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.
Right on--so many get their feelings of self worth through Peer approval. ---Your Peers won't be with you when they close the lid on your casket. Be true to your self.--Everybody else will do just fine.
Morals are a subset of philosophy. How moral structure develops depends a lot on what the ancestors held to be important. The same can be said of religions, social structures, and superstition.
Many cultures put a premium on male offspring, and infanticide of the females was morally acceptable. The idea of wives killing themselves upon the death of the husband was commonly practiced in India until the Brits came into the area and frowned upon it. Entire leadership/political dynasties even willingly died upon death of the leader and were entombed with him.
The bigger question is "What is a moral code that is achievable and consistent with the greatest future growth of what we perceive is 'good.'" That then flows to "What exactly is good, and why?" The answer to it all is... as we eventually grasp the true meaning... 42.
Morals keep us civilized. W/o them anyone would feel right doing anything they wanted. For humans to be able to live with eachother we have to have some sort of a code of conduct to guide us by or true anarchy would be the norm. And as much as people clam, nobody truly wants that to be the case.
As for them to have been set down be a god, that all depends on what your personal belief system is. Personally it doesn't matter to me which way you want to think on that part of it because does it really matter?
If it was handed down by a god, does he/she require you to be able to understand him in order to live by the rules and moral codes he/she laid down? And if we in fact did create them ourselves then I belive they were created out of nessesity for a more civilized society.
Also I do believe that as time goes on more of our outdated morals and values will be left behide as we become more aware of who we are as the human race.
So in answer to your question I believe that the changes we have made have been good up to this point but we still have a bit more progress to make in this world.
(Did that make sense?)
This makes a lot of sense. As you said a moral code is a necessity of any kind of community/society. That's plain to see. I mean if we allowed theft everyone would steal, no one would work, no one would produce any goods or farm (Why put forth the work if someone is just going to run off with it?)
I would however say that it does matter where they came from. Whether they are from god or from man makes a monumental difference. Look in all the gay marriage debates we have going on for example. The entire thing almost hinges on the notion that our morals are god given. If morals were man made that would make a huge difference I think.
Someone posted a bit about a 40 year old man marrying a 12 year old girl and beating her into submission. The very fact that even in a Christian nation this moral ideal has become obsolete tells me a number of things. Namely that (some) morals have to change. There are what I would call universal standards such as don't steal, don't kill etc which every society will have, even if they are outside the scope of Christianity. These morals are necessitated by society, without them society would be impossible.
It really brings to light the double standards of god given morals. Even the best of Christians will agree that 40 year old men have no business marrying 12 year old girls and they couldn't be happier that this standard has become outdated. Yet the same ones that agree with this being disbanded will often turn around and say that we must adhere to the morals that condemn homosexuality (for example, I only keep bringing up the gay argument because it seems to be the most prevalent argument on here).
So in the end I guess I am getting to this: How do we differentiate between the morals that need disbanded because they are harmful to society, and those that need to stay? Moreover, aren't all these Christians going to hell with the gays and the atheists for not adhering to this rigid set of moral standards?
What society sees as "moral" and what's best for an individual may not be the same thing.
Everyone should act in their own best interests--sometimes that means following society's morals, sometimes that means developing your own. Society may approve of something that simply does not work for you.
What society sees as "moral" and what's best for an individual may not be the same thing.
Everyone should act in their own best interests--sometimes that means following society's morals, sometimes that means developing your own. Society may approve of something that simply does not work for you.
I vote for what is best for me and mine. If I lived in Rome, would I care what the Romans did? I'm not very flexible.
I generally try and go with what I think would be the best for the larger group, not just me. If I were only looking out for me, and everyone else is only looking out for theirs, the fabric of society would break.
good OP. people dont change much. religion is the teacher of ethics akamorality. no religion no ethics. we kicked god out of the home and K12. how is that working out??. largest prison population on earth.
good OP. people dont change much. religion is the teacher of ethics akamorality. no religion no ethics. we kicked god out of the home and K12. how is that working out??. largest prison population on earth.
I can agree that religions teach us ethics. but there are some ethical standards that are universal no matter where you go such as condemning theft. How can these standards come from religion, when these standards exist across the entire plane of religions and societies? So while they may teach these standards, no one religion can claim the credit for the creation of them.
I generally try and go with what I think would be the best for the larger group, not just me. If I were only looking out for me, and everyone else is only looking out for theirs, the fabric of society would break.
Yeah, but everyone needs to attend to their own business. Instead of making laws against, for example, where one can smoke. Even though I no longer smoke, it's getting to a point where you can't even smoke in your own home.
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.
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.
