Philosophy Forums
Welcome to the Philosophy Forums! If you already are a member, please log in. If you are not a member, please join the forums now. It's completely free, and all viewpoints are welcome.


Transcending Fairness

Goto page Previous  1, 2
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Philosophy Discussion Forum Index // Ethics and Morality
View previous topic :: View next topic ::
Author Message
Isidorus



Joined: 16 Nov 2009
Posts: 124

Post: #16   PostPosted: Wed Nov 25, 2009 2:51 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote Add User to Ignore List
philosophical discussions tend to be quite shallow, if they do not include depth.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
wanabe



Joined: 24 Nov 2008
Posts: 2112
Location: EVERYWHERE

Post: #17   PostPosted: Wed Nov 25, 2009 9:06 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote Add User to Ignore List
Homicidal Pacifist, he may be in even better shape.

Real fights don't have weight classes or rules.

As you said fairenough.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Isidorus wrote:
philosophical discussions tend to be quite shallow, if they do not include depth.


Care to elaborate?
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
belinda wrote:
the imprisonment should be as comfortable for the offender as is [reasonably] possible.Thus revenge is [reduced], and a window is left for possible rehabilitation.


Agreed.
_________________
The Secret To Eternal Life: Live Life To The Fullest, And Help All Others To Do So. Fear is weakness leaving the mind.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Scott
Site Admin


Joined: 20 Jan 2007
Posts: 1709

Post: #18   PostPosted: Wed Nov 25, 2009 9:46 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote Add User to Ignore List
wanabe wrote:
The most fair thing would be equality would it not scott; any thing less isn't truly fair.

That's not what the dictionary said. Fair does not mean the exact sameness of two things nor does it mean equality. I gave you the relevant definitions of fair.

Like I said, Events happen that are "consistent with rules, logic, or ethics." People, decisions and other things can "have or exhibit a disposition that is free of favoritism and biased." Results or other things can be "equitable." I do not feel you have provided any reason to doubt these commonly accepted truths. I do not feel one can consistently reasonably deny the truth of those statements without being a nihilist. It seems to me as nihilistic as saying that ants and spiders do not exist.

Scott wrote:
Consider this example, one year the judges of a yearly race are paid off by one of the runners. The one who paid them clearly passes the finish line after the fastest runner, but the corrupt judges declare the slower guy who paid them the winner. Someone says, "that's unfair!" Is this person delusional because fairness does not exist? The next year, the new judges are not corrupt and do not take any bribes, the guy who passes the finish line first is declared the winner. People say, "Unlike last year, that was fair." Are these people delusional, believing in something that doesn't exist?
wanabe wrote:
If the race was truly fair it would be more like the winning runner competing against his own time. but even then it would not be fair because he is older or his weight is different, etc.

I do not think that would make the rules of the race "fairer." Anyway, the question was not what would make the rules of the race fairer, but rather whether the people are incorrect to say the decision (not the rules) is fair or if the example shows an instance when fair is the appropriate description, in this case a description of the quality that the decision made in the second race has that the decision in the first race did not. I think it is obvious that the decision in the second example--where the judges follow the rules and declare the fastest runner the winner as opposed to taking bribes--is "having or exhibiting a disposition that is free of favoritism or bias" and "consistent with rules, logic, or ethics," making it fair in more than one sense of the word.
_________________
Online Philosophy Club - Please tell me how to improve this website!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
wanabe



Joined: 24 Nov 2008
Posts: 2112
Location: EVERYWHERE

Post: #19   PostPosted: Wed Nov 25, 2009 11:00 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote Add User to Ignore List
Scott, there is little point in me arguing with you, the master of the site(bit ironic), especially if your going to use the infallible dictionary. I'm not accusing you of acting in the above way, but ultimately down the 'line' that's what it boils down to.

You can get your definition out of a dictionary, out of a cereal box, or you can use context and spend all day explaining, which is what we do anyway.

I said fair does not exist. I was being a bit short. There is fair, it is in our minds, that works well enough, practical, I get it sure, FAIR ENOUGH (I am a 'reformed' nihilist though). I'm not here to discuss commonly accepted truths; I could watch tv for that. Among other things I'm here in hopes to find some truth or evidence there of.

Ants and spiders may not exist, but they move around, and are experienceable by the senses; more than we can say for the 'logical' construct of fair.

I don't really give a d@mn about the race analogy, but I did read what you have to say.
_________________
The Secret To Eternal Life: Live Life To The Fullest, And Help All Others To Do So. Fear is weakness leaving the mind.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Philosophy Discussion Forum Index // Ethics and Morality All times are GMT - 5 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2
Page 2 of 2

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum

Check out our Philosophy Articles!


© 2007-2009 OnlinePhilosophyClub.com, Scott Hughes. | Please suggest ways to make the forums even better!