|
Without question, morality comes from the mind of the individual. There is no single standard of
morality, it is simply impossible to find any common thread that runs through all cultures across
time, even murder and rape have been thought moral by some cultures. |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
I agree. I believe that an individual's perception of what is 'right' and what is 'wrong' is simply
the result of psychological conditioning (especially during early childhood). We feel anxious when
considering doing something that society has deemed 'wrong' because we know it will have personal
negative consequences for us (i.e. We will be punished by the law, our family etc).
Therefore, if a child were to grow up in a hypothetical society that had no ethics or morals (and
hence no punishment), he too would not develop ethics or morals. I believe therefore, that no one
person/nation/race can ever correctly claim that their values/ethics/morals are superior to
conflicting opinions. I believe it all boils down to where, when, and how you are brought up. |
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
 |
|
So the question is.... "Is there a moral law for our universe?"
The answer to that question would answer many, many others.
I don't have a proof for you right now but I will work on it. |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
No. Morals are your compass: Without? You are lost............ |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
As opposed to what? Morality is a spiritual based structure. The spirituality is based in faith.
Faith in a God or higher power of some kind. Faith by its nature cannot be proven to exist, but it
is where morality does come. Nature is not moral. |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Morality, I believe, is the result of evolutionary psychological benefits. Such benefits may
include; conformity, or reciprocation. It was not until later in our evolutionary history (about a
few thousand years ago) that we started wonder what gives us our moral compass. Some decided to
attach it to the notion of God, and come up with the idea that there is only good and evil - this
view, of course, without access to an evolutionary explanation.
The moral changes that have occurred since (and are reflected in the changes in the law) are down to
the shifting moral zeitgeist - the idea that as our modern societies become more complex, consensus
forces our moral beliefs to change.
So morality would be independent of our thoughts (had we not started to question), but in a much
more primitive form.
On your other point, you're right that no person or culture has claim of moral supremacy, but in
order to move forward morally, it is necessary to open debate (and, dare I say it, criticize) with
those who we believe to be acting immorally. |
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
23 Mar 2008 22:14
Sign In
For and Against Recent Activity
