U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Great Debates
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 11-14-2008, 07:23 AM
 
Location: Ottawa, Canada
609 posts, read 1,043,538 times
Reputation: 173

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by TKramar View Post
yes. Take killing. Is it EVER morally justifiable? If so, you're a relativist, if not, you're an absolutist.

I don't believe in right and wrong, per se, just "right" or "wrong" for me.
of course theres examples its ok. natural law would say its "legal" to kill someone in self defence (depending on the situation)

i have always found that like anything in life, the moderate, middle position is often the best one.. for example sometimes im an absolutist. and taht no matter what culture or other fact, some things a re 100% wrong. such as rape. but then other times im a relativist, and can see where doing the "wrong thing" can actually be "right"
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 04-13-2009, 12:59 PM
 
Location: El Paso, TX
3,302 posts, read 3,755,932 times
Reputation: 2524
Quote:
Originally Posted by leangk View Post
there are a tonne of different beliefs, religions and philosophies that have set out morals. philosophies have a number of "schools", which have numerous beliefs like egoism, hedonism, legal justitifcation (if its legal its moral!( i also cant remember the real name of this).

i seemed to struggle myself with the belief that only a higher being can logically make rules, because if not it becomes the opinion of people. such as muslims believing what they do to woemn completely normal. then again certian rules need to be interpreted in religion to apply to modern scenarios.. what do you guys think?
I believe that any type of conduct that is not part of what I believe as "natural rights" is usually moral relativism.

However, I also agree that there are certain standards of conduct that are universal. Rape is one of them. Theft is another one. Physical assault is another one. Murder too but I am aware some people can get hung up on legal defintions on this one. However I define murder when anyone is going against the natural instinct and desire to keep his life.

So in other words morals are subjective when they apply to behvaiors that are not those natural rights we all protect due to our own desire to protect ourselves from harm and from loosing our lives.

So in my opinion, you may follow whatever moral codes you may want to whether you believe in following a church's teachings or for some other reason. However, I believe you will agree you will not murder, rape, rob bomebody, hit somebody, etc. with malicious intent and those I do not need to tell you you need to respect those rights or if you want to call them moral expectations.

If you believe in a higher being, well, then you may have a journey what is his guide in life. Many people do so and that is fine. You may find what you think are his expectations of him. However, other people may find he expect behavior that somewhat varies than your conclusions. In the end, you respect his and he respect yours. However, do not try to impose yours on others and that is what others try to do by pushing for laws that have personal moral roots.

You have a great day.
El Amigo

You have a great day.
El Amigo
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-13-2009, 01:23 PM
 
Location: Victoria TX
42,668 posts, read 71,556,197 times
Reputation: 35864
Quote:
Originally Posted by leangk View Post
such as muslims believing what they do to woemn completely normal. then again certian rules need to be interpreted in religion to apply to modern scenarios.. what do you guys think?
I think that, by "religion", you mean "my religion".

Quote:
Originally Posted by elamigo View Post

So in other words morals are subjective when they apply to behvaiors that are not those natural rights we all protect due to our own desire to protect ourselves from harm and from loosing our lives.
Those other things, unlrelated to protecting people from harm and distress, are not morals. There exists another word to describe them: Dogmas. If we don't call them something else, how do we know the difference?

Dogma, by definition, carries no intrinsic ethical value. It is neither good or bad. It is just an authoritarian edict of behavior. Like refusing to cut hair.

Last edited by jtur88; 04-13-2009 at 01:34 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-13-2009, 03:07 PM
 
Location: El Paso, TX
3,302 posts, read 3,755,932 times
Reputation: 2524
Quote:
Originally Posted by jtur88 View Post
I think that, by "religion", you mean "my religion".



Those other things, unlrelated to protecting people from harm and distress, are not morals. There exists another word to describe them: Dogmas. If we don't call them something else, how do we know the difference?

Dogma, by definition, carries no intrinsic ethical value. It is neither good or bad. It is just an authoritarian edict of behavior. Like refusing to cut hair.
Now we are getting here into semantics I suppose.
What is a moral standard? Is murder not one of them? I believe they are. With that in minnd, if we have a law in protecting people from murder not a moral law. I believe it is. To me that moral principle is universal. From that angle this moral principle is not subjective because it is a universally accepted principle even by criminals.

I may not have been clear before. I will go by steps on this one.

Step one: By nature none of us agree with someone to come and kill us just like that. That is a natural call it what you want, instinc? survival? I do not care the fact is that we believe that way.

Step two: As time passed by as civilizations formed we included not killing others as part of our norms. Many of those norms became such because someone said "God says we shall not murder". Since someone said God said so many call that a "moral principle".

