling or superfluous?
No actually I'm saying the opposite, that seeing everyone of equal value is freeing. But the concept of objective morality creates artificial hierarchies that inevitably lead to oppression. This is fundamentally because no set of restrictive moral values labelling some things "good" and others "bad" can mathematically be an objective component of reality. This isn't to say that there are not social commonalities in what people like or don't like, just that people liking it does not in and of itself give it that value.
What is there if there is no underlying moral structure? How do humans go about governing themselves in a world in which concepts such as morality are considered obsolete? Isn't that pathology run amok?
Underneath there's just raw math and physics. There's no divine safety net to catch you. There is only the interplay between what someone can do and what they want to do.
What do you mean by humans "governing" themselves? Do you actually mean the concept of a natio state or do you mean the concept of how do individuals live their day to day lives? Or something else?
Why would it be pathology run amok? Are you saying that if tomorrow you found out there was no morality you would immediately go out and mass murder people? Are you only
not doing that because you believe there's an objective morality? If so, damn man, damn. If no, then why would you think it would be any different for anyone else? Why would someone want to go out attacking people knowing that they could just get attacked in return? How would that be in their self interest?
I'm honestly not sure what you're getting at here. Are you saying that those who behave as though morality is a non-issue are correct? That the ends always justify the means? Are those who do conduct themselves in an ethical manner just judgemental and resentful of their obvious inferiority?
Technically yes, those people are correct, because morality doesn't exist. It's just an opinion. Which is why they on average tend to be more accomplished and stable in life since they know that if they want something they gotta put the work in for it. They understand that no one's obligated to notice their existence let alone care about it. There's a very good reason that people in highly demanding leadership roles such as CEO's and Presidents tend to score the highest on the Psychopathic Personality Index. Because to get to that level you need to be ruthless and efficient. You need to have a very strong grasp of reality to get there and stay there, naturally ideas like morality get tossed in the trash with belief in the tooth fairy and santa clause. These people got there because they recognize that all they truly have is themselves, their own knowledge, their own capabilities, and nothing else. Everything is just a means to an end, even being nice to people is at least partially a tactic to gain favour and/or not make enemies. Talk to some people who went from being homeless to being millionaires and you'll hear more or less the same story. That in one way or another they got there because they made their life about them and their desires. And now they're the happiest people inn the world. Those people, more than anyone else, understand that the world is nothing but dog eat dog. And it really makes them appreciate the help that they do get along the way, since no one was obligated to give it to them.
He says it a little differently than I do, but it's the exact same message.
I think the means
determine the ends so.... yes... maybe? I don't actually know. At the end of the day it doesn't matter what I think in regards to how someone else conducts themselves if I lack the power to influence it so I don't waste my time worrying about it.
Inferiority is a moralistic concept by definition since you need a hierarchy in order to label one thing as better or worse than the other so no, no one's inferior. It's possible that they could be using inferior methods to achieve their goals but that doesn't mean that
they are inferior.
I feel like you're kind of all over the map. Or perhaps confusing morality with ideology? SJW's don't necessarily behave in a moralistic manner. If anything, they seem to have adopted the idea that the ends do indeed justify the means. I believe Antifa openly says this.
I might be confusing your definitions of morality and ideology with mine but thatd be because niether of us have given formal operational definitions of what we mean by those terms, Here's one I grabbed off the net:
Morality -
- The quality of being in accord with standards of right or good conduct.
- n.
A system of ideas of right and wrong conduct: religious morality; Christian morality.
- n.
Virtuous conduct.
but of course, what does "good" or "virtuous mean? Here's their definitions for the same source
Good -
- Being positive or desirable in nature; not bad or poor: a good experience; good news from the hospital.
- adj.
Having the qualities that are desirable or distinguishing in a particular thing: a good exterior paint; a good joke.
- adj.
Serving the desired purpose or end; suitable: Is this a good dress for the party?
So, an opinion
Virtuous -
- Having or showing virtue, especially moral excellence: led a virtuous life.
- adj.
Possessing or characterized by chastity; pure: a virtuous woman. See Synonyms at moral.
So a circle jerk leading back to morality which on it's own proves my point that morality is just an opinion.
All ideologies have a moralistic foundation, that's what makes them an ideology. SJW's are COMPLETELY moralistic, believing they are the good moral crusaders out to fix all the racism, sexism and whatnot in the western world. Their belief in the good of their cause justifies their methods to themselves since they're "the good guys" and thus can't be wrong. Just like every other moral crusade throughout history:
Or as C.S Lewis put it:
"Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It would be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience."