• 99 results
  • 1
  • 2
#1 Edited by ghost_runner (278 posts) - - Show Bio

I've been thinking alot about morality and what is right and what is wrong. Here are my thoughts

In order to understand man's relationship with morality we must first see where morality comes from. Why are acts in some countries considered taboo while they are considered ordinary in others?

Well it all comes from society. we are all animals really, highly evolved animals sure but animals non the less. Each species has a different survival method, like camoflash. Our survival method is forming groups and societies. Now of course killing a member of the group would make the group weaker thus killing is wrong, and of course we teach our children that killing is wrong and in a generation or two murder becomes morally wrong not logically wrong.

Now you must be thinking "what about the dark ages? There was murder and rape all around" and your right, this is were religion comes into play. Lets skip a few hundred years and assume that religion has become a international thing and say that most all societies agree that certain things are right and wrong. Now why are they wrong? That's because society says so and society says so because religion says so and the generation before said so, thus an entire generation comes to believe in a certain kind of morality and there are very, very few people that challenge society and generally it doesnt end well for those who do.

We must conclude that there really isnt anything that is right or wrong, there is only what society will let us do and not let us do and of course what we all as children have been taught to believe is right and wrong.

PS. This is all just my objective view on the matter, i personally am a religious person and of course believe in a higher power that decides what is right and what is wrong

#2 Posted by The Stegman (25544 posts) - - Show Bio

I agree, I don't believe there are any universal moral truths.

Online
#3 Posted by _Black (2302 posts) - - Show Bio

Perception.

#4 Posted by NlGHTCRAWLER (2899 posts) - - Show Bio

Apart of me believes that we all individually conclude what is right and what is wrong through millions and millions or years crafting, but then I look at places like Africa and it's hard to accept that society isn't needed to keep us at bay. Also in this day and age, whenever society crumbles riots and chaos breaks out.

#5 Posted by DoomDoomDoom (4253 posts) - - Show Bio

"Oh no an ethics problem...QUICK get behind the Veil of Ignorance"

#6 Posted by WarMachineMarkV (1214 posts) - - Show Bio

- I'm right, your wrong, and society should worship me

- In all seriousness, right and wrong is a sea of shades of grey depending on the subject and the situation surrounding it.

#7 Posted by minigunman123 (3116 posts) - - Show Bio

I'm conflicted, because I believe in God and right and wrong, and am not only religious, but of Christian mind... So I don't think morality is relative, but I also sometimes can be confused about whether something is actually wrong, or just illegal (morally vs. legally wrong).

I have no doubts that there is an absolute standard for morality, society doesn't change that, in my opinion. Society can say "murder is okay" for example, but I hope that the more enlightened folks will obviously say "no it's not" and either try to change the system, or not take part in it. This is obviously just an example to illustrate my views. Yes, I said enlightened; this is because I believe murder is always wrong. In Sparta, they used to throw babies over cliffs if they weren't healthy and/or large; in my mind, even though that was the norm for at least a while, that doesn't make it right. We have many examples in comic books as well...

Darkseid's viewpoint. An evil tyrannical god that actively abuses his followers if they don't do what he wants, and murders many, not for any reason other than trying to live. Seriously, he wants to rule life, life is just a math equation to him. We'd all agree this is a BAD DUDE, right? No questions asked? Darkseid is a bad guy. His followers however, treat him as God, and would never question him. Does that make him right? Does that mean his rule should go uncontested simply because of the consequences of standing against what is wrong?

Another one. Trigon. Trigon wishes to rule everything, destroy everything else, and use the very souls of his followers to power and fuel his incredible magic to conquer the multiverse. I'm willing to bet that many of his followers treat him like a God because he is the antithesis of a God in DC's comics, a terrible demon with terrible might who can manipulate your very essence of your being, for his own amusement or gain.

