User:RD/9k/cobalt rule (Q618)
Main entries
- Whatever destructive thing is done by one free-floating individual person or individual group now will be done by other individual entities before long -> this is the part of the golden rule that I wholeheartedly agree with, even if I think there are some fundamental problems with the concept of ethics. I'll have to find a name for this "rule" later
- What is done unto others will happen again and again and again / Murphy's law (generic) -> the cobalt rule. cobalt ore is a faint blue-violet depending on the angle. but some cobalt minerals are bright saturated blue. it equally symbolizes exmat and Rothenberg's weird Lacanian model of unpredictable individuals. but my main reasoning is it is one possible element to use in spacecraft, which could see the earth from a far distance. it's used in engines apparently. [1]
- What is not done unto others does not happen again and again / nickel rule / inverse cobalt rule
- According to Kant we must not regard workers as a working class because using a human being for the greatest common good is a violation of equally regarding everyone as ends and not as means [2] / (9k) -> and there we have it. ...
this is a terrible fallacy to the point of probably breaking a moral rule if we had 'golden rules' that actually covered predicting the way real people act. we can start with the cobalt rule: whatever bad thing one person does can be done by everyone. from there, you need to cover the possibility that enabling one person who does bad things means enabling all people who can replicate the same bad thing, because cobalt rule. finally we quite ironically bring out the silver rule and point out that you shouldn't let happen to absolutely everyone what you don't want happening to yourself.
gosh yeah the second thing can be called the nickel rule. do not do unto others what you do not want happening again and again and again. - cobalt rule -> actually. I think I more like the idea that the nickel rule is things happening repeatedly while the cobalt rule refers to intentional actions as seen in the golden rule.
- nickel rule / Anything done once accumulates / Every Ideal reaches its extreme / Every Ideal reaches its extreme in some person or situation if it is practiced at all / Murphy's law (generic) / Anything not done once does not accumulate (nickel inverse) / Every Ideal not practiced does not reach its extreme (nickel inverse) -> existential-materialist anti-ethical rule. ethological? descriptive behavioral rule.
nickel rule + ?? = golden rule. - cobalt rule / Anything chosen once accumulates / Every opinion, preference, or deliberate action reaches its extreme in somebody if it is practiced at all / Anything never chosen does not accumulate (cobalt inverse) -> traditional ethics treats everyone as rational agents, but in existential materialism it's actually important to separate out deliberately chosen actions from actions in general that might not be deliberately chosen.
Related
- The golden rule shatters ethics / The golden rule ultimately contradicts itself and shows that individuals practicing "moderation" is not enough to stop "extremes", because it demonstrates how a single behavior done only once by one person but not contained on a populational level as opposed to an individual level (in this case, because the behavior is "good" and welcomed) can quickly scale up into large-scale changes; in the real world there is no actual hard barrier between cultural moderation and cultural extreme and the only major difference is a difference of scale
this + ?? = nickel rule. - Edgeworth's dialectic is inappropriate for use at large scales; the Idealist model of "moderation" and "extremes" cannot be expected to operate reliably or at all in large societies as opposed to very small clusters of people / (9k)
- Why does the word ethology refer to personality or culture instead of literal behavior? ->
this probably has some detailed history behind it that I just don't understand right now
I read up just a little bit on Idealism. I think the overall connection is this: a long time ago it was perfectly intuitive to model behavior as coming from a person's essence, "nature", or "character" (characterization of a thing), hence the terms "ethos" (in Greek) and "character" (as used in English) as a moral or ethical disposition. the new use of "ethos" in the sciences is a literalization of the concept where behavior simply exists because behavior exists in the observed material world, rather than because of abstract Ideals. I like that definition of "ethos" a lot better. sure it sounds circular on the surface, but so did "character leads to character".
Ideologies or fields
- (none)