LG, will you represent me when I sue the gov't when healthcare passes?

#76
#76
lawgator1 said:
Glad to!

First, let's discuss the difference between deontological and teleological principles.

Deontological principles emphasize the morality of an action, most often in natural law, or theological terms. The most frequent form is something based in religion, such as being in favor of banning homosexual marriage because you believe that the Bible forbids it.

Teleological thought, on the other hand, is results oriented. It is frequently associated with utilitariansim, which emphasizes things you have heard, such as "the greatest good for the greatest number." It by and large de-emphasizes the individual in favor of cost-benefit analysis.

They each have their benefits and drawbacks. Deontological principles are theoretically stable and predictable, though human interpretation tends to skew religious principles, as we all know. And, if carried to their extreme, such principles can have disastrous effetcs. A great example of the pitfalls of such thought is 911. In the minds of the terorists, their actions were justified purely because dictated by their religion.

Utilitarian processes are susceptible to unintended consequences screwing up your quantitative result. This is frequently referred to as the "all the ripples in the pond" theory. Consider a boy who drops a pebble into a pond. He sees the pebble hit the bottom, but he cannot know what the effects will be of the ripples.

An excellent example of that problem is the effort to kill Hitler in WWII. While most folks would say it would have been great to have killed him, many scholars point out that it was his decision to invade Russia in the dead of winter that might have cost Germany the war. There are some such scholars who maintian that had Hitler been killed, then someone with a military mind might have risen to power, and the outcome of the war might have been different, or at least lasted far longer and cost many more lives.

Point is, if you say you are acting because you like the anticipated effects, you have to recognize that you do not know what ALL of the effects will be, resulting in at least a chance that it will be a net negative.

More later ...
Click to expand...

Wow! Ethics 101. Thanks for the enlightenment.
 
#77
#77
lawgator1 said:
He's the one touting complete individual responsibility for everything. Just reminding him of the consequences of that philosophical principle if it is applied universally.

Kant said (paraphrasing): Act as though the maxim of your action was universalized. Meaning that you should make ethical choices based on what would happen if the philosophy behind it were applied to all situations, and do you like the results in other circumstances?
Click to expand...

Let's use your philosophical foundation to address entitlements. You hang your hat on unintended consequences and the inability to know the full consequences of your desired action.

The same holds for entitlements. What are the unintended consequences? Many would suggest (and there is evidence to support them) that dependence is an unintended consequence and more entitlements beget more entitlements - the old vicious cycle.

So how is advocating personal responsibility as the primary approach someone should adopt philosophically and intellectually shallow when you argue the value of entitlements? Neither is free from the law of unintended consequences. In neither situation would either approach be universally applied.
 
#78
#78
The arguments that you have LG aren't even close to valid. If they want to tax us some to keep our infrastructure in shape (roads, bridges, and other things) and other things like law enforcement and such, then I have absolutely ZERO issue with that. Other than that, is where things fall on personal responsibility. Keep spinning it LG, that's what liberals do. You can't make me feel bad for anyone, because I have been through a lot and it takes yourself to decide to make it right, not the damn government. There were many nights that I went to bed hungry and hurting, but I didn't use the government at all because that's not what it is for. There are many other places that can fill in for the government and do, but people are too damn lazy to go out and do something other than get that check in the mail the first of the month.

Oh, I want you to try and spin the whole Congress voting themselves a raise too, in a recession. Then they turn around and say that they can't give people on Medicare any cost of living increase. Do you see the hypocrisy??
 
Last edited:
#79
#79
volinbham said:
Let's use your philosophical foundation to address entitlements. You hang your hat on unintended consequences and the inability to know the full consequences of your desired action.

The same holds for entitlements. What are the unintended consequences? Many would suggest (and there is evidence to support them) that dependence is an unintended consequence and more entitlements beget more entitlements - the old vicious cycle.

So how is advocating personal responsibility as the primary approach someone should adopt philosophically and intellectually shallow when you argue the value of entitlements? Neither is free from the law of unintended consequences. In neither situation would either approach be universally applied.
Click to expand...

I will argue that it is 100% an intended result of entitlements.
 
#80
#80
volinbham said:
Let's use your philosophical foundation to address entitlements. You hang your hat on unintended consequences and the inability to know the full consequences of your desired action.

The same holds for entitlements. What are the unintended consequences? Many would suggest (and there is evidence to support them) that dependence is an unintended consequence and more entitlements beget more entitlements - the old vicious cycle.

So how is advocating personal responsibility as the primary approach someone should adopt philosophically and intellectually shallow when you argue the value of entitlements? Neither is free from the law of unintended consequences. In neither situation would either approach be universally applied.
Click to expand...


I don't disagree with you, at all.
 
#81
#81
g8terh8ter_eric said:
The arguments that you have LG aren't even close to valid. If they want to tax us some to keep our infrastructure in shape (roads, bridges, and other things) and other things like law enforcement and such, then I have absolutely ZERO issue with that. Other than that, is where things fall on personal responsibility. Keep spinning it LG, that's what liberals do. You can't make me feel bad for anyone, because I have been through a lot and it takes yourself to decide to make it right, not the damn government. There were many nights that I went to bed hungry and hurting, but I didn't use the government at all because that's not what it is for. There are many other places that can fill in for the government and do, but people are too damn lazy to go out and do something other than get that check in the mail the first of the month.

Oh, I want you to try and spin the whole Congress voting themselves a raise too, in a recession. Then they turn around and say that they can't give people on Medicare any cost of living increase. Do you see the hypocrisy??
Click to expand...

