Ethical Existential dilemma

[Blackandblue]

Does enlightenment carry a moral obligation? how about lesser degrees of enlightenment? It seems we are in a perpetual state of ignorance and there is little point thinking about what is moral and ethical and what is not, without being subject to unknown consequences of our presumable free actions. the only thing we can be sure of is our own personal impact on chaos.
I like religious people because they see that and think predictably. My somebody someday will be genius enough to be able to harness the predictability of masses for some greater good.
Should we all just be slaves to something arbitrary? Maybe it’s the path to happiness, instead of endlessly exploring the mind and hypspace with drugs. I know it can be A path to happiness. Think of all the religious people who are just so dandy and a bit unusual, like Ned from the Simpsons.
What do you think? Or is it too late to turn back? I don’t think it would be for me! I could become a monk!
Perhaps the technological revolution and singularity is the goal of mankind and I am obliged to contribute to that.

 

[SnozzleBerry]

Morality is a conceptual construct...it has no objective existence/meaning/role...only that which you give it.

 

[Blackandblue]

Morality is a conceptual construct...it has no objective existence/meaning/role...only that which you give it.

I see the logic here. Although it is not neccersarily true. It only means that it has no objective meaning yet conceived to me or you.

We cannot determine whether in the absolute, it exists and we are blind to it.

But, because some people suggest that they have absolute moral standards, I think it's reasonable to investigate them. Perhaps the framework we can use to evaluate which system to choose is how personally satisfying it is, or how satisfying when a critical mass of people adopt it.

I once heard: "Non-believers are looking for a fight, but can’t understand what we are trying to tell them because they lack the knowledge that the holy spirit gives us. I pray for the lost and confused."

Just being the devils advocate here so we can tackle this issue as deeply as we can.

 

[SnozzleBerry]

There's nothing to tackle...

In American society, it is NEVER acceptable to intentionally decapitate someone if your life is not immediately endangered by that individual. And, even in those situations of self-defense, decapitation will cause society at large to engage in an increased level of scrutiny with regards to the circiumstances.

In Ilongot society, there are emotional situations in which headhunting is not only acceptable, but is culturally understood as driven by these emotional states.

These two viewpoints can never be reconciled owing to the completely different cultural understandings of "morality".

Thus, morality is objectively useless and means nothing other than what any given person/group of people assign it to mean in any given context.