"Morality" does not exist. (1 Viewer)

[Ivan The Terrible]

It has come to Your Master's knowledge that some humans on this site hold this postion. Do you agree with this? Vote and share your postion.

Ivan The Terrible, Your Master, has entered the polling booth!

 

[FallingPianos]

I voted that morality does indeed exist.

 

[Ivan The Terrible]

star2589,

I voted that morality does indeed exist.

I agree with your view. However, can you tell us why you think morality exist?

 

[FallingPianos]

star2589,

I agree with your view. However, can you tell us why you think morality exist?

Its part of my belief system, I cant prove it.

but neither can anyone else prove that morality doesnt exist.

 

[Real Korimyr #9]

Voted Yes.

Just because morality is an arbitrary social construct does not mean that it doesn't exist. That would be like trying to claim that society-- sorry, Libertarians-- language, property, or philosophy didn't exist.

Now, if you're asking whether objective moral standards exist, or if morality exists separately from the actions of sentient beings... then I'd have to say "no".

 

[Vincent]

I say it does exist.

 

[clone]

morality is a point of view; a perspective. this changes with every person, according to their social and spiritual wellness.
morality is what you consider to be right and wrong.

 

[talloulou]

Moral just means you place a judgement on something and you hold that something to be good or bad. It's obviously completely subjective. And people can have morals that promote goodness or morals that promote badness. I always think its funny when liberals are told by christians that they have no morals. Some of them seem to take it as a huge insult when really it just means they havent made as many good vs bad judgements as the christians have. And the christians by their own book are supposedto be nonjudgemental.

For example I have morals when it comes to pedophiles. I don't think adults should be taking advantage of children. I judge that as bad.

I have no morals when it comes to homosexuality. I couldn't say it's good 'cause I'm not a homosexual and so it's not personally good. However I wouldn't say it's bad as I think two consenting adults should be free to do whatever they want. I have absolutely no morals whatsoever regarding that issue.

However a homosexual could judge their own homosexuality as being good or bad and that would be their "moral."

Or a non-homosexual could judge homosexuality as being bad and that would be their own.......misguided in my opinion......moral.

 

[Gardener]

Most of the people I've encountered who make this silly claim are at that stage in their life when they are hip if they walk around smoking their clove cigarettes, while wearing their Che Guevara caps and clutching a book they have never read, but hoping desperately somebody notices. It's an affectation and part of their personna du jour that may very well change in a year or three when they start shaving.

In others, it simply acts as a get out of jail free card. When pressed on their obvious lack of intellectual honesty or consistancy of viewpoint, they simply pull out their magic buzz phrase and voila! -- they can talk out of both sides of their mouth and all is forgiven.

What I find amusing is the fact that if people actually believed this nonsense they profess, they would not even be posting in these discussion boards to begin with. If they really had no sense of morality, they would not care a whit one way or another about much of anything, and so would not be motivated to offer their opinion on all these various subjects in which one's sense of right and wrong is integral to the discussion.

The only people for whom I would say the notion of morality does not exist are the true sociopaths and psychopaths -- those who are so damaged as to exist outside the realm of right and wrong.

 

[Apostle13]

Morality is a given. However, it is all too often ill-defined according to the individual. As a Christian I believe in absolutes... Either wrong or right, black or white. Hence, no gray areas. This is oddly accepted because many if not most are not willing to commit change in order to appease their own conscience. Denial that one thing or another is morally wrong over time diminishes their guilt. When done in groups/masses re-defines it as socially acceptable. To win their own internal battle they often readily conclude "There is no God". Therefore, no repercussion.

 

[Jerry]

Morality is a given. However, it is all too often ill-defined according to the individual. As a Christian I believe in absolutes... Either wrong or right, black or white. Hence, no gray areas. This is oddly accepted because many if not most are not willing to commit change in order to appease their own conscience. Denial that one thing or another is morally wrong over time diminishes their guilt. When done in groups/masses re-defines it as socially acceptable. To win their own internal battle they often readily conclude "There is no God". Therefore, no repercussion.

Yup, that's my take on it as well.

There is absolute perfection (white), and there is everything less than absolute perfection (black).