Let's use a more relevant one... Hitler. I don't think I need to go on with this one, but I will anyway. There were and are Nazi sympathizers out there who still follow rigidly to the Nazi regime's idea of exterminating any non-Arians, even if they don't actively exterminate families anymore, and while nowadays they're hard to find and pretty uncommon (at least I HOPE so!), they were obviously more common when Hitler was still around. I recognize that there were also Germans who did not appreciate Hitler's rule, but he did indeed take care of his populace, he took care of Germany very well during his reign. He took the loot from houses and apartments that were vacated (usually by force because you weren't a proper German in the Nazi's eyes) and distributed it to the German citizens, and moved German citizens into the apartments and houses that were vacated. He relieved them of the depression, if only temporarily, even though it was his REAL plan that he'd exterminate the Jews. He won many people over. Does that mean he was NOT an evil dictator?

I like to think that the masses are usually wrong, because they usually are, even if they do something right, they often do it for the wrong reason, which is still wrong; intent, or lack thereof, is everything. I strongly disagree with the idea that the majority is correct and decides what's right and wrong, good and bad, and what we should or shouldn't think. I think morality is always present no matter what society says.

I do realize that by essentially saying "the masses are asses", I'm open to a lot of flaming, but if you're really interested in debating, please don't flame. I'm not calling any one person anything; I'm not even attacking a specific group of people, I'm attacking a notion, the notion that majority rules. While it has it's places (such as in democracy), it also has instances where it should back off, such as the case of morality. There are rights and wrongs.

Hope you enjoyed the read.

#8 Posted by Blood1991 (8098 posts) - - Show Bio

For me the distinctions often seem clear, but to others that is not the case. Our perception is shaped by our background, raising, personality, and personel experiences.

#9 Posted by sesquipedalophobe (4786 posts) - - Show Bio

Morality is a social invention.

#10 Posted by joshmightbe (25053 posts) - - Show Bio

Morality was an invention of human arrogance as a way to pretend we aren't animals

#11 Edited by Soulstealer (825 posts) - - Show Bio

@ghost_runner said:

I've been thinking alot about morality and what is right and what is wrong. Here are my thoughts

In order to understand man's relationship with morality we must first see where morality comes from. Why are acts in some countries considered taboo while they are considered ordinary in others?

Well it all comes from society. we are all animals really, highly evolved animals sure but animals non the less. Each species has a different survival method, like camoflash. Our survival method is forming groups and societies. Now of course killing a member of the group would make the group weaker thus killing is wrong, and of course we teach our children that killing is wrong and in a generation or two murder becomes morally wrong not logically wrong.

Now you must be thinking "what about the dark ages? There was murder and rape all around" and your right, this is were religion comes into play. Lets skip a few hundred years and assume that religion has become a international thing and say that most all societies agree that certain things are right and wrong. Now why are they wrong? That's because society says so and society says so because religion and the generation before said so, thus an entire generation comes to believe in a certain kind of morality and there are very, very few people that challenge society and generally it doesnt end well for those who do.

We must conclude that there really isnt anything that is right or wrong, there is only what society will let us do and not let us do and of course what we all as children have been taught to believe is right and wrong.

PS. This is all just my objective view on the matter, i personally am a religious person and of course believe in a higher power that decides what is right and what is wrong

I'd argue that personal experience and the sense of self that one has also impacts morality greatly. After all society can say a great many things, however it is up to the individual to decide his or her own actions within the societal group. That's to say that though the things you mentioned are indeed influences toward the cause of morality (for the sake of the society or the religion) I'd argue that in the end morality falls within the realm of the person whom is considering what is right and what is wrong more so than simply the outline placed before them by outside groups and forces.

Is the society a massive influence? Yes. However it's only one of many influences. Personal experience is another. We learn what we can and cannot get away with within any particular discipline structure and also what our punishment is if we exceed that structure. We know what punishments we're willing to accept and which we are not. We are capable of weighing the "benefit" vs the "risk." I also cited the sense of self as an influence however I'm not about to try to explain the human sense of self (I doubt I have either the communication skills nor the intellect to truly encompass it or it's many subtleties and influences) however I'll say that we are all a great many many variables small and large come together in varying ways (that could have come together in a near limitless alternate amount of ways to be honest) to create us as we are. Who you are is as much a deciding factor to me. Self lets us set boundaries positive and negative for ourselves, and it's reevaluation allows us to accept or not accept the breaching of these boundaries and how that fits once again into the concept of self.

