Let's Think Together
Or Selective brain function?
Published on May 22, 2007 By ThinkAloud In Misc
There is nothing more dishonest than being morally inconsistent. if someone is immoral in a consistent way at least you can argue with them based on what their values are and try to show them that they are on the wrong side of the issue. However, when they are morally inconsistent you know that they know what the right side of the issue is since they go there whenever they choose. Unfortunately, it seems that they choose the right side ONLY when it suits their agenda or whatever their objectives are.

It is really hypocrite and flagrantly dishonest to say you are against violence and coercion (even provoked ones) in personal everyday societal interactions with people around you and at the same time have no objection whatsoever to your country adopt force and coercion as means of interaction with other nations of the world without being provoked.

The same goes for people who support unnecessary war as long as they don’t have any personal stake in the matter. Once someone they know is killed in it or if the war goes on for a long time than what they thought, their view changes 180 degrees in a flash.

I see this way of moral inconsistency allover the place: In tax issues, poverty issues, health care issues,etc. The typical explanation they usually give when they change their mind is "I learned my lesson" or "I was young and naive". This of course is BS and they know it. Before they changed their view, they knew what the moral side of the issue was. They just didn’t go there till it hit them in the face and became personal.

How convenient. Be moral and civilized in your personal life, but when it comes to the nation and to other nations.... naaaah.

Is this a real moral choice these people make or is it selective brain function? Their brain works when it is personal and it doesn’t when it is not?

I don’t think it is the latter, since this is the way non-human brains work. They choose sides based only on their self-interest. Natural selfishness you might call it. Humans are not supposed to be that way.

It must be the first then, they just select the moral side Only when it suits their self-interest.

In both cases the result is the same, the difference is that one is natural instincts, the other is by choice.

It is sad that some people behave that way. Unfortunately, these days so many of us do.

Comments (Page 2)
2 Pages1 2 
on May 29, 2007

"Liberalism" is not that.

Pure communism is not that either.  You are looking at the implementation of communism.  Just as Pure Liberalism is not in and of itself bad, the implementation often is. 

Liberalism, in its true form here in the US, is about the state doing a cradle to grave care taking of the individual.  And in its pure form, so is communism.  The execution of communsim is imperfect since it is done by imperfect souls.  But the philosophy is liberal.

We have had several debates of late about how evil (or good) some of the major religions of the world are.  IN their pure form, they are meant to be good.  But then they are corupted by imperfect people to do evil.  That does not make the core tenets of those religions evil, just the implementation.  But I dont see many people arguing that the inquisition was not done by Catholics because they were not following the core beliefs of their religion.

on May 30, 2007
That does not make the core tenets of those religions evil, just the implementation. But I dont see many people arguing that the inquisition was not done by Catholics because they were not following the core beliefs of their religion.


I fully agree with that. It is a terrible thing that many have become "morally" selective even in politics not just religion.

Liberalism, in its true form here in the US, is about the state doing a cradle to grave care taking of the individual


I honestly cant say that i heard or read that anyone of the main-stream people on the left call for that. That may be an extreme adopted by very few on the extreme left. I dont think we should judge the majority of the left based on that.

I think Communism has a sinister element in it regarding the control of people's lives, not just taking care of them. Liberalism doesnt have that element though.
on May 30, 2007

I think Communism has a sinister element in it regarding the control of people's lives, not just taking care of them. Liberalism doesnt have that element though.

Not all Liberals are communists is what should be stated.  So while some elements of liberalism do have those elements (I use the example of hate crimes - which is another form of thought control), not all do.  Just as not all Elements of any ism contain the essence of the evil parts.

Each ism contains good, as well as bad. 

I was going to go on, but realize that this is going far afield of your original article, so we will leave it for another thread.  But I will leave it as while liberalism is not evil, it contains factions that are evil (just as conservatism does), and they are capable and have done things in their name that may not fit with their pure goals, but are evil in their actions.

2 Pages1 2