Marx wrote an excellent critique of capitalism, included a series of contemporary opinion and dissected it well, even naming the methodologies for that critique. But neither he, nor Engels, resolved any practical design rules. Or proposed any more than a philosophy of living which has massive gaps in the practical application.
This is a continuation of the post titled, The Basics of Ethics, found here;
https://www.reddit.com/r/Ethics/comments/1ucrz23/the_basics_of_ethics/
__________________________________________________
If we accept that individual choice is the basics of all ethics, in that;
'Everything comes down to choice.
Respecting others choices and not making choices for them.
Your individual liberty, and personal choices are paramount, unless those choices impact on others, and restrict their choices.'
And that;
'The Basic task of a Society is to implement rules that limit a persons individual freedom on behalf of people as a whole. For instance, driving speed limits help keep others safe from your choices, and you safer from your own.'
____________________________________________________
Then we need to start to make some statements about choice;
An individual choice can only be a true choice if it is equitable.
Having a society that is multi tiered depending on your, or your parents personal circumstances, is not equitable and so some people will not have the same range of choices as others.
The current education system for example, creates a state education that is underfunded, and a private education system that is anything but. This leads to inequality of opportunity and inequality of outcome.
In the framework of choice, being the basics of ethics, a two tier education system is unethical.
There are many examples of this two tiered system, within our existing capitalist frameworks, and are tied to wealth and poverty, but I would prefer if the discussion stays quite simple.
Are two tiered systems inherently unethical?
Should everything we do aim towards the most equitable, and therefore the most ethical, society we can design?
To me it seems both that it would be far easier to organise the input of the masses, under our current material conditions, and attract more people to subscribe to model.
Marx wrote an excellent critique of capitalism, included a series of contemporary opinion and dissected it well, even naming the methodologies for that critique. But neither he, nor Engels, resolved any practical design rules. Or proposed any more than a philosophy of living which has massive gaps in the practical application.
Im new here, but the posts I've seen, primarily about the US Democratic Party sudden influx of Socialists, seem to be confusing the terms Democratic Socialism, and Social Democrat.
The reason I'm concerned is because the two terms relate to two very different outcomes, and barely any posts are related to any expected outcomes from the Democratic Party, or the smaller group within it.
Both can have admirable objectives, but the route to them, and the milestones needed are very very different.
So can I ask, what do people think are the objectives, the Democratic Socialists of America, have one set, but candidates for the Democratic tickets all seem to have a set of disaparate views, labelled by the press as Democratic Socialists, but in my opnion none of them are, they are Social Democrats.
Dicsuss....
Philosophy is great for expanding ones thought processes, looking at issues from different standpoints and really trying to understand other peoples shoes. But mostly it just dissapears up its own mantras and never actually reolves anything. As i am a person who is happy to talk for days as long as it reolves something I thought I would distill all ideas of morality, ethics, right and wrong and the role of society down into the simplest form. As Einstein once never said if you cant explain it simply, then you don't understand it will enough.
Everything comes down to choice.
Respecting others choices and not making choices for them.
Your individual liberty, and personal choices are paramount, unless those choices impact on others, and restrict their choices.
Stealing, is taking someones choice to retain their owenership of whatever it is you have stolen.
Murder, is taking away the choice of someone not to stop living.
Our own autonomy should be the basis for all ideas about ethics, right and wrong.
If something you do, takes away the choices of others then its wrong.
If you do something that affects another and dont get consent, then its wrong.
_______________________
The Basic task of a Society is to implement rules that limit a persons individual freedom on behalf of people as a whole. For instance, driving speed limits help keep others safe from your choices, and you safer from your own.
_______________________
Philosophy is great for expanding ones thought processes, looking at issues from different standpoints and really trying to understand other peoples shoes. But mostly it just dissapears up its own mantras and never actually reolves anything. As i am a person who is happy to talk for days as long as it reolves something I thought I would distill all ideas of morality, ethics, right and wrong and the role of society down into the simplest form. As Einstein once never said if you cant explain it simply, then you don't understand it will enough.
Everything comes down to choice.
Respecting others choices and not making choices for them.
Your individual liberty, and personal choices are paramount, unless those choices impact on others, and restrict their choices.
Stealing, is taking someones choice to retain their owenership of whatever it is you have stolen.
Murder, is taking away the choice of someone not to stop living.
Our own autonomy should be the basis for all ideas about ethics, right and wrong.
If something you do, takes away the choices of others then its wrong.
If you do something that affects another and dont get consent, then its wrong.
_______________________
The Basic task of a Society is to implement rules that limit a persons individual freedom on behalf of people as a whole. For instance, driving speed limits help keep others safe from your choices, and you safer from your own.
_______________________
Philosophy is great for expanding ones thought processes, looking at issues from different standpoints and really trying to understandother peoples shoes. But mostly it just dissapears un its own mantras and never actually reolves anything. As i am a person who is happy to talk for days as long as it reolves something I thought I would distill all ideas of morality, ethics, right and wrong and the role of society down into the simplest form. As Einstein once said if you cant explain ti simply, then you don't understand it will enough.
Everything comes down to choice.
Respecting others choices and not making choices for them.
Your individual liberty, and personal choices are paramount, unless those choices impact on others, and restrict their choices.
Stealing, is taking someones choice to retain their owenership of whatever it is you have stolen.
Murder, is taking away the choice of someone not to stop living.
Our own autonomy should be the basis for all ideas about ethics, right and wrong.
If something you do, takes away the choices of others then its wrong.
If you do something that affects another and dont get implicit consent, then its wrong.
_______________________
The Basic task of a Society is to implement rules that limit a persons individual freedom on behalf of people as a whole. For instance, driving speed limits help keep others safe from your choices, and you safer from your own.
_______________________
When we hold to these basics. Then every single other question becomes much easier to answer.
Here on Reddit, a large part of the content is taken without permission from others, without their consent. So by these basic rules, its inherently unethical.
AI models have scraped the internet for content that people havent given specific consent to use, and so all use of those models is unethical.
The basics tell us easily where the boundaries lay.