• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every persons position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

Self - all that matters

SingleCellOrganism

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 2, 2010
Messages
531
Reaction score
105
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Since there is no right or wrong, other than right and wrong for YOU, can it also be argued that murder/stealing etc. are not wrong?

Follow the logic:

1. Survival of the fittest has proven that only the "strong" and adaptable survive
2. Morality is relative, what is wrong for you might be right for me
3. We have finite lives, sacrificing for some nebulous "morality" that nobody agrees on is a waste of time

Ergo - lie, steal, cheat; anything that improves your own situation is the "strong surviving"

Some moralists/absolutists would disagree with this, but hey, its all relative anyway!
 

MaggieD

Supporting Member
Monthly Subscriber
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 9, 2010
Messages
43,244
Reaction score
44,661
Location
Chicago Area
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Moderate
Since there is no right or wrong, other than right and wrong for YOU, can it also be argued that murder/stealing etc. are not wrong?

Follow the logic:

1. Survival of the fittest has proven that only the "strong" and adaptable survive
2. Morality is relative, what is wrong for you might be right for me
3. We have finite lives, sacrificing for some nebulous "morality" that nobody agrees on is a waste of time

Ergo - lie, steal, cheat; anything that improves your own situation is the "strong surviving"

Some moralists/absolutists would disagree with this, but hey, its all relative anyway!

I guess it makes sense if you're a Single Cell Organism...
 

Gardener

free market communist
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 5, 2005
Messages
26,657
Reaction score
15,927
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
I never receive any disagreement when I state so definitively that solipsism is really the only way to go.
 

SingleCellOrganism

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 2, 2010
Messages
531
Reaction score
105
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
I never receive any disagreement when I state so definitively that solipsism is really the only way to go.

Ahh, but solipsism ignores the probability that others exist, so you are only deluding yourself!

With relativism you get to acknowledge others exist, and still screw them over because its "right for you".
 

Catz Part Deux

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
May 19, 2009
Messages
28,721
Reaction score
6,738
Location
Redneck Riviera
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Moderate
Since there is no right or wrong, other than right and wrong for YOU, can it also be argued that murder/stealing etc. are not wrong?!

Would you like to be killed and/or have your property stolen? It's fairly common sensical to understand that social morality consists largely of not doing to other people what you wouldn't want done to you. Why do you need a god to tell you not to steal?
 

Gardener

free market communist
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 5, 2005
Messages
26,657
Reaction score
15,927
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Ahh, but solipsism ignores the probability that others exist, so you are only deluding yourself!

With relativism you get to acknowledge others exist, and still screw them over because its "right for you".

I see these words on the screen and am comforted that I made them so.
 

MaggieD

Supporting Member
Monthly Subscriber
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 9, 2010
Messages
43,244
Reaction score
44,661
Location
Chicago Area
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Moderate
Since there is no right or wrong, other than right and wrong for YOU, can it also be argued that murder/stealing etc. are not wrong?

Follow the logic:

1. Survival of the fittest has proven that only the "strong" and adaptable survive
2. Morality is relative, what is wrong for you might be right for me
3. We have finite lives, sacrificing for some nebulous "morality" that nobody agrees on is a waste of time

Ergo - lie, steal, cheat; anything that improves your own situation is the "strong surviving"

Some moralists/absolutists would disagree with this, but hey, its all relative anyway!

This is a great definition of a psychopath.

psychopath ( ) n. A person with an antisocial personality disorder, manifested in aggressive, perverted, criminal, or amoral behavior without empathy.
 

SingleCellOrganism

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 2, 2010
Messages
531
Reaction score
105
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Would you like to be killed and/or have your property stolen? It's fairly common sensical to understand that social morality consists largely of not doing to other people what you wouldn't want done to you. Why do you need a god to tell you not to steal?

People concerned with self and self-preservation don't think about such things. Those are the pondering of a mind concerned with justice and philosophy.

As much as I would lament having my property stolen, as I wouldn't steal others, there certainly are a plethora (of el guapos) of others with no concern for absolute morality that can make these justifications; and they would be right.

I agree, it's a psychotic philosophy, but that is essentially what is being taught in the subtleties of our western culture.
 
Last edited:

rathi

Count Smackula
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 10, 2006
Messages
7,890
Reaction score
4,730
Location
California
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
1. Survival of the fittest has proven that only the "strong" and adaptable survive

Completely and utterly wrong. Survival mechanisms rarely rely on strength not to mention that evolution is driven by numerous other factors. Peacocks for instance, having a higher chance of mating with a larger tail, even when that tail makes them more vulnerable to predators.

