1) The 8th non-commandment is "We act morally when the happiness of others makes us happy."
On p. 96, you write: "A person can be said to act in a moral manner if he or she derives a great deal of self-happiness from other people's happiness."
How do you see this fitting in with how most philosophers have treated morality? It seems to put a lot of weight on how you feel about your own actions.
2) What have you found to be the most challenging criticism of your book?
-
In total there are 6 users online :: 0 registered, 0 hidden and 6 guests (based on users active over the past 60 minutes)
Most users ever online was 789 on Tue Mar 19, 2024 5:08 am
Morality and happiness
-
-
- One with Books
- Posts: 2752
- Joined: Thu Dec 30, 2010 4:30 am
- 13
- Has thanked: 2280 times
- Been thanked: 727 times
- Chris OConnor
-
- BookTalk.org Hall of Fame
- Posts: 17019
- Joined: Sun May 05, 2002 2:43 pm
- 21
- Location: Florida
- Has thanked: 3511 times
- Been thanked: 1309 times
- Gender:
- Contact:
- DWill
-
- BookTalk.org Hall of Fame
- Posts: 6966
- Joined: Thu Jan 31, 2008 8:05 am
- 16
- Location: Luray, Virginia
- Has thanked: 2262 times
- Been thanked: 2470 times
Re: Morality and happiness
I was going to post a separate question on Dexter's topic, but will post it here.
I found the formulation of morality very interesting, too: that morality is the degree to which we derive happiness form the happiness of others. I guess my question regards this matter of degree. We know that even "bad people" will show concern over the happiness of those closest to them (if Tony Soprano is any guide). But extending out from this tight circle, what can we say about the factors that make us care about the happiness of other people even when we'll never be able to observe them being made happy by our actions? Presumably it isn't simply that we see we can become happier by making these efforts. If it was, everyone would want to do that, right? So it seems that particular tools of acculturation are needed to make individuals more moral.
Would you say that religion could reasonably be said to be one of these tools?
(A simple example I thought of is a lost library book. If I find it and don't make an effort to turn it in so that the patron isn't on the hook for the cost, I'm clearly not acting morally, nor am I taking advantage of an opportunity to make myself happier. What has gone wrong with me?)
I found the formulation of morality very interesting, too: that morality is the degree to which we derive happiness form the happiness of others. I guess my question regards this matter of degree. We know that even "bad people" will show concern over the happiness of those closest to them (if Tony Soprano is any guide). But extending out from this tight circle, what can we say about the factors that make us care about the happiness of other people even when we'll never be able to observe them being made happy by our actions? Presumably it isn't simply that we see we can become happier by making these efforts. If it was, everyone would want to do that, right? So it seems that particular tools of acculturation are needed to make individuals more moral.
Would you say that religion could reasonably be said to be one of these tools?
(A simple example I thought of is a lost library book. If I find it and don't make an effort to turn it in so that the patron isn't on the hook for the cost, I'm clearly not acting morally, nor am I taking advantage of an opportunity to make myself happier. What has gone wrong with me?)