What is the foundation for your moral and political beliefs?

[HIP56948]

Good Pair of people who created me.

 

[Jacksprat]

True. I mean, what if you get a person who wants someone to kill and eat them (has happened)?

Example. I often go to a university library to write and do research. I like dead quiet. There are often students sitting around talking or doing video conferencing. I did think of the golden rule and wondered how they would like it if students were at another table talking. I've seen it. It does not bother them.

 

[Jacksprat]

True. I mean, what if you get a person who wants someone to kill and eat them (has happened)?

Years ago someone told me about a person described as a masochist. She realized that he wanted people to be mean to him.

 

[Drowning Man]

Years ago someone told me about a person described as a masochist. She realized that he wanted people to be mean to him.

I'm saying that regardless of how someone may want to be treated, killing and committing cannibalism on them would be morally wrong.

 

[Jacksprat]

I'm saying that regardless of how someone may want to be treated, killing and committing cannibalism on them would be morally wrong.

I never heard of actual cannibalism.

 

[OscarLevant]

Have you ever asked yourself where your moral and political beliefs come from?
If so, did you ever find an answer that satisfied you?

Given that there is a 5k character limit on this forum, I never posted it here. But, on PF, I did, since they have a 16k character limit, which gave me enough room to write the essay.

So, yes, I wrote about it here ( I post as "Patricio Da Silva" on PF ):

Politics of the center. What is it?

There's a pendulum in politics. Swing too far to the left, it rebounds, and swings too far to the right. and vice versa, in a never ending going from...

politicalforum.com

 

[Drowning Man]

I never heard of actual cannibalism.

Armin Meiwes - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Armin Meiwes (German: [ˈmaɪvəs]; born 1 December 1961) is a German former computer repair technician who received international attention for murdering and eating a voluntary victim in 2001, whom he had found via the Internet. After Meiwes and the victim jointly attempted to eat the victim's severed penis, Meiwes killed his victim and proceeded to eat a large amount of his flesh.[1] He was arrested in December 2002. In January 2004, Meiwes was convicted of manslaughter and sentenced to eight years and six months in prison. In a retrial in May 2006, he was convicted of murder and sentenced to life imprisonment. Because of his acts, Meiwes is also known as the Rotenburg Cannibal or Der Metzgermeister (The Master Butcher).

 

[Jacksprat]

Armin Meiwes - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Armin Meiwes (German: [ˈmaɪvəs]; born 1 December 1961) is a German former computer repair technician who received international attention for murdering and eating a voluntary victim in 2001, whom he had found via the Internet. After Meiwes and the victim jointly attempted to eat the victim's severed penis, Meiwes killed his victim and proceeded to eat a large amount of his flesh.[1] He was arrested in December 2002. In January 2004, Meiwes was convicted of manslaughter and sentenced to eight years and six months in prison. In a retrial in May 2006, he was convicted of murder and sentenced to life imprisonment. Because of his acts, Meiwes is also known as the Rotenburg Cannibal or Der Metzgermeister (The Master Butcher).

Okay, seems like an odd desire. The idea of eating horse meat grosses me out.

 

[Drowning Man]

I can think of only one moral absolute. And I'd love to see someone poke a hole in it, if possible.

Torture for pleasure is wrong.

When I say, "torture", I don't mean fun time with whips and safe words and things...I'm talking about actual torture.

 

[Drowning Man]

Okay, seems like an odd desire. The idea of eating horse meat grosses me out.

I'm just saying...even if they want it, it may be morally wrong to treat them that way.

 

[Roger Duke]

From all of my studies of religion, philosophy, morals, ethics, rules, laws, etc....the only constant that I've seen is that they all fall short.

These posts are all amazing.
This particular one caught my eye. If none of these are worthy of being a foundation, what is? Can a society without a foundation stand? Can an individual? (Apparently so since you are still here.)

 

[Jacksprat]

These posts are all amazing.
This particular one caught my eye. If none of these are worthy of being a foundation, what is? Can a society without a foundation stand? Can an individual? (Apparently so since you are still here.)

I do not care if someone believes it right to murder someone. In our society it is illegal and you will be prosecuted.

 

[Drowning Man]

These posts are all amazing.
This particular one caught my eye. If none of these are worthy of being a foundation, what is? Can a society without a foundation stand? Can an individual? (Apparently so since you are still here.)

First, laws don't equal morality. So, a society can stand just fine without a solid moral foundation. A shaky one does just fine.
Second, I've found some of the worst atrocities committed by man were those where the perpetrators had an absolute certainty that they were right morally and/or religiously. Can you show where living in the grey, not knowing for sure, but constantly examining one's beliefs and morals, is a bad thing?