 

[Ivan The Terrible]

Gardener,

Most of the people I've encountered who make this silly claim are at that stage in their life when they are hip if they walk around smoking their clove cigarettes, while wearing their Che Guevara caps and clutching a book they have never read, but hoping desperately somebody notices. It's an affectation and part of their personna du jour that may very well change in a year or three when they start shaving.

In others, it simply acts as a get out of jail free card. When pressed on their obvious lack of intellectual honesty or consistancy of viewpoint, they simply pull out their magic buzz phrase and voila! -- they can talk out of both sides of their mouth and all is forgiven.

What I find amusing is the fact that if people actually believed this nonsense they profess, they would not even be posting in these discussion boards to begin with. If they really had no sense of morality, they would not care a whit one way or another about much of anything, and so would not be motivated to offer their opinion on all these various subjects in which one's sense of right and wrong is integral to the discussion.

The only people for whom I would say the notion of morality does not exist are the true sociopaths and psychopaths -- those who are so damaged as to exist outside the realm of right and wrong.

Great post. Do we have anyone here whom has a diff view?

 

[ManOfTrueTruth]

It has come to Your Master's knowledge that some humans on this site hold this postion. Do you agree with this? Vote and share your postion.

Ivan The Terrible, Your Master, has entered the polling booth!

The human species cannot survive without morality. It is in the long term best interests of the human race to practice morality.

 

[afr0byte]

I don't think the idea is so much that morality does not exist as much as there's no one definite moral standard.

 

[Real Korimyr #9]

Great post. Do we have anyone here whom has a diff view?

Wouldn't call it fundamentally different, but I'm inclined toward being more charitable.

Egoist moral philosophy is, basically, underdeveloped. It includes a correct understanding that absolute moral standards cannot exist without the monotheistic notion of God, but then allows itself to slide into nihilism-- egoists simply do not finish their thought.

Human beings have an innate sense of moral outrage, which is easily tapped into through early childhood conditioning. We are naturally moral beings, despite the arbitrariness of morality; obviously, then, morality must serve a purpose.

The question, then, is what purpose morality serves-- and what kind of morality best serves that purpose. We could probably argue about that for years and never come to an agreement, but if we're actually thinking about it and trying to promote what we believe is "correct" morality, we're doing better than 99% of the people out there.

The problem with the egoists is, they don't like living life according to other peoples' rules, and as soon as they realize that there's no rational basis for the rules they grew up with, they reject them-- but they're in no hurry to write a new set of rules to live by, either for themselves or for anyone else.

Of course, you can fix up their egoism real quick, if you're stronger than they are. Beat them down, steal from them, and humiliate them every chance you get-- until they realize the need for rules, and learn to use those rules to get people to help protect them from you.

Most fun you can ever have, doing a public service.

 

[ngdawg]

Morals are like home furnishings. What fits in one person's life doesn't necessarily fit in anyone else's and some are sitting in an empty house...
I do disagree with the concept of absolutes, black and white, etc. As our lives change, our morals change. What was acceptable in youth is not always acceptable when one is a parent, an executive, etc. That can go the other way as well, but with growing responsibilities, morals generally change and increase. And while there are the basic morals of not killing another person or destroying something, that, for me, would go right out the window when it comes to protecting the lives of the people I love and care about.

 

[Real Korimyr #9]

Morals are like home furnishings. What fits in one person's life doesn't necessarily fit in anyone else's and some are sitting in an empty house...

The problem is, morality is a lot like language. It only works when people agree upon the rules of how it works.

The more people who agree to a single set of moral beliefs, the better that morality functions. Thus, the reason that most moral codes involve the need to convince-- or coerce-- others into following it.

And while there are the basic morals of not killing another person or destroying something, that, for me, would go right out the window when it comes to protecting the lives of the people I love and care about.

Personally, I don't think that's immoral. I would kill everyone else on the planet, if it meant protecting the lives of my family, my friends, or my nation.

Their lives are simply more important than anyone else's.

 

[Apostle13]

Morals are like home furnishings. What fits in one person's life doesn't necessarily fit in anyone else's and some are sitting in an empty house... .

The problem is, morality is a lot like language. It only works when people agree upon the rules of how it works.

Spin it metaphorically... Explain allegorically... Deny it categorically... Makes no matter. Changes not the TRUTH. Exact morals are inherently instilled. Individually compromised.