All that is to say that we all possess self appointed boundaries and these are as strong or stronger than bounds put forth by societies in some ways while also weaker in others. Sometimes they clash with society sometimes they are symbiotic; but in the end they are only loosely "based on" what's around us so much as well as what's inside us in my opinion.

#12 Posted by minigunman123 (3116 posts) - - Show Bio

@joshmightbe: Imagine this scenario. Spoiler warning because of graphic text and detail. You've been warned.

I just raped your closest female companion in your life (be it a mother, wife, sister, girlfriend or daughter), right in front of you. While you were watching. I taped your eyes open, handcuffed you to a door, you can't break free because I whacked you with a baseball bat before all this occurred. You're brain damaged. Your beloved is bleeding and screaming in pain and fear. I start tattooing grotesque images on her with a knife. In front of you. I shoot her in the foot after I'm done, if she's alive, and then rape her again, living or not. I then stick the knife in her womanhood until blood comes out. Then I shoot you in the foot, and toss her lifeless corpse to you, laughing, as I explain I videotaped it all, and plan on using it to get off on during the nights when I'm too lazy to do it to another family. I take whomever else I find in the immediate vicinity, if anyone, and shoot them, they're dead. You're still handcuffed, I never let you go. I leave you there to starve to death knowing I took the lives of at least one of your loved ones. I had no reason, I just thought it was fun.

So, are you telling me that's not evil, and that you'd just shrug it off because the notion of evil and good is just born out of pure arrogance?

#13 Edited by ghost_runner (278 posts) - - Show Bio

@minigunman123: I dont think you understand what i was trying to say. Your argument is that though bad people may do things for good reasons and people may agree with them that in your opinion still makes tham evil, but thats not what im taking about.

Im asking if morality and right and wrong are real things or are they just something we made to increase our chances of survival and we have been so brain washed by society and religion that we believe some things are right while other are wrong, when in reality maybe there is no right and wrong.

For the sake of argument lets say that what we have been lead to believe is wrong is actually right and vice versa and that what Hitler did was right. Even if lets say God told you that you still wouldn't believe it because of what you have been taught to believe since birth.

#14 Posted by minigunman123 (3116 posts) - - Show Bio

@ghost_runner: Well if you consider religion brainwashing, then I can't explain to you what morality is. Morality will constantly be rejected until one realizes religion and accountability aren't just fictional pieces of trash.

#15 Posted by ssejllenrad (12847 posts) - - Show Bio

Morality is something you shove down the throats of people who don't agree with you...

#16 Posted by SC (13307 posts) - - Show Bio

No such thing as good or evil, or Universal right or wrong, but that being said, anytime you have things that share common components, you have room for objectivity. By assigning labels to actions objectively, we (humans) can have objective morality - as in steer away from the idea that morality is only fostered by society (or given by a higher power) and subjective based on the idea we are different and thus no objective basis for good or bad actions but those subjectively or arrogant applied. This ignores that although we are not impossibly identical, we are also not impossibly foreign and alien to each other and so viewing either stance in terms of absolutes, although convenient and easier to teach, learn and understand isn't probably the most reasoned way of addressing the matter. If I insist to people that I want to try to chew and completely eat my arms off, fingers, hands, wrists, elbows and so forth but that I will enjoy this and find its best for me as an individual, probably better to conclude I am mot well mentally. There exists smart reasoned learnable basis for this. Whilst some might argue if we found a tribe practicing a ritual in this way and taught it to youngsters as a part of their culture, that because they are a different society with a different culture, there is therefore nothing wrong with the practicing of cannibalizing your own arms... just for the hell of it or cultural reasons, or religious reasons... we can have objective reasons why this isn't of benefit to the person, people or culture, in a big way. The tricky part comes with defining and asserting the objective reasons, asserting and demonstrating. Morality after all is often invoked to justify a persons personal vendettas and or sate cultural or religious requirements/doctrines. Its a good thing our brains are so big and learning is getting cheaper and easier.       