This is NOT Robin Hood, man. You really think that they are taking all your hard-earned money and giving it to people poorer than you?
 
#84
#84
Since I am in the top 25% of wage earners in the country (meaning my household makes over 65K a year) they are taking my money and giving it to people that have no true desire to better their situation. They are giving it to people who sit around and wait for a handout that they believe is their right to have. Robin Hood is the poster boy of Socialism, which is exactly whats been progressing over the last 50 years in this country.
 
#85
#85
BigPapaVol said:
you are lost.
Click to expand...

I guess so... But I'm pretty sure if you look at the Federal budget, there's a lot more money going to unnecessary wars(and the no-bid contracts for "rebuilding" the destruction caused), the war on drugs, etc.

And for the record, I think we need real health care reform, not socialized medicine. There is no reason for drug companies to charge Americans so much for drugs, especially when other countries can get the same medicine for WAY less money.
 
#86
#86
DMichel123 said:
I guess so... But I'm pretty sure if you look at the Federal budget, there's a lot more money going to unnecessary wars(and the no-bid contracts for "rebuilding" the destruction caused), the war on drugs, etc.

And for the record, I think we need real health care reform, not socialized medicine. There is no reason for drug companies to charge Americans so much for drugs, especially when other countries can get the same medicine for WAY less money.
Click to expand...
The entitlements portion of the federal budget is by far the largest portion, period. Pretending that income distro via income taxation and wealth redistribution via estate taxes isn't an enormous part of the liberal agenda is just absurd. It's pure vote buying and has worked for well over a half century now.

The medicinal drug business is venture capital every single day, even for the big, public and established horses.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#87
#87
DMichel123 said:
I guess so... But I'm pretty sure if you look at the Federal budget, there's a lot more money going to unnecessary wars.
Click to expand...

It was necessary during the Clinton Admin., he didn't do anything about it, and Bush was left with that.
 
#88
#88
BigPapaVol said:
The entitlements portion of the federal budget is by far the largest portion, period. Pretending that income distro via income taxation and wealth redistribution via estate taxes isn't an enormous part of the liberal agenda is just absurd. It's pure vote buying and has worked for well over a half century now.

The medicinal drug business is venture capital every single day, even for the big, public and established horses.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
Click to expand...

I never said anything about Liberal or Conservative... To be so lost, at least I can see that they are the same f***ing thing....
 
#89
#89
DMichel123 said:
I guess so... But I'm pretty sure if you look at the Federal budget, there's a lot more money going to unnecessary wars(and the no-bid contracts for "rebuilding" the destruction caused), the war on drugs, etc.

And for the record, I think we need real health care reform, not socialized medicine. There is no reason for drug companies to charge Americans so much for drugs, especially when other countries can get the same medicine for WAY less money.
Click to expand...


Simple answer......MOVE
 
#90
#90
DMichel123 said:
I never said anything about Liberal or Conservative... To be so lost, at least I can see that they are the same f***ing thing....
Click to expand...

You didn't need to and the two aren't remotely the same thing. Not even a little bit. .
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#91
#91
BeecherVol said:
It was necessary during the Clinton Admin., he didn't do anything about it, and Bush was left with that.
Click to expand...

People spouting this are the same as those who continually say Obama inherited the economic mess and gets a pass.

Both made (and are making) matters worse with their decisions while in office, so it is all mute.
 
#92
#92
BigPapaVol said:
You didn't need to and the two aren't remotely the same thing. Not even a little bit. .
Posted via VolNation Mobile
Click to expand...

Just goes to show that their system is working, and they are succeeding in keeping us divided. Believe what you want, but I know that every president besides JFK has had ties to the Masons/Illuminati. They took care of him.
 
#93
#93
DMichel123 said:
Just goes to show that their system is working, and they are succeeding in keeping us divided. Believe what you want, but I know that every president besides JFK has had ties to the Masons/Illuminati. They took care of him.
Click to expand...
How much tin foil do you go through in a week?
 
#94
#94
Ah, BPV we all need a good conspiracy theory ever now and then! Bring on the Black Helicopters!
 
#95
#95
DMichel123 said:
Just goes to show that their system is working, and they are succeeding in keeping us divided. Believe what you want, but I know that every president besides JFK has had ties to the Masons/Illuminati. They took care of him.
Click to expand...

Oh no! Not the Illuminati conspiracy again.
 
#97
#97
DMichel123 said:
Just goes to show that their system is working, and they are succeeding in keeping us divided. Believe what you want, but I know that every president besides JFK has had ties to the Masons/Illuminati. They took care of him.
Click to expand...

:question:

illuminati you say?

jfk you say?

working you say?

believe you say?

care you say?
 
#98
#98
rjd970 said:
People spouting this are the same as those who continually say Obama inherited the economic mess and gets a pass.

Both made (and are making) matters worse with their decisions while in office, so it is all mute.
Click to expand...

Call it what you want.
 
#99
#99
Daddy Gee said:
I'm afraid that's what most of us think... "no way this passes.. this is America"

I'm not sure that the D's don't go ahead and pass it regardless of the political consequences... once it's law, there will be no going back
Click to expand...

the law can be changed.
 
#100
#100
lawgator1 said:
Do you realize how upside-down your life would be if the U.S. Constitution was interpreted today through the prism of the 18th century?
Click to expand...

we wouldn't be taxed to death. we wouldn't have millions illegal alliens. you lawyers would not the ability to steel money way you do. costs would be very low and we wouldn't be worrying about our children paying a massive debt.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top