So I go into Starbucks today to get some coffee....

[CO Hummer]

....and this jerk budges in line in front of me.

So, this gets me thinking about Aristotelean ethics and that sort of thing. As I sit there drinking my coffee it hits me.

Morality is supposed to be about other people. It deals with our actions to the extent that they affect other people. Moral praise and blame is attributed on the grounds of an evaluation of our behavior towards others and the ways in that we exhibit, or fail to exhibit, a concern for the well-being of others. Virtue ethics, according to this objection, is self-centered because its primary concern is with the agent's own character. PhilD agrees with me that virtue ethics seems to be essentially interested in the acquisition of the virtues as part of the agent's own well-being and flourishing. Morality requires us to consider others for their own sake and not because they may benefit us. There seems to be something wrong with aiming to behave compassionately, kindly, and honestly because this will make me happier. KenP disagrees wholeheartedly. Related to this objection is a more general objection against the idea that well-being is a master value and that all other things are valuable only to the extent that they contribute to it. This line of attack, exemplified in the writings of Tim Scanlon, objects to the understanding of well-being as a moral notion and sees it more like self-interest. Furthermore, well-being does not admit to comparisons with other individuals. Thus, well-being cannot play the role that eudaimonists would have it play.
This objection fails to appreciate the role of the virtues within the theory. The virtues are other-regarding. I'm with DRTY on this - that kindness, for example, is about how we respond to the needs of others. The virtuous agent's concern is with developing the right sort of character that will respond to the needs of others in an appropriate way. The virtue of kindness is about being able to perceive situations where one is required to be kind, have the disposition to respond kindly in a reliable and stable manner, and be able to express one's kind character in accordance with one's kind desires. The eudaimonist account of virtue ethics claims that the good of the agent and the good of others are not two separate aims. Both rather result from the exercise of virtue. Rather than being too self-centered, understand what Timgco already knows, that virtue ethics unifies what is required by morality and what is required by self-interest.

[DennisAJC]

Originally Posted by CO Hummer

I'm with DRTY on this - that kindness, for example, is about how we respond to the needs of others. The virtuous agent's concern is with developing the right sort of character that will respond to the needs of others in an appropriate way. The virtue of kindness is about being able to perceive situations where one is required to be kind, have the disposition to respond kindly in a reliable and stable manner, and be able to express one's kind character in accordance with one's kind desires.

The harsh truth and conviction in your words put tears in my eyes. And quite a surprise about DRTY.

Invigorating to my mind and spirit. Thank you CO.

BTW, You should have never edited out the butterfly and PhilD. It was a symbol of the ambiotic curtain between the body and soul.

[h2co-pilot]

Did you tip? you Elitist Bastard!!!

[K9sH3]

Originally Posted by h2co-pilot

Did you tip? you Elitist Bastard!!!

OMG, Give him a break at least he went inside.
and of course he gave a tip. And he kept his calm, I hate when ppl cut in line.

[JamesT]

Originally Posted by h2co-pilot

Did you tip? you Elitist Bastard!!!

HEY!!!!! I am the ELITIST BASTARD! Get it right.

[h2co-pilot]

Originally Posted by JamesT

HEY!!!!! I am the ELITIST BASTARD! Get it right.

My bad, you Bastard.

Originally Posted by Bully13

Drive through! (No one ever cuts in front of me or bumps into me when I roll in the Hummer)

Check out this Bastard.

[GLBLWARMR]

I always have a very powerful (SBD) in reserve to defile the nostrils of the bastard that tries to cut in front of me. They usually walk away until the fumes clear. I get further in line.

[MarineHawk]

Originally Posted by CO Hummer

....and this jerk budges in line in front of me. ... Morality is supposed to be about other people. ... Morality requires us to consider others for their own sake and not because they may benefit us. ... kindness, for example, is about how we respond to the needs of others.

You're probably right, but what if the jerk desperately needs a good bitch-slapping? Is it immoral to satisfy his need?

[JamesT]

Originally Posted by MarineHawk

You're probably right, but what if the jerk desperately needs a good bitch-slapping? Is it immoral to satisfy his need?

but you knew I would.

[Bully13]

Drive through! (No one ever cuts in front of me or bumps into me when I roll in the Hummer)

[Bully13]

pad... 667 is better than 666

[Hmmm2]

Originally Posted by Bully13

pad... 667 is better than 666

Ohhhhhh hahahhaha .. I did EXACTLY the same thing when I hit THAT number!!!

[xburbman]

Hmmmm, I side with Ken on this one: Morality requires us to consider others for their own sake and not because they may benefit us. There seems to be something wrong with aiming to behave compassionately, kindly, and honestly because this will make me happier. KenP disagrees wholeheartedly.

- In other words, don't go around bein a 'do gooder' and puttin up a front just cause it makes you feel good. - And besides that, Ken offered 3 kind, compassionate and helpful words prior to my honeymoon in Italy. They were: Get Married First. - He B rite! I now completely understand and appreciate his words of wisdom.

[KenP]

I look forward to our discussion for it will be adequate if it has as much clearness as the subject-matter admits of, for precision is not to be sought for alike in all discussions, any more than in all the products of the crafts. Now fine and just actions, which political science investigates, admit of much variety and fluctuation of opinion, so that they may be thought to exist only by convention, and not by nature. And goods also give rise to a similar fluctuation because they bring harm to many people; for before now men have been undone by reason of their wealth, and others by reason of their courage. We must be content, then, in speaking of such subjects and with such premisses to indicate the truth roughly and in outline, and in speaking about things which are only for the most part true and with premisses of the same kind to reach conclusions that are no better. In the same spirit, therefore, should each type of statement be received; for it is the mark of an educated man to look for precision in each class of things just so far as the nature of the subject admits; it is evidently equally foolish to accept probable reasoning from a mathematician and to demand from a rhetorician scientific proofs.

