Author
|
Topic: should there be a teleological suspension of the ethical? (Read 921 times) |
|
Pabreetzio
Adept
Gender: 
Posts: 37
Reputation: 7.07
Rate Pabreetzio
I'm Patrick
   
 
|
 |
should there be a teleological suspension of the ethical?
« on: 2005-05-23 00:41:21 » |
 |
The question is whether or not there should be a teleological suspension of the ethical. By teleological i mean serving ones own memes as being more important than rewards of ones self or even another person's rewards.
Recently I have been pondering this question because of my girlfriend, Jennifer, and her family situation. Jennifer has a verbally abusive father. Now some of you may think well at least it isnt physical abuse, but in many ways verbal abuse is worse than physical abuse. Verbal abuse results in wounds that do not heal naturally over time. Jennifer's father gets mad very often, and he will get mad at her if she asks the wrong question, he doesnt allow for her to talk back, and he does not want anyone to ever point out any flaw he might have.
Now the anger might be so bad perhaps if Jennifer could admit it when she gets upset, but shes afraid that if he sees her getting upset he will get even more angry at her, which very well may be very true. After all the years of pain her father has given her from his angry nature Jennifer hates her father, but shell never say this to him because of her fear of the power he has over her. She thinks that if she points out his flaws, or if someone else such as myself does even, he will backlash by taking her out of the nice college preperatory school she has financial aid to go to, and this will result in her not being able to go to as well of a college. She wants things to go smoothly her last year of highschool. She wants to be able to see me.
I want to be able to confront him about the situation. I feel he deserves a lecture on what he has done to his daughter. I dont think any father wants to cause as much pain to their daughter as he is causing this very day. I think he would like for things to be better. I think the right thing to do would be to open discussion and have talks with him on the issue.
unfortunately Jennifer does not want me to since it will result in the loss of some things she wants. I think its more important to do whats right now, rather than waiting till she can support herself to have her rub in his face how horrible he is.
cost and reward weighed, ethically the situation comes to what is most probable, and i trust she is right that he wouldnt change even if confronted. But I think the right thing to do is to talk to him about it and give him the chance to once shown how horrible things are.
Doing what I think is right, despite whether it might be what is best for Jennifer or myself, or anyone, would be suspending the ethical for something higher than the ethical.
What do you guys think is the right thing to do? do what is right and confront the father, or take the safe course that doesnt have the chance of disrupting the peace to the point of disaster?
|
|
|
|
|
MoEnzyme
Anarch
Gender:
Posts: 2256
Reputation: 3.91
Rate MoEnzyme
infidel lab animal
|
|
Re:should there be a teleological suspension of the ethical?
« Reply #1 on: 2005-05-24 00:06:06 » |
|
teleological suspension of the ethical . . . ? That sounded like a mouthful, but I guess what you are trying to deal with is whether you should confront her father.
Here at the Church of the Virus we encourage not only question asking, but answers too. Maybe not always the perfect or best one, but we have to start with something. So here is my answer.
No.
1) If she decides she wants or needs to stand up to her father, then supporting her in that is fine, but for you to take that on yourself on her behalf only reinforces her helplessness in the situation, in addition to possibly alienating either or both of them. Offering advice or support is one thing, but Jennifer needs to manage her own fights even if she loses. You aren't her husband, and even if you were your plan is presumptuous. Speaking of which . . .
2) You are too damn young to be having a girlfriend. Tom Leykis suggests no girlfriends/boyfriends until you are at least 25. Before then you just have playmates or dates. Any greater commitment is a prelude to marriage, so don't do it unless you are in that kind of market. At your age you would serve yourself much better to invest in your education and further earning potential rather than investing in a relationship. Spouses and significant others (of either sex) are dreamkillers, so don't get tangled up with them until you have achieved your dreams, and THEN you will tend to get the best pick if you don't sell too early like you seem to be doing.
|
I will fight your gods for food,
Mo Enzyme
(consolidation of handles: Jake Sapiens; memelab; logicnazi; Loki; Every1Hz; and Shadow)
|
|
|
knives
Initiate
Gender:
Posts: 43
Reputation: 5.04
Rate knives
|
|
Re:should there be a teleological suspension of the ethical?
« Reply #2 on: 2005-05-26 10:28:13 » |
|
I have to agree with Jake, you should encourage her to be strong, fighting her fights is up to her, fighting for her just adds to her helplessnes. Remember, there are different ways of taking care of someone you love. I ain't saying all of them are right, but the purpose of it you should always keep in mind. Daddy maybe be verbally abusive but daddys paying for college, if she hates him so much, I apologize if I'm too harsh on this but maybe she should just forget receiving any money from him, go get a job and pay for her own studies, but no! daddy stops being a bad guy when he pays for college. Hate is a pretty big word, its in us to hate but it should be handled carefully. I apologize again, I don't mean to offend, but that is acting hypocritical. Don't hate him for the attitude but accept the money. If you hate somebody, you truly let that person know somehow and don't receive anything from him.
You should stick only with Jake's advice, in one thing you are correct, it won't do any good to take the psycological damage just to get a degree in college if probably you will be to harmed to use it for your own good. The father has his way of loving her daughter, she should tell him that the way he practices that love does her more harm than good, if he truly loves her, she probably will understand. If he doesn't, don't be a hypocrite, she should take her bags and leave if she really "hates" him. But hey, don't forget Jake's last advice, is very important to keep in mind too, I know for experience, but I won't bore you with the details.
|
God is just an equation,
who equals slavery.
God is just a perception,
of people's misery.
(Mindfuckers, Victor Rivera 2004)
|
|
|
David Lucifer
Archon
Posts: 2642
Reputation: 8.78
Rate David Lucifer
Enlighten me.
|
|
Re:should there be a teleological suspension of the ethical?
« Reply #3 on: 2005-05-26 10:38:27 » |
|
Quote from: Pabreetzio on 2005-05-23 00:41:21
Doing what I think is right, despite whether it might be what is best for Jennifer or myself, or anyone, would be suspending the ethical for something higher than the ethical.
|
I'm confused about how you could think that is right course of action when you also say there is no expected benefit. It seems your reasoning is flawed.
|
|
|
|
|
knives
Initiate
Gender:
Posts: 43
Reputation: 5.04
Rate knives
|
|
Re:should there be a teleological suspension of the ethical?
« Reply #4 on: 2005-05-28 23:01:50 » |
|
Quote:I'm confused about how you could think that is right course of action when you also say there is no expected benefit. It seems your reasoning is flawed.
I guess that's why he's asking, the confusion also came to my mind, I hope I helped in any way to clear his confusion.
|
God is just an equation,
who equals slavery.
God is just a perception,
of people's misery.
(Mindfuckers, Victor Rivera 2004)
|
|
|
|
Logged