2. Morality is relative, what is wrong for you might be right for me

True.

3. We have finite lives, sacrificing for some nebulous "morality" that nobody agrees on is a waste of time

Maybe for you, not for me. I recognize that my view of morality is personal not universal, that doesn't mean I won't do my best to live up to it.

Ergo - lie, steal, cheat; anything that improves your own situation is the "strong surviving"

Look around you: are thieves and murderers the most successful members of society or are they at the very bottom?
 

tacomancer

Christian Capitalist Social Democrat
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 8, 2010
Messages
44,216
Reaction score
24,380
Location
Akron
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Progressive
Even if you are only looking out for yourself, a huge part of the probability of long term survival is environmental factors. Those include danger (people not murdering or stealing from you), opportunity (a good chance to get a job, easy to obtain food), and influence (changing your environment to be in your best interest). Because of the environment and how it affects your life, opportunities, etc, it a perfectly valid self interest strategy to be a good person.
 

scourge99

DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 26, 2007
Messages
6,233
Reaction score
1,462
Location
The Wild West
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Moderate
Since there is no right or wrong, other than right and wrong for YOU, can it also be argued that murder/stealing etc. are not wrong?

Follow the logic:

1. Survival of the fittest has proven that only the "strong" and adaptable survive
2. Morality is relative, what is wrong for you might be right for me
3. We have finite lives, sacrificing for some nebulous "morality" that nobody agrees on is a waste of time

Ergo - lie, steal, cheat; anything that improves your own situation is the "strong surviving"

Some moralists/absolutists would disagree with this, but hey, its all relative anyway!

Lets suppose you are correct (which you aren't) that there is some absolute moral standard. How does that fix the situation we are in today? It doesn't. In fact some of the major atrocities of history have been committed in the name of some proclaimed absolute morality.

We still run into the problem of:
1) figuring out which of the nay claims to absolute morality is correct.
2) convincing, compelling, forcing, etc, people that they should follow that morality.

Humans will act like humans whether they believe in any particular god(s) or not and whether absolute morals exist or not.

In short, the "is"/"ought" problem remains open. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Is–ought_problem
 
Last edited:

majora$$hole

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 28, 2010
Messages
1,268
Reaction score
168
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Moderate
Since there is no right or wrong, other than right and wrong for YOU, can it also be argued that murder/stealing etc. are not wrong?

Follow the logic:

1. Survival of the fittest has proven that only the "strong" and adaptable survive
2. Morality is relative, what is wrong for you might be right for me
3. We have finite lives, sacrificing for some nebulous "morality" that nobody agrees on is a waste of time

Ergo - lie, steal, cheat; anything that improves your own situation is the "strong surviving"

Some moralists/absolutists would disagree with this, but hey, its all relative anyway!
my sargent alway said "if you aint cheating you aint trying".
 

lizzie

DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 22, 2009
Messages
28,580
Reaction score
31,551
Location
between two worlds
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Libertarian
Since there is no right or wrong, other than right and wrong for YOU, can it also be argued that murder/stealing etc. are not wrong?

That only works if you are living in a vacuum. Fortunately for mankind, we have emotions and construct emotional ties, which in turn help us to empathize with others, and hopefully help us become more loving and giving human beings. Taken at face value, though, excluding group behavior and denying the emotional ties we have by nature, your original premise is correct.
 

scourge99

DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 26, 2007
Messages
6,233
Reaction score
1,462
Location
The Wild West
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Moderate
Taken at face value, though, excluding group behavior and denying the emotional ties we have by nature, your original premise is correct.

Even working from the vacuum of strict, cold logic there are objective reasons why killing and stealing are bad/wrong.
 

Panache

Irrelevant Pissant
DP Veteran
Joined
May 4, 2007
Messages
4,194
Reaction score
1,041
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Libertarian
Since there is no right or wrong, other than right and wrong for YOU, can it also be argued that murder/stealing etc. are not wrong?

Follow the logic:

1. Survival of the fittest has proven that only the "strong" and adaptable survive
2. Morality is relative, what is wrong for you might be right for me
3. We have finite lives, sacrificing for some nebulous "morality" that nobody agrees on is a waste of time

Ergo - lie, steal, cheat; anything that improves your own situation is the "strong surviving"

Some moralists/absolutists would disagree with this, but hey, its all relative anyway!

This assumes that we value only our own situation, and do not value anyone else's situation.