Moderator
#17 Posted by ghost_runner (278 posts) - - Show Bio

@minigunman123: Relax that's not what im saying. Im a religious person too but im asking you to take an objective look at this. My using of the word brainwashing might have been done in an incorrect manner but you must realise brainwashing does not mean you are lead to believe something that is incorrect, it can also be for things that are right but the point is that we arent really allowed to see for our selves what is right and wrong we are told. Even if you let a person choose he will most likly choose the one society says is the right one because of the conscious or unconscious pressure but on that person by society, there is not a sane person alive who can fight against this.

BTW. I edited my comment so you might want to reread that.

#18 Posted by Glitch_Spawn (17132 posts) - - Show Bio

Nothing is true. Everything is permitted.

#19 Posted by ghost_runner (278 posts) - - Show Bio

@Glitch_Spawn: Oh i knew somebody was ganna leave this comment sooner or later

#20 Posted by Glitch_Spawn (17132 posts) - - Show Bio

@ghost_runner said:

@Glitch_Spawn: Oh i knew somebody was ganna leave this comment sooner or later

In all seriousness though, I get it. You pretty much spilled it all out on the table. You eat bacon here you're a good American. You eat bacon in front of an authority figure in any middle eastern country you're a heretic.

In even more seriousness I am a got'damn huge fan of the AC series. Ever since the release of the original dawg.

#21 Posted by FadeToBlackBolt (23334 posts) - - Show Bio

I challenge anyone to explain the raping or murder of a child as being a wrong invented by society.  
 
It's just wrong. 

#22 Posted by ghost_runner (278 posts) - - Show Bio

@Glitch_Spawn: I didnt like the first one so much but man AC2 was awesome.

#23 Posted by Hawkeye446 (3939 posts) - - Show Bio

@SC said:

No such thing as good or evil, or Universal right or wrong, but that being said, anytime you have things that share common components, you have room for objectivity. By assigning labels to actions objectively, we (humans) can have objective morality - as in steer away from the idea that morality is only fostered by society (or given by a higher power) and subjective based on the idea we are different and thus no objective basis for good or bad actions but those subjectively or arrogant applied. This ignores that although we are not impossibly identical, we are also not impossibly foreign and alien to each other and so viewing either stance in terms of absolutes, although convenient and easier to teach, learn and understand isn't probably the most reasoned way of addressing the matter. If I insist to people that I want to try to chew and completely eat my arms off, fingers, hands, wrists, elbows and so forth but that I will enjoy this and find its best for me as an individual, probably better to conclude I am mot well mentally. There exists smart reasoned learnable basis for this. Whilst some might argue if we found a tribe practicing a ritual in this way and taught it to youngsters as a part of their culture, that because they are a different society with a different culture, there is therefore nothing wrong with the practicing of cannibalizing your own arms... just for the hell of it or cultural reasons, or religious reasons... we can have objective reasons why this isn't of benefit to the person, people or culture, in a big way. The tricky part comes with defining and asserting the objective reasons, asserting and demonstrating. Morality after all is often invoked to justify a persons personal vendettas and or sate cultural or religious requirements/doctrines. Its a good thing our brains are so big and learning is getting cheaper and easier.

I agree. Great post by the way, seeing as the topic at hand is such a dense one.

Randomly tying this to comics, in Red Lanterns, (I forget the specific issue), the said Lanterns go to a planet where the females of the species, at puberty, are blinded. The Red Lanterns tried preventing this, as I would agree, but since it was a part of the Aliens traditions and culture/religion, lines get blurred.

