in light of the "atheists shit gold bricks" article, here is my first draft and RFC. Especially interested in other humans' POV.

Ape Morality as Superior to Human Morality

I am basically an human. With a lowercase "h". Meaning, "lacking a capital 'H'". Specifically, I do not throw crap at others in my species. This is a "negative crap throwing behavior", negative in the sense that I am lacking in any crap throwing. Lacking, of course, since there is no evidence to date that suggest any such things exist.

That said, I am a moral and ethical person. And I believe that my morals, as a human, are in general more lowly developed than the bulk of today's apes.

First, consider the Human.

the lowest and all-too-typical human adheres to the set of sociatal morality presented to him, if only because he is aware of, and concerned with, other humans. Don't do this, don't do that, because if you do, you'll go to "jail"... Do this and do that, because if you do, you'll go to "McDonalds". This is the lowest level of moral development, described by Kohlberg as "pre-pound-me-in-the-ass-prison" morality. It is essentially indistinguishable from the child who fears punishment for disobediance, or who avoids temptation to disobey for the promise of future presents from Santa Claus. This type of animal knows that "laws must be followed", but only because "something bad" will happen to him if he doesn't.

Even the more morally advanced human, one with some amount of education and intelligence, has still not not progressed much further. She follows the standard moral code because of a developed sense of social order and self-interest. She desires to live in a society where she is protected against crime and deviance, where the laws are obeyed and enforced. Therefore she submits to following the social code herself, because it is in her self-interest that her society functions in an predictable and orderly (ie, safe) manner.

Now consider the Ape.

What reason does an ape have to behave morally? Certainly he has no fear of "jail" or longing for "McDonalds" ... apes have to consider questions of personal morality at a depth that seems largely missing amongst the humans. Indeed, for apes it does not suffice to answer questions of morality and ethics with "well, The Bible teaches us this..." or "well, Jesus said that..." or "well, last week the Right Reverend So-and-So said something else..."

Apes can't just blindly appeal to supernatural deities or magic scriptures. They actually have to develop reasons for supporting moral constructs, and defend these reasons with logic based in the reality of the world we actually live in -- not some world that might be forthcoming after we die and rise up to meet Jesus in the Sky.

For myself, as an atheist, morality is certainly not a question of punishment vs. reward, or even law-and-order vs. anarchy-and-chaos. What's at stake is the fundamental concept of the social contract, individual rights, and universal justice. An ideal society, must also be a "good" society. Any society can have law and order. Totalitarian dictatorships have plenty of law and order, but that does not make them necessarily good.

For a just and good society, the individual has rights that must be respected and protected. But this is not easily determined. Questions must be addressed as to "which rights" and "how much"? Certainly the right to live takes precedence over the right to property. But property rights must supercede at least some individual freedoms

The moral atheist understands that the answers to these moral questions are those that move humanity towards a just society. Justice which is based on universal principles, and not merely following the letter of the law -- or scripture -- as the case may be. Universal principles transcend societal norms, and the truly moral person must at times stand apart from society.

Lacking appeals to supernatural punishments and rewards, and without the suppression of inquiry so often encountered in dogmatic religions, the moral atheist is far more inclined to consider the complexities of morality as it determines the nature of just societies. Her reasoning is not constrained to pre-packaged psalms and sermons, parables and epistles. She is not constrained by fear of punishment, or impelled by self-interest towards safely organized social structures. On the contrary, her reasoning is informed by a concerned for universal principles that move beyond the group-think of heavenly-inspired zealots.

To actively consider moral problems in all their complexities, and make rational choices based on honest investigations, this is truly a higher morality than groups of people behaving in patterns because they are instructed to by an authority with a (perceived) power to punish and reward.

4/1/2006 10:04:38 PM

I see what you did there. GG.

4/1/2006 10:05:28 PM

Didn't read.

The soap box is not the appropriate place to post stupid fucking parody threads.

I hope Duke has good enough sense to ban your stupid ass.

Get

the

fuck

out.

4/1/2006 10:06:10 PM

I'm sorry, did I miss something?

4/1/2006 10:08:12 PM

Jesus

Why do people post shit like this in TSB and think they're funny

4/1/2006 10:11:29 PM

I guess the same reason people post the fact that they didn't read the first post, say they hope the poster gets banned, and then curses profanities at them telling them to leave?

4/1/2006 10:17:03 PM

All it takes is reading the title and a little bit of your shitty unoriginal post to realize that you deserve a ban.