Why not assume that we value other people's situations? Or assume that we hold no value for our own?
 

Goshin

Burned Out Ex-Mod
DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 16, 2009
Messages
45,511
Reaction score
50,112
Location
Dixie
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Since there is no right or wrong, other than right and wrong for YOU, can it also be argued that murder/stealing etc. are not wrong?

Follow the logic:

1. Survival of the fittest has proven that only the "strong" and adaptable survive
2. Morality is relative, what is wrong for you might be right for me
3. We have finite lives, sacrificing for some nebulous "morality" that nobody agrees on is a waste of time

Ergo - lie, steal, cheat; anything that improves your own situation is the "strong surviving"

Some moralists/absolutists would disagree with this, but hey, its all relative anyway!



All I can say is, I'd hate to go thru life with that as my guiding philosophy... I think I'd be one miserable sumbeech if I did.
 

MaggieD

Supporting Member
Monthly Subscriber
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 9, 2010
Messages
43,244
Reaction score
44,661
Location
Chicago Area
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Moderate
Since there is no right or wrong, other than right and wrong for YOU, can it also be argued that murder/stealing etc. are not wrong?

Follow the logic:

1. Survival of the fittest has proven that only the "strong" and adaptable survive
2. Morality is relative, what is wrong for you might be right for me
3. We have finite lives, sacrificing for some nebulous "morality" that nobody agrees on is a waste of time

Ergo - lie, steal, cheat; anything that improves your own situation is the "strong surviving"

Some moralists/absolutists would disagree with this, but hey, its all relative anyway!

Human beings would not have evolved successfully had we not been hardwired to live in "packs," if you will. Pack living precludes survival of the fittest and INcludes looking out after each other. Even the animal kingdom doesn't live by survival of the fittest within the herd or pack unit. "Survival of the fittest" mentality applies to predators.
 

Cold Highway

Dispenser of Negativity
DP Veteran
Joined
May 30, 2007
Messages
9,595
Reaction score
2,739
Location
Newburgh, New York and World 8: Dark Land
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
Since there is no right or wrong, other than right and wrong for YOU, can it also be argued that murder/stealing etc. are not wrong?

Follow the logic:

1. Survival of the fittest has proven that only the "strong" and adaptable survive

Deffine strong

2. Morality is relative, what is wrong for you might be right for me

Somewhat true, murder and theft are wrong no matter what the justifcation.

3. We have finite lives, sacrificing for some nebulous "morality" that nobody agrees on is a waste of time

Whats best for me may not work for others but I respect what they believe as long as they dont try to kill me or use the gun of the government in order to change.
 

ReverendHellh0und

I don't respect you.
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 13, 2007
Messages
79,903
Reaction score
20,981
Location
I love your hate.
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
Since there is no right or wrong, other than right and wrong for YOU, can it also be argued that murder/stealing etc. are not wrong?

Follow the logic:

1. Survival of the fittest has proven that only the "strong" and adaptable survive
2. Morality is relative, what is wrong for you might be right for me
3. We have finite lives, sacrificing for some nebulous "morality" that nobody agrees on is a waste of time

Ergo - lie, steal, cheat; anything that improves your own situation is the "strong surviving"

Some moralists/absolutists would disagree with this, but hey, its all relative anyway!




On Sheep, Wolves, and Sheepdogs - Dave Grossman
 

reefedjib

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 12, 2009
Messages
6,762
Reaction score
1,619
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Private
Human beings would not have evolved successfully had we not been hardwired to live in "packs," if you will. Pack living precludes survival of the fittest and INcludes looking out after each other. Even the animal kingdom doesn't live by survival of the fittest within the herd or pack unit. "Survival of the fittest" mentality applies to predators.

This is key, in my opinion. Survival in packs/societies require cooperative behaviors and non-violent competition. There are societal rules such as do not lie, cheat or steal, or murder. Survival of the fittest requires a fitness evaluation and this evaluation in a society is radically different than when you are on your own.

I think the universe follows nondualism, related to solipsism. All experience is personal and subjective, including your experience of yourself.
 

scourge99

DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 26, 2007
Messages
6,233
Reaction score
1,462
Location
The Wild West
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Moderate
They establish rules/laws. It is possible to derive natural rights from relative morality.
But if all experience is subjective and personal then how is it that two people, let alone a society of people, all come to an understanding on what those rules/laws are?

There must be some objectivity otherwise there is no explanation for how agreement occurs.
 
Top Bottom