#24 Posted by joshmightbe (25053 posts) - - Show Bio

@minigunman123 said:

@joshmightbe: Imagine this scenario. Spoiler warning because of graphic text and detail. You've been warned.

I just raped your closest female companion in your life (be it a mother, wife, sister, girlfriend or daughter), right in front of you. While you were watching. I taped your eyes open, handcuffed you to a door, you can't break free because I whacked you with a baseball bat before all this occurred. You're brain damaged. Your beloved is bleeding and screaming in pain and fear. I start tattooing grotesque images on her with a knife. In front of you. I shoot her in the foot after I'm done, if she's alive, and then rape her again, living or not. I then stick the knife in her womanhood until blood comes out. Then I shoot you in the foot, and toss her lifeless corpse to you, laughing, as I explain I videotaped it all, and plan on using it to get off on during the nights when I'm too lazy to do it to another family. I take whomever else I find in the immediate vicinity, if anyone, and shoot them, they're dead. You're still handcuffed, I never let you go. I leave you there to starve to death knowing I took the lives of at least one of your loved ones. I had no reason, I just thought it was fun.

So, are you telling me that's not evil, and that you'd just shrug it off because the notion of evil and good is just born out of pure arrogance?

Actually humans are pack animals so in this situation it would basically make you a threat to my pack therefore there would be a natural imperative to deal with the situation.

#25 Posted by The Stegman (25544 posts) - - Show Bio
@FadeToBlackBolt:  
 

I challenge anyone to explain the raping or murder of a child as being a wrong invented by society.  
 
It's just wrong. 

Yet the millions of pedophiles out there who have done it don't see it as wrong, what's "evil" or "wrong" for some, isn't for others. 
Online
#26 Posted by minigunman123 (3116 posts) - - Show Bio

@The Stegman: Those "millions" (I'm not sure how accurate that figure is, to be honest) are still wrong.

@joshmightbe: Well if you didn't feel I did anything actually wrong, by doing that, if I were you, I'd be ashamed...

@ghost_runner: I understand you're trying to take a different view on this, but I still disagree that morality is something we decide for ourselves. If we believe something is right or wrong, I don't agree that that makes it right or wrong.

#27 Posted by joshmightbe (25053 posts) - - Show Bio

@minigunman123: I told you I would feel something was wrong with that because we are naturally programmed to defend our pack. I'd honestly feel worse about my inability to protect my family from someone doing that to them.

#28 Posted by joshmightbe (25053 posts) - - Show Bio

@FadeToBlackBolt said:

I challenge anyone to explain the raping or murder of a child as being a wrong invented by society. It's just wrong.

I do see it as wrong but my point was that society invented the concept of right and wrong. There is no natural morality. Nature only concerns itself with survival, there are no ethics or morals involved from a purely natural perspective. Our morals were developed as an offshoot of our natural pack mentality, we see things like this as wrong because they present a threat to the pack and the survival of our species.

#29 Posted by ghost_runner (278 posts) - - Show Bio

@minigunman123 said:

@ghost_runner: I understand you're trying to take a different view on this, but I still disagree that morality is something we decide for ourselves.

I disagree, morality is something that we inherit form our culture, our society, our family, and our religion.

#30 Posted by minigunman123 (3116 posts) - - Show Bio

@ghost_runner: That still implies that someone MADE IT UP and is passing it down to us. In your explanation someone has to make it up first, and thus it gets passed down and we get "brainwashed". Brainwashing implies we were forced to believe something, whether we inherently think it's correct or incorrect, right or wrong, you're essentially saying we're too stupid or inept to think for ourselves and must be forced to believe something that someone or some group of people long ago decided was "right", which is still PEOPLE deciding what is right and wrong, which I disagree with. Your original post, takes the position that no religion is correct over another, and that morality is completely subjective to how we were raised. That's the same as saying both religion and thus morality were made up by people, because no specific version is correct or "real", and like I keep saying, I do not believe people can decide morality on our own. Let's please just leave it at that, I haven't been misunderstanding your point, I just don't agree.

