Morality

[ninerbuff]

Mine came from my Iron Man comic book series.

 

[McBell]

is morality subjective?

Yes.

can we ever agree on something about morality?

Yes.
Ever agree on EVERYTHING about morality?
no.

are there actions that are inherently evil, for example, murder or rape, or are these actions ever be justified as right?

Evil is so subjective a word as to be pretty much worthless outside individual application.

 

[Father Heathen]

Should everyone have the same morality? Humans don't reason in the same way, we're liable to come to some pretty different conclusions.

I imagine that everyone would have very similar morals if they weren't tainted by archaic religious and cultural norms.

Also, do you value reason and compassion as equally important? Or is one better than the other?

They balance each other out.

 

[tumbleweed41]

Reason and compassion.

Ditto

 

[diosangpastol]

as for us Christians, the bible sets the standards, without the standard of absolute morality, there will be no morality at all, just plain societal consensus for relative convenience.

For example:
1. Same sex marriage is man's right to choose his gender and his mates. =Relationship management.
2. Abortion is not killing or infanticide, it is family management. = Population control management.
3. Corruption is not bad, it is just 'gift-giving' especially during Christmas, and 'other occassions'. Graft will become a natural phenomenon for 'interconnected' relationships. =Wealth and favor distribution management.
4. Vendetta killing is the society's natural response for rising crime. =Justice management.
5. Lying and false pretense become a tool of necessity for convenience and common good, just ask those to MIlitray Generals who suddenly suffered selective forgetfulness on some instances of their lives......=Information management.

 

[Dan4reason]

as for us Christians, the bible sets the standards, without the standard of absolute morality, there will be no morality at all, just plain societal consensus for relative convenience.

For example:
1. Same sex marriage is man's right to choose his gender and his mates. =Relationship management.
2. Abortion is not killing or infanticide, it is family management. = Population control management.
3. Corruption is not bad, it is just 'gift-giving' especially during Christmas, and 'other occassions'. Graft will become a natural phenomenon for 'interconnected' relationships. =Wealth and favor distribution management.
4. Vendetta killing is the society's natural response for rising crime. =Justice management.
5. Lying and false pretense become a tool of necessity for convenience and common good, just ask those to MIlitray Generals who suddenly suffered selective forgetfulness on some instances of their lives......=Information management.

You know that the bible contains genocide, slavery, and sexism right?

 

[Father Heathen]

as for us Christians, the bible sets the standards, without the standard of absolute morality, there will be no morality at all, just plain societal consensus for relative convenience.

For example:
1. Same sex marriage is man's right to choose his gender and his mates. =Relationship management.
2. Abortion is not killing or infanticide, it is family management. = Population control management.
3. Corruption is not bad, it is just 'gift-giving' especially during Christmas, and 'other occassions'. Graft will become a natural phenomenon for 'interconnected' relationships. =Wealth and favor distribution management.
4. Vendetta killing is the society's natural response for rising crime. =Justice management.
5. Lying and false pretense become a tool of necessity for convenience and common good, just ask those to MIlitray Generals who suddenly suffered selective forgetfulness on some instances of their lives......=Information management.

 

[Sunstone]

as for us Christians, the bible sets the standards, without the standard of absolute morality, there will be no morality at all, just plain societal consensus for relative convenience.

For example:
1. Same sex marriage is man's right to choose his gender and his mates. =Relationship management.
2. Abortion is not killing or infanticide, it is family management. = Population control management.
3. Corruption is not bad, it is just 'gift-giving' especially during Christmas, and 'other occassions'. Graft will become a natural phenomenon for 'interconnected' relationships. =Wealth and favor distribution management.
4. Vendetta killing is the society's natural response for rising crime. =Justice management.
5. Lying and false pretense become a tool of necessity for convenience and common good, just ask those to MIlitray Generals who suddenly suffered selective forgetfulness on some instances of their lives......=Information management.

How, then, do you answer someone who says, "With all due respect, Christians have by and large proved themselves no better nor any worse than any other group in society. The notion Christians have an inside track on morality at most serves only to make them proud and unlikely to listen compassionately to anyone but themselves. Jesus would be ashamed."

 

[waitasec]

as for us Christians, the bible sets the standards, without the standard of absolute morality, there will be no morality at all, just plain societal consensus for relative convenience.

For example:
1. Same sex marriage is man's right to choose his gender and his mates. =Relationship management.
2. Abortion is not killing or infanticide, it is family management. = Population control management.
3. Corruption is not bad, it is just 'gift-giving' especially during Christmas, and 'other occassions'. Graft will become a natural phenomenon for 'interconnected' relationships. =Wealth and favor distribution management.
4. Vendetta killing is the society's natural response for rising crime. =Justice management.
5. Lying and false pretense become a tool of necessity for convenience and common good, just ask those to MIlitray Generals who suddenly suffered selective forgetfulness on some instances of their lives......=Information management.

what in the world are you implying here? morality evolves. we are evolving primates who are obviously flawed. repeating the same mistake over and over by not learning from history, so i should say we are pretty much on the verge of insanity, go figure...religion
:bonk:

 

[waitasec]

How, then, do you answer someone who says, "With all due respect, Christians have by and large proved themselves no better nor any worse than any other group in society. The notion Christians have an inside track on morality at most serves only to make them proud and unlikely to listen compassionately to anyone but themselves. Jesus would be ashamed."

absolutely!!!
there is nothing religion can enable a believer to do that a non believer cannot do...

 

[Sunstone]

absolutely!!!
there is nothing religion can enable a believer to do that a non believer cannot do...

I think a key word here is "enable". When it comes to morals, religion seems to be, above all else, an enabler. It enables both good and evil.

 

[diosangpastol]

How, then, do you answer someone who says, "With all due respect, Christians have by and large proved themselves no better nor any worse than any other group in society. The notion Christians have an inside track on morality at most serves only to make them proud and unlikely to listen compassionately to anyone but themselves. Jesus would be ashamed."

my reply would be, very simply, that Christians are not the paradigm of what Christians should be. Christ is. Jesus would not have been a guard at Auschwitz. Jesus would not have launched the Crusades. Jesus would not have burned witches. Christians throughout history have been guilty of some pretty horrendous things. But Jesus, not Christians, is the paradigm that we try to live by.

 

[Nooj]

Speaking for myself, reason is dominant for various reasons. One of them is that reason leads to and supports compassion, while the reverse is not necessarily true.

Compassion seems to me to be irrational. We don't reason our way to empathy, it just happens.

 

[Father Heathen]

Compassion seems to me to be irrational. We don't reason our way to empathy, it just happens.

Actually, being social animals, caring for others of our kind has mutual benefit, and empathy is a necessary component of sound mental and emotional health.

 

[LuisDantas]

I also disagree. You may want to read "How Are We to Live?" from Peter Singer. He makes quite a case for empathy as a logical attitude.

 

[waitasec]

my reply would be, very simply, that Christians are not the paradigm of what Christians should be. Christ is. Jesus would not have been a guard at Auschwitz. Jesus would not have launched the Crusades. Jesus would not have burned witches. Christians throughout history have been guilty of some pretty horrendous things. But Jesus, not Christians, is the paradigm that we try to live by.

why then are christians so controlling and worried about their religious freedoms more they are about helping the needy?

missionaries are for the purpose of gaining converts, a contrived act as far as i am concerned.
atheistic charities exists as well, there are more religious ones simply for the fact there are more religious people than non religious people.

i just don't see how religion, or a supposed relationship with a supreme deity, sets anyone apart from an unbeliever in any way shape or form.

 

[Nooj]

Actually, being social animals, caring for others of our kind has mutual benefit, and empathy is a necessary component of sound mental and emotional health.

Just to clarify, what I mean when I say compassion is irrational is that I don't think it's a form of reasoning. It's irrational for the same reason that hate is irrational (or un-rational), because it's an emotion that we feel instead of something we think over.

But about your post. You say that caring for others of our kind is mutually beneficial and therefore it's reasonable to be compassionate. But why give value to mutually beneficial actions? We are social animals, but that seems irrelevant to me. Should we act in certain ways by virtue of the fact that we are social animals? I guess one could argue that social animals should always act for the benefit of society (I'd ask why this is the case), and that being compassionate is the best or only way to benefit society. But I have problems with that line of argument.

There are individuals in societies who aren't compassionate. Selfish people or psychopaths do things to maximise their benefit, sometimes even at the expense of others. To these people, it would be eminently reasonable/rational to not be compassionate since self interest is their agenda. For other people, it's helping others. Why should we choose one over the other?

 

[LuisDantas]

why give value to mutually beneficial actions?

Because it is only logical to do so? By definition, what is beneficial has value, isn't that so?

We are social animals, but that seems irrelevant to me.

There are individuals in societies who aren't compassionate. Selfish people or psychopaths do things to maximise their benefit, sometimes even at the expense of others. To these people, it would be eminently reasonable/rational to not be compassionate since self interest is their agenda. For other people, it's helping others. Why should we choose one over the other?

Because ultimately it is the best approach for all parts involved.

 

[Nooj]

I was chewing over my words and so I edited my post somewhat, just a heads up.

Because it is only logical to do so? By definition, what is beneficial has value, isn't that so?

No, I don't think so. I think what is beneficial is benficial, but value is a judgement. One could judge what is harmful to be of value and of more importance. But that wasn't my point. I'm asking why mutually beneficial actions should be more valued than say, selfish actions.

Because ultimately it is the best approach for all parts involved.

Why should we care about all the parties involved?

 

[LuisDantas]

Sorry, I just don't understand how something that is beneficial can have no value.