I do disagree with the concept of absolutes, black and white, etc. As our lives change, our morals change. What was acceptable in youth is not always acceptable when one is a parent, an executive, etc.

Generally morals decline. Example: I would wager that as a youth you would have never made reference to a fetus as a parasite..? That is just wrong and heartless conveyance spewed forth in classic degenerate fashion.

 

[afr0byte]

Spin it metaphorically... Explain allegorically... Deny it categorically... Makes no matter. Changes not the TRUTH. Exact morals are inherently instilled. Individually compromised.Generally morals decline. Example: I would wager that as a youth you would have never made reference to a fetus as a parasite..? That is just wrong and heartless conveyance spewed forth in classic degenerate fashion.

Don't mind me if I'm not inclined to take your argument too seriously, considering your username.

 

[Apostle13]

Don't mind me if I'm not inclined to take your argument too seriously, considering your username.

Yea whatever... Pass me the chicken..:lol:

 

[ngdawg]

Spin it metaphorically... Explain allegorically... Deny it categorically... Makes no matter. Changes not the TRUTH. Exact morals are inherently instilled. Individually compromised.Generally morals decline. Example: I would wager that as a youth you would have never made reference to a fetus as a parasite..? That is just wrong and heartless conveyance spewed forth in classic degenerate fashion.

A) that argument is 3 doors down, to the left....and B) while I may have said it lives like one or similar, I never called it one, so you can stop with the finger pointing, k? k....
And in my youth, I couldn't care less about fetuses anyway, so don't even go there.

 

[Apostle13]

A) that argument is 3 doors down, to the left....and B) while I may have said it lives like one or similar, I never called it one, so you can stop with the finger pointing, k? k....
And in my youth, I couldn't care less about fetuses anyway, so don't even go there.

Did that make you mad when I said that..:lol: You know I couldn't resist... Afterall you are my favorite adversary.
Nevertheless... You are right and I apologize... No really.

 

[ngdawg]

How on earth would morals decline as maturity and responsibility grow? Single 20-somethings out partying and 'finding themselves' sure don't have the moral fiber necessary to successfully raise a family, succeed in business, etc. because they are still searching for that base that will show them the morals they personally need to live by. If that statement was true, by the time everyone hit their 60's they'd all belong to rave clubs, sex clubs, cross personal boundaries with no conscience and generally not give two sh!ts about the next guy.
We develop moral character through the venues shown us, given us. We make choices based on what we perceive to be the best moral road for us, if we're half-way intelligent enough. If we aren't, we are doomed to fail personally and societally.
This does not mean we have to follow a written 'guide', but we at least should be aware of the consequences of good, true choices vs bad, false ones and act with that knowledge.

 

[Apostle13]

How on earth would morals decline as maturity and responsibility grow? Single 20-somethings out partying and 'finding themselves' sure don't have the moral fiber necessary to successfully raise a family, succeed in business, etc. because they are still searching for that base that will show them the morals they personally need to live by. If that statement was true, by the time everyone hit their 60's they'd all belong to rave clubs, sex clubs, cross personal boundaries with no conscience and generally not give two sh!ts about the next guy.
We develop moral character through the venues shown us, given us. We make choices based on what we perceive to be the best moral road for us, if we're half-way intelligent enough. If we aren't, we are doomed to fail personally and societally.
This does not mean we have to follow a written 'guide', but we at least should be aware of the consequences of good, true choices vs bad, false ones and act with that knowledge.

I can only speak from a Christian's POV regarding moral conduct because beyond that which is a biblical standard I must view as compromise. The ace measures of morality are found within our own conscience, but it is an in-depth probe and the willingness to recognize what is truth even despite ourselves are that which brings it into fruition. Morality begins at the individual level as does our own esteem for they are one defining/regulating the other. Majority rule is no accurate measure. Internal conviction, unadulterated (without our own past for reasons of justification) is the precise tool of measure. The bible itself only affirms that which we know/knew... Yet, often at times redirecting us, as well, preventing critical error.

 

[MSgt]

Of course, morality exists. It exists in different forms and on different levels to suit the needs of the individual.

Even terrorists have a level of morality that suits their needs to destroy.