@joshmightbe: So you wouldn't have any feelings other than what you basically consider the "logical" feeling of the pack being damaged? You wouldn't feel sorrow for the fact your loved one, not just a random person, was tortured and killed in front of you? Do you even have feelings, Mr. Spock? Note, I'm not asking if you have some instinctual feeling "the pack was harmed, this is bad," I'm asking if you would feel "My wife was just brutally treated, then killed, and I had to watch, the person I loved most and felt most comfortable with is gone, I am sad". Humans are not like animals, we can't just go find another mate, we can't walk up to a random person and say "you're my mate for life, let's go procreate". Do you even believe love or sadness exists, or do you believe we're basically logical computers?

#31 Posted by minigunman123 (3116 posts) - - Show Bio

@FadeToBlackBolt: Yes, it is; but a lot of people are just saying it's the "pack" or "herd" mentality, we want to protect humans because that's how we feel safe. That's wrong. Random people don't protect random strangers, usually, and we're part of a pack, it's called a city, or society; there's a bond that's not logical, it's emotional, between families and loved ones. I don't know if I can explain this if people don't believe humans have a soul and aren't just animals, which seems to be the dominating belief in this thread -_-

#32 Edited by ghost_runner (278 posts) - - Show Bio

The arguments im constantly hearing is that if you loved ones died in a horrific fashion, then would the person who killed them be evil? Wouldn't you be angry?sad?

1. Yes that person would be evil but only by the definition that i have come to believe.

2. I would only feel sad angry because we as animals have evolved to feel emotions. For example Love, we can all agree that love is just a chemical reaction in our brains (that doesnt make it any less signification or real). So why do we fall in Love? Its natures way to make sure that we reproduce and that some part of us lives on and that we stay with our chosen mate and child to protect them and make sure they survive.

Each emotion we have is just natures way of making do things that are beneficial for our survival in some way or give us pleasure in some way or form. However as we are so highly evolved we can chose to follow our emotions or not and this is were our other survival method comes in to play, which is logic.

If im an evil person and you stop my master plan then in my eyes you will be the evil one. Just because a large majority agrees that something is wrong that doesnt really make it wrong. Prime example: gay marriage.

an other example is when a solder kills in war but is thought of as a hero back home, only because there the society says its ok to kill in that case, why? because that way it ups their chances of survival.

#33 Posted by joshmightbe (25053 posts) - - Show Bio

@minigunman123: I would feel sorrow, sorrow is well documented to exist in hundreds of species, it's not a human specific emotion. Many animals will actually halt their normal routine after losing a mate, there are hundreds of documented cases where wolves would let themselves starve due to loss. There are many emotions people like to pretend are specifically human but the reality is most of our emotions are completely rooted in nature and are shared by many others in the animal kingdom. Anger, Sorrow, Joy, and Anxiety are present in all mammals but we're not discussing emotion here we're discussing Morality they are 2 different things all together.

#34 Posted by John Valentine (16335 posts) - - Show Bio

@joshmightbe said:

Morality was an invention of human arrogance as a way to pretend we aren't animals

So insightful.

#35 Posted by nickthedevil (13658 posts) - - Show Bio

@joshmightbe said:

Morality was an invention of human arrogance as a way to pretend we aren't animals

#36 Posted by Lunacyde (19458 posts) - - Show Bio

Everything is what it is because we give it a name and meaning. Good and evil are no different.

#37 Posted by joshmightbe (25053 posts) - - Show Bio

@minigunman123: Whose to say animals don't have souls? Millions of Buddhists, Hindus and even Native Americans believe they do. That has nothing to do with Morality morality is just a system of social norms which sometimes conform to our natural emotional responses which are chemical reactions in our brains. Morality goes against our emotions just as often as it goes with them

#38 Posted by King Saturn (224817 posts) - - Show Bio
morality seems more like a social construct... 
#39 Posted by SC (13307 posts) - - Show Bio
@lykopis said:

You don't need to believe in a "soul" to be emotional and loving and loyal. To be "good". I don't agree people wouldn't be inclined to protect strangers -- I step in every time I see need, do what I can charity wise? Either at home or overseas? I volunteer as well and I really enjoy it -- I do it for myself more so than for the people I am assisting and I have a strong sense of community with everyone I come in contact with, regardless of religion or race.