 

[NatMorton]

First, do no harm.

 

[fmw]

I learned morality from my father's example.

 

[CaughtInThe]

Lord. Please forgive the trump supporters in this thread.

Amen.

 

[Roger Duke]

First, laws don't equal morality. So, a society can stand just fine without a solid moral foundation. A shaky one does just fine.
Second, I've found some of the worst atrocities committed by man were those where the perpetrators had an absolute certainty that they were right morally and/or religiously. Can you show where living in the grey, not knowing for sure, but constantly examining one's beliefs and morals, is a bad thing?

I sorta understand this and sorta not.
But if you are saying that you personally are your own foundation, isn't that denying the ethics that you were taught by those who raised you? Isn't it denying the influence of the Founding Fathers on American culture that influenced you? Isn't it denying the influence of Christ on all of western civilization? You may not want them to be foundations but to deny that they are seems like it is denying history.

 

[Jacksprat]

I sorta understand this and sorta not.
But if you are saying that you personally are your own foundation, isn't that denying the ethics that you were taught by those who raised you? Isn't it denying the influence of the Founding Fathers on American culture that influenced you? Isn't it denying the influence of Christ on all of western civilization? You may not want them to be foundations but to deny that they are seems like it is denying history.

I cannot think of any nation in history that made murder and stealing legal. You don't need religion for that.

 

[noonereal]

Have you ever asked yourself where your moral and political beliefs come from?
If so, did you ever find an answer that satisfied you?

Yes and yes.

 

[Mach]

Isn't it denying the influence of the Founding Fathers on American culture that influenced you? Isn't it denying the influence of Christ on all of western civilization? You may not want them to be foundations but to deny that they are seems like it is denying history.

No, not Christianity. Enlightenment.

Age of Enlightenment - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

"The Age of Enlightenment, or simply the Enlightenment,[note 2] was an intellectual and philosophical movement that dominated Europe in the 17th and 18th centuries with global influences and effects.[2][3] The Enlightenment included a range of ideas centered on the value of human happiness, the pursuit of knowledge obtained by means of reason and the evidence of the senses, and ideals such as liberty, progress, toleration, fraternity, constitutional government, and separation of church and state.[4][5]"
...
The central doctrines of the Enlightenment were individual liberty and religious tolerance, in opposition to an absolute monarchy and the fixed dogmas of the Church."


Reason, enlightenment, is a primary influence in our system of government. Taking OUT religion as part of state, was one of the ways that was accomplished.

 

[Jacksprat]

No, not Christianity. Enlightenment.

Age of Enlightenment - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

"The Age of Enlightenment, or simply the Enlightenment,[note 2] was an intellectual and philosophical movement that dominated Europe in the 17th and 18th centuries with global influences and effects.[2][3] The Enlightenment included a range of ideas centered on the value of human happiness, the pursuit of knowledge obtained by means of reason and the evidence of the senses, and ideals such as liberty, progress, toleration, fraternity, constitutional government, and separation of church and state.[4][5]"
...
The central doctrines of the Enlightenment were individual liberty and religious tolerance, in opposition to an absolute monarchy and the fixed dogmas of the Church."


Reason, enlightenment, is a primary influence in our system of government. Taking OUT religion as part of state, was one of the ways that was accomplished.

For example, Kant secularized many tenets of Christianity. For Kant, morality is absolute, but one need not be religious.

 

[mrdeltoid]

Have you ever asked yourself where your moral and political beliefs come from?
If so, did you ever find an answer that satisfied you?

Without a doubt, my parents taught me to do my best to live by the 10 commandments. I grew up in a blue-collar, God-fearing row house community. I remember as a kid, going to church on Sunday, Boy Scouts during the week, little league in the summer, football in the fall, so, teamwork and sportsmanship was big. That was the foundation that formed my core values.

 

[Mach]

For example, Kant secularized many tenets of Christianity. For Kant, morality is absolute, but one need not be religious.

I can see the wisdom in this, especially given the topic:

Kant's ethics are organized around the notion of a “categorical imperative,” which is a universal ethical principle stating that one should always respect the humanity in others, and that one should only act in accordance with rules that could hold for everyone.

 

[Roger Duke]

I cannot think of any nation in history that made murder and stealing legal. You don't need religion for that.

I never said you did. You don't need religion to be good, honest, or any number of admirable adjectives.

 

[Jacksprat]

Not a huge fan of Kant but I can see the wisdom in this, especially given the topic:

I am a critic of Kant. But he invented a branch of ethics called deontology. Deontology means true in itself. Utilitarianism is another school, that ethics is just useful for society. The third is virtue ethics, from Aristotle, that ethics are really aspirations.