THIS IS NOT THE FUCKING SECTION FOR POSTING THIS IDIOTIC GARBAGE

POST SHITTY PARODIES IN CHIT CHAT

SWEET FUCKING GOD

4/1/2006 10:21:25 PM

Well, you're entitled to your opinion.

I'd like to see you work on the anger issues and represent yourself in a better way.
Right now you're coming off as a duechebag.

A good start would be to ease up on the capslock.

4/1/2006 10:26:33 PM

I'm not coming off as a douchebag.

I'm just pissed the fuck off at all of these dumb fucking threads created by people who think their idea is so radicially original and funny that they should be the exception, and allowed to post what amounts to a shitty chit chat parody thread in the soap box

The cheese faggots are included in this group

4/1/2006 11:02:26 PM

I think we have to agree to disagree on what belongs in what section and what constitutes Cheese thread behavior.

Do you have anything to add in regard to the thread's topic or are you going to continue with your swearing and pants wetting?

4/1/2006 11:10:46 PM

0/10

4/1/2006 11:11:38 PM

i thought it was pretty good....and he made a pretty good point

4/1/2006 11:16:26 PM

McDanger said:

Quote :

"The soap box is not the appropriate place to post stupid fucking parody threads."

Satire is an important form of social commentary. I think parody threads are especially appropriate for the Soap Box.

4/1/2006 11:32:58 PM

Fine. Does it need its own thread?

This reminds me exactly of the stupid cheese shit that everybody was giggling over, when there were more parodies in this section than actual discussions

4/1/2006 11:40:19 PM

[Edited on April 1, 2006 at 11:46 PM. Reason : not worth it]

4/1/2006 11:44:27 PM

Quote :

"i'd rather have a soap box full of parodies than a racist conspiracy theorist"

4/1/2006 11:55:20 PM

McDanger said:

Quote :

"Fine. Does it need its own thread?"

Not to abuse an example, but did A Modest Proposal need to be its own pamphlet?

Quote :

"This reminds me exactly of the stupid cheese shit that everybody was giggling over, when there were more parodies in this section than actual discussions"

Well, the point of those parodies was to crowd out discussions that weren't worth having. It kinda worked and it was kinda entertaining, so I can't fault that.

4/1/2006 11:58:13 PM

it did produce quantifiable results

look at the number of conspiracy posts in non-conspiracy threads before the cheese threads

and then look at the number after

4/2/2006 12:00:32 AM

Quote :

"Satire is an important form of social commentary. I think parody threads are especially appropriate for the Soap Box."

[Edited on April 2, 2006 at 12:18 AM. Reason : i wish FroshKiller hung out in TSB more often...]

4/2/2006 12:18:21 AM

heh

Quote :

"This is a "negative crap throwing behavior" "

lo-fuckin-l

gg




[Edited on April 2, 2006 at 1:08 AM. Reason : ]

4/2/2006 1:05:16 AM

ive come to the conclusion that mcdanger is a selfrighteous sonofabitch who takes himself way too seriously.

and probably has like major hemmorhoids, or something. that much anger must have some cause related to the anus.

4/2/2006 1:24:31 AM

It's not that I take myself too seriously.

I just don't take you seriously.

4/2/2006 1:28:37 AM

lol whatever, CAPS BOY.

4/2/2006 1:30:42 AM

This is some pretty weak shit

You're just angry because I didn't like your shittily-written and even more shittily-thought-out post.

4/2/2006 1:32:15 AM

yes, angry. but also hurt. and betrayed.

devastated, is probably more accurate.

4/2/2006 1:38:12 AM

I think parodies should be allowed if they are witty

this is not

it's garbage

4/2/2006 1:51:44 AM

Better than most parody threads.... which ain't sayin' much.

4/2/2006 1:53:38 AM

i think its funny. but i guess im biased.

4/2/2006 3:26:39 AM

I'll admit I didn't expect anyone to fall out of their chair laughing about this thread, but I didn't think anyone would, well let's not go there.

Even if you don't like this parody thread, you gotta love
http://www.thewolfweb.com/message_topic.aspx?topic=329777

parody of

http://www.thewolfweb.com/message_topic.aspx?topic=329680

[Edited on April 2, 2006 at 10:00 AM. Reason : .]

4/2/2006 9:59:13 AM

Damn right apes have a higher moral standard. At least when one ape fucks the other in the ass he has the courtesy to give the other ape a "reach around".

4/4/2006 12:52:06 AM

GIVE APES THE VOTE!!!!!!

YOU WON'T REGRET IT!!!!

4/4/2006 11:36:46 AM