Anyone I am lucky enough to meet and get to know becomes my family and I love them all. I appreciate religion can play a strong role in supporting that, but it's not a requirement when determining how to go about living your life right.

 
Great reply and points as usual. I'll add on to you if I may.  
 
Just because something is constructed or recognized by man, doesn't mean its made up, as in false. Or not real based on the idea it hasn't always existed or handed down by a higher power. Human's possess the means to assert morals. They can be subjective based, or objective. Stones and rocks do not. People will be inclined to help others for a few different reasons. They can for natural and subjective and unknown reasons, and lots of studies and papers have been done about this and how empathy in this way could aid human survival  (and so a helper doing so for reasons beneficial to themselves) or a person, knowledgeable,  educated, aware and intelligent enough to just make the conscious decision to help people with no objective gain or reward or personal benefit. Not needing a soul for that one either.  
 
There is also a distinct difference between realizing your thinking as being subjective and objective. A person explaining the logical basis as far as harm coming to their loved ones, is not saying they would not have subjective personal emotional reactions if the example was not a hypothetical. The reasoning here is because if people only had emotional reactions to things, then we wouldn't be all be communicating on computers. The same applies to say earlier conversations about extreme child abuse. Many victims of, go on to perpetuate the cycle. So while its true to say they don't recognize what they are doing is necessarily wrong, especially if they are trying to sate deep seeded psychological issues and mental/emotional needs without any normal reasoning and logic to tell them not to, we can know why and how this is and trace the line back. The initial attacker and the victim could be said to not be in optimal running conditions. how they make conclusions about the world ideally could and should be addressed (and thankfully often are)  
Moderator
#40 Posted by minigunman123 (3116 posts) - - Show Bio

I'd just like to point out that I don't care or mind WHAT people believe, I DO think people should have at least a basic sense of morality, but I don't hold others to my religion's morality; I won't go around telling gay people they're bad, or anything, because it is totally not my place. I think I came off as too aggressive in this thread, and that's my fault, sorry about that; but the only thing I was actually originally trying to argue for, was that I think that there is an absolute standard for morals. If you're not part of my religion, which is fine, I don't expect or require or even ask that everyone be, then I don't expect you to have the same moral code, which is also (usually) fine. I do believe that at the very least, some moral codes should be followed by everyone, such as no murdering, stealing etc., as I'm sure everyone agrees to.

I don't expect or want everyone to believe we all have a soul, and I won't knock people for thinking animals have souls. I didn't mean to imply animals don't have emotions, I DO personally believe humans have a soul, and that emotions are different for us, and what I meant by my statement about the soul is that I simply don't know how I can explain it unless you at least try to see it from the viewpoint that humans aren't the same as animals. I don't expect or ask anyone to believe that, but I simply can't think of a way to explain what I believe without others first accepting my belief as possibly valid, to the point where they understand why I believe what I believe.

Let's try to get back to the main thread topic, I recognize the topic suggests that morality is constructed by conditioning from the home, from society, and by religions we are exposed to, and I somewhat agree, somewhat disagree. My own beliefs hold that there's an absolute standard for morality, it's not influenced by anything, it's just there. Yes, I am Christian, no, I'm not going to do any outlandish rebuking by calling homosexuals horrible or anything. I believe that Humans are not animals, and that we are the only beings held to morality, and before anyone says "what about aliens", I don't know, but I doubt sentient outer space aliens exist. Let's not bring this discussion to become about my specific views, or on evolution (which will undoubtedly come up soon, and someone will try to tell me what I believe is garbage), but just try to explain OUR OWN views.

