PDA

View Full Version : Morality: is it an opinion?


EuRo
August 27th, 2016, 04:38 PM
What is your stance on morality? Is it subjective or objective, and what do you have to back up your claims?

Arkansasguy
August 27th, 2016, 08:28 PM
What is your stance on morality? Is it subjective or objective, and what do you have to back up your claims?

Should people reply to this thread with their honest opinion?

Uniquemind
August 27th, 2016, 08:46 PM
It doesn't exist in the same way for everybody, and it is culturally more relative the more complex the context.

However as babies there does seem to be some sense of mild sense of right VS wrong, pleasant Vs unpleasant people or behavior with recognition of empathy to and from and by others.

ThisBougieLife
August 27th, 2016, 09:28 PM
I believe that it is ultimately subjective. I submit the possibility that humans by their nature tend toward viewing certain things as "moral" and "immoral" and that these tendencies can be seen cross-culturally. But even when you find the most basic examples (i.e. "killing is wrong") you can find opposition. Killing is wrong, unless it's self-defense, unless it's in war, unless it's punishment for a heinous crime, unless it's for the maintenance of honor (in some cultures). Even something seemingly so basic as "killing is wrong" may not be as basic upon closer inspection. I believe there are naturalistic explanations for some moral rules (for example, the violation of the familial unit and the possible genetic defects may explain the prohibition of incest cross-culturally; it doesn't need to come from a higher power).

This is just my honest opinion. I cannot "prove" this. There may very well be a metaphysical moral standard that exists independent of human consciousness. I personally do not believe there is likely to be one, however.

Flapjack
August 27th, 2016, 10:26 PM
I think morals are very important to have! I would also had that if you're only doing something to get a girl or to please a skygod then you're not really moral.

Voice_Of_Unreason
August 28th, 2016, 12:00 PM
Funny enough, I have actually just started a college class all about morality. Rather fascinating, I would be more learned about this later, but my current stance is that of a universal morality.

Flapjack It seems like all forms of morality are based upon pleasing others. Pleasing God, or pleasing man, that is basically what morality is. If you meant that doing something morally correct only for selfish means isn't moral, then I agree with you. But saying that morality is wrong when you are trying to please someone, then you might need to reevaluate your knowledge of ethics.

Vlerchan
August 28th, 2016, 12:02 PM
But even when you find the most basic examples (i.e. "killing is wrong") you can find opposition.
This is because, certain moral pejoratives might not be absolute.

It's more than possible to justify all those exceptions, and at the same time the overarching idea that killing is wrong, within the same moral rubric.

I would also had that if you're only doing something to get a girl or to please a skygod then you're not really moral.
Who should you be doing 'something' for?

---


I'm agnostic as to whether morality is objective or not. I Er towards it not being objective, though.

Flapjack
August 28th, 2016, 12:18 PM
@PlasmaHam (http://www.virtualteen.org/forums/member.php?u=122733)

Who should you be doing 'something' for?

The person you're trying to help :) If you're donating to charity you should be doing it for that charity. If you're carrying shopping home for an elderly person then do it for the elderly person.

Don't get me wrong being a good person is good regardless of why you do it but I think doing it to get 72 virgins or to avoid burning for eternity isn't moral.

ThisBougieLife
August 28th, 2016, 12:19 PM
This is because, certain moral pejoratives might not be absolute.


And it's the "absolute" ideas that I often have trouble with. While "killing is wrong" may be a general tendency, there are often gray areas with these moral pejoratives that make them less than "absolute".

jamie_n5
August 28th, 2016, 12:41 PM
I would say for me it is objective. It is a part of who I am.

dxcxdzv
August 28th, 2016, 01:43 PM
http://nsa38.casimages.com/img/2016/08/28/160828085822255249.jpg

Dalcourt
August 28th, 2016, 02:31 PM
PlasmaHam there are classes about morality? Dear Gawds...

Anyway I have never thought much about the concept of morals.
Morals seen as standards of behaviour...as a principle of what is right and what is wrong or how do we define them here?
As I see it they are subjective and objective at the same time.
First if seen as standards of behaviour of a certain society or group they are objective. You don't recognise them as being your opinion since they represent the values of your culture and if you act or judge according to them you feel you do it in an objective way.
But the way how strongly you identify with them and act or judge according to them makes them subjective of course.

Yeah sounds weird and probably is but since I grew up in a place without morals what do I know about them.

candorgen
August 29th, 2016, 03:42 PM
As I see it (currently) morals are subjective. The ideas and systems that they are usually in are formed and maintained with our minds.

What is impressive about humanity these days is the amount of diversity with ideas and POVs of the world; morality is no different.