Step three: That principle whether somebody call it norm others moral principle, others societal contract, whatever, it is a universal principle that is only relative to the fact we do not want to die. That is it. It is not relative to something else.

Step four: There are other moral principles that did not originate from what others have called natural right like murder.

Step five: A married man having sex with somebody else. Some religious group and maybe even some societies may condone that. Others call it morally wrong. It is not a natural right to have sex with someone else. Some people do share partners also. Even if you have sex with a married person does not kill the partner. Sure it may cause grief but it will not kill people per say. Assaulting causes physical harm, killing does to and denies life and robbing somebody else also is against our feeling of physical ownership. "Robbing" somebody's wife involved that woman's choice of having sex with somebody else.

So a moral principle like murder not relative to anythink else whether adultery is relative to social norms, ethics, etc. that may vary with societies.

The bottom line you added something else I did not actually addressed above. I refered to certain behaviors that fall under relativism and others that do not. Cutting hair may fall under relativism depending of the situation.

I just looked at dogma in a dictionary:
Here is what I read- 1. a system of principles or tenets, as of a church. 2. a specific tenet of doctrine authoritatively put for, as by a church; the dogma of the Assumption. 3. prescribed by doctrine: political dogma. 4. a settled established opinion, belief, or principle: the dogman that might makes right.
The origin of the word is stated "to seem, think, seem good"

What I read may not exactly apply to hair cutting. It could if somebody may want to say that cutting hair is believed mandated by God I guess.

I still do not know how that applies to my message above for you to reply with that.

You have a great day.
El Amigo
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-13-2009, 03:09 PM
 
Location: Texas
14,969 posts, read 13,766,418 times
Reputation: 4539
It is an opinion that murder, rape, theft, assault, etc. are wrong as well.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-13-2009, 03:20 PM
 
455 posts, read 886,074 times
Reputation: 372
Quote:
Originally Posted by afoigrokerkok View Post
It is an opinion that murder, rape, theft, assault, etc. are wrong as well.
Exactly, morality is subjective. It could be argued (i don't agree with this notion), that the murdering of humans is good.

-Population control (in the same way it can be used in hunting deer)
-Long-term survival of the Earth
-Help in maintaining the diversity of species, slow down extinctions of other species
-For those that believe in an afterlife: they will get there quicker.

Again, i don't agree with this notion. I am just illustrating that even some things we regard as absolute morals, are actually subjective.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-13-2009, 03:35 PM
 
Location: El Paso, TX
3,302 posts, read 3,755,932 times
Reputation: 2524
Quote:
Originally Posted by afoigrokerkok View Post
It is an opinion that murder, rape, theft, assault, etc. are wrong as well.
MMMM? In a sense it is an opinion. But that opinion is based in some universal principles that have their root on our natural righst we have within us as humans.

However, what were you trying to say with that comment? Please expand. How does that comment support something or rebuttle something? I fail to see your point with this comment.

You have a great day.
El Amigo
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-13-2009, 03:36 PM
 
Location: southern california
55,237 posts, read 72,415,357 times
Reputation: 47455
i know i know it sounds incredulous but if you can just reject parents family and church and schools leaders, it gets easier. you gota work at it. being a loser does not come naturally.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-13-2009, 03:38 PM
 
Location: Texas
14,969 posts, read 13,766,418 times
Reputation: 4539
Quote:
Originally Posted by elamigo View Post
MMMM? In a sense it is an opinion. But that opinion is based in some universal principles that have their root on our natural righst we have within us as humans.

However, what were you trying to say with that comment? Please expand. How does that comment support something or rebuttle something? I fail to see your point with this comment.

You have a great day.
El Amigo
You (and others) were discussing how these "absolutes" somehow differ from "other" morals.

They come from the same ideals and they are not really that different.

It is completely subjective. What these "natural rights" are are also subjective.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-13-2009, 03:40 PM
 
Location: El Paso, TX
3,302 posts, read 3,755,932 times
Reputation: 2524
Quote:
Originally Posted by afoigrokerkok View Post
It is an opinion that murder, rape, theft, assault, etc. are wrong as well.
But just now I thought of something. Do you think that we humans just suddenly wake up and say "I think it is wrong if someone comes and kills me". At that point just developed that opinion? He did not have to wait for that conclusion. As soon as he sees someone threatening to kill him, he is not there wondering if that is right or wrong. He will protect that life. As a matter of fact he does not have to wait to be thought to protect his life. If he sees a threat to it, he will react. Does he need to have an opinon? Does an animal reason if another animal is approaching it? No, it has that instict for survival just as we do. I do not think it needs an opinion to protect inself.

You have a great day.
El Amigo
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Great Debates
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2018, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top