I am sorry if I offended anyone earlier, I think I may have, it wasn't my intention really, sorry if I did.

And @joshmightbe, after reading your latest comments I see that you would indeed feel badly about something happening, I didn't fully understand your beliefs on the scenario I proposed, your earlier comments made it sound like you wouldn't really feel anything about the situation, which disturbed me. But even if it did I shouldn't try to change your views unless you wanted to learn more about what I believed. Hope we're cool. :)

#41 Posted by joshmightbe (25053 posts) - - Show Bio

@minigunman123: We're cool I was just pointing out that Morality and Emotions are different things. And even with my comment on human arrogance, its not necessarily bad thing considering that our ego is actually a huge part of why we're the dominant species on the planet. It led us to believe we could tame fire, which is pretty much the foundation of human civilization.

#42 Edited by minigunman123 (3116 posts) - - Show Bio

@joshmightbe: Perhaps there's a fine line between arrogance and dreams/aspirations? In regards to things like technological development anyway.

#43 Posted by joshmightbe (25053 posts) - - Show Bio

@minigunman123: Ego is the root of aspirations without it we'd have never dreamed of leaving the caves

#44 Posted by NlGHTCRAWLER (2899 posts) - - Show Bio

In history when man has ventured too far past the lines morality to the point where it is no longer recognizable, man as a species has suffered. There has never been a time where rape, murder, pedophilia, and chaos have brought about a lasting period of peace or joy throughout the general population because if it did, that's where we would be today. We are who we are today based upon our mistakes. We adapt, so that we don't make the same mistakes again. Our mistakes as a species is where our moral compass comes from. Whether from God himself or some sort of genetic anomaly that has traveled through our parents DNA, we know what is wrong and what in return is right.

#45 Posted by joshmightbe (25053 posts) - - Show Bio

The human brain is both the cause of and solution to almost all our problems

#46 Posted by Enemybird (3278 posts) - - Show Bio

@joshmightbe said:

Morality was an invention of human arrogance as a way to pretend we aren't animals

I don't think its in any way meant to pretend we aren't animals. Morality is a philosophy that allows everyone the best chance of survival in layman's terms.

#47 Posted by aliensoldier105 (488 posts) - - Show Bio

@Enemybird: the day humans became intelligent enough to develop weapons and burn fossil fuels was the day we forfeited the right to exist as a specie.

sorry, but intelligence and imperfection don't mix. high IQ + faults like selfishness, hypocrisy and greed = evil

religion, like morality was a man invented thing.

#48 Posted by aliensoldier105 (488 posts) - - Show Bio

ha

you've got to be joking!

morality died out a long time ago, nobody seems to care whether we live or die, or what kind of torment by simply existing can bring nowadays

if only there were such thing as a righteous creator, so it could fix the damage the world is in, both financially and socially. and yes I do wish some people dead, I often hear "murder" stories where the situation was provoked by morons, so really I don't care if some lying and abusive scumbag gets killed. I say to myself, not my problem and just less pricks in the world to worry about.

have a look at what is happening, year 2012 and wars and riots still happen, what does that tell you? sometimes I question why we're not extinct yet, I think it would benefit the wildlife if the human population were to be cut down a notch or two.

VERY FEW people i know are trustworthy, the others i used to get along with have betrayed me, and I tell you there's not many things more humiliating and depressing to have liars take the side of others over yours when you're in the right. regardless if you have proof or not.

#49 Posted by utotheg38 (18883 posts) - - Show Bio

Chicks=Right

Dudes= Wrong

Religion has all the answers

#50 Posted by aliensoldier105 (488 posts) - - Show Bio

@NlGHTCRAWLER: must i repeat, morality is virtually non existent in the grand scheme of things.

morality is just some delusional concept that will never be absolute in human beings. we will never have a perfect moral code like the one hardwired into the character Sonny in iRobot. otherwise we wouldn't need prisons now would we?

and it's funny seeing religious nuts try to pin the blame for all the worlds chaos on "the devil."