Now each man judges well the things he knows, and of these he is a good judge. And so the man who has been educated in a subject is a good judge of that subject, and the man who has received an all-round education is a good judge in general. Hence a young man is not a proper hearer of lectures on political science; for he is inexperienced in the actions that occur in life, but its discussions start from these and are about these; and, further, since he tends to follow his passions, his study will be vain and unprofitable, because the end aimed at is not knowledge but action. And it makes no difference whether he is young in years or youthful in character; the defect does not depend on time, but on his living, and pursuing each successive object, as passion directs. For to such persons, as to the incontinent, knowledge brings no profit; but to those who desire and act in accordance with a rational principle knowledge about such matters will be of great benefit.

These remarks about the student, the sort of treatment to be expected, and the purpose of the inquiry, may be taken as our preface

[xburbman]

Originally Posted by KenP

I look forward to our discussion for it will be adequate if it has as much clearness as the subject-matter admits of, for precision is not to be sought for alike in all discussions, any more than in all the products of the crafts. Now fine and just actions, which political science investigates, admit of much variety and fluctuation of opinion, so that they may be thought to exist only by convention, and not by nature. And goods also give rise to a similar fluctuation because they bring harm to many people; for before now men have been undone by reason of their wealth, and others by reason of their courage. We must be content, then, in speaking of such subjects and with such premisses to indicate the truth roughly and in outline, and in speaking about things which are only for the most part true and with premisses of the same kind to reach conclusions that are no better. In the same spirit, therefore, should each type of statement be received; for it is the mark of an educated man to look for precision in each class of things just so far as the nature of the subject admits; it is evidently equally foolish to accept probable reasoning from a mathematician and to demand from a rhetorician scientific proofs.

Now each man judges well the things he knows, and of these he is a good judge. And so the man who has been educated in a subject is a good judge of that subject, and the man who has received an all-round education is a good judge in general. Hence a young man is not a proper hearer of lectures on political science; for he is inexperienced in the actions that occur in life, but its discussions start from these and are about these; and, further, since he tends to follow his passions, his study will be vain and unprofitable, because the end aimed at is not knowledge but action. And it makes no difference whether he is young in years or youthful in character; the defect does not depend on time, but on his living, and pursuing each successive object, as passion directs. For to such persons, as to the incontinent, knowledge brings no profit; but to those who desire and act in accordance with a rational principle knowledge about such matters will be of great benefit.

These remarks about the student, the sort of treatment to be expected, and the purpose of the inquiry, may be taken as our preface

Indeed! Your knowledge and wisdom on these things speaks clearly to my mind and I too look forward to exchange of thoughts of variant subject matter which be adequate if it has as much clearness as the subject-matter admits of, for precision is not to be sought for alike in all discussions, any more than in all the products of the crafts. Now fine and just actions - Yeah; Italian women R fine and actionalble. We must be content, then, in speaking of such subjects - or in my case(being on my honeymoon) merely viewing said subjects, but Oh to be King!
with such premisses to indicate the truth roughly and in outline - their clothes covered the truth roughly (albeit tightly), however their smooth and soft outlines were of an hourglass nature. Now each man judges well the things he knows, and of these he is a good judge. - I know of these things well however am confounded still from time to time.
And so the man who has been educated in a subject is a good judge of that subject, and the man who has received an all-round education is a good judge in general. - AHHHH! Education! Being taught of the differences - great and small, of the nuances between lust and love, only to be brought back to the port of indecision, wherein we must stand and ...pardon me 'I digress'! And it makes no difference whether he is young in years or youthful in character - I B the latter;
but to those who desire and act in accordance with a rational principle knowledge about such matters will be of great benefit. - I wish to act in accordance with all that I have learned in order to give my wife child - although it is difficult at times (when my wife calls during a meeting to tell me she's ovulating and that I need to come home); it will be well-worth the outcome(pardon the pun) when we are able to raise the child, Indeed, it will be of great benefit. -

I thank you for your continued ponderance and thought provoking words.

[JamesT]

I am so lost in with this thread.

In hope of sounding even remotly as inteligent as ya'll let me contribute this:

WTF are you talking about?

[CO Hummer]

Originally Posted by JamesT

I am so lost in with this thread.

In hope of sounding even remotly as inteligent as ya'll let me contribute this:

WTF are you talking about?

James,
Sorry about that. Hope this clears it up.....

There are basically two camps on the theory of intelligence: those who believe in one unilinear construct of general intelligence (g), and those who believe in many different intelligences. Binet founded the French school of intelligence, in which intelligence tests were regarded as a practical means of separating the bright from the dull. Intelligence quotient (IQ) was regarded as simply an average of numerous dissimilar abilities, not as a real thing with definite properties that could be studied. Galton founded the English school of intelligence, in which it was believed that intelligence is a real faculty with a biological basis and could be studied using reaction times on simple cognitive tasks.
The English school took a huge step forward with Spearman's invention of factor analysis. Using this technique, Spearman found that all tests of intelligence have positive correlations (loadings) on the general factor and called this factor general intelligence. However, Thurstone later disputed the prominence assigned to general intelligence by rotating the factors. In this way he found several primary mental abilities, instead of the one found by Spearman.

[Hmmm2]

Originally Posted by JamesT

I am so lost in with this thread.

In hope of sounding even remotly as inteligent as ya'll let me contribute this:

WTF are you talking about?

Ohhhhh hahahahahahahaha ...it's bizarre, isn't it?