What are morals?

[am1x90xnike]

The definition is 'concern with right or wrong'

Recently, especially on this forum, I've been questioning traditional 'morals.'

I feel people are so wrapped up in a false reality, a world in which whatever they believe to be true is actually true, that anyone who challenges that is seen as wrong.

What are morals besides a code we've created that will help us cope with the difficulties of life? What is right? What is wrong? Is it wrong to steal to feed your family? Is it right to belittle someone because they like to do drugs?

In real life I'm probably one of the nicest, happiest people you'll ever meet. Yet, whenever I promote freedom of thought I feel crazy. I feel like the world as a whole pays a lot of lip service to their ideals, but don't actually believe the phrases they spew.

'Freedom' is a word on a piece of paper, yet the truly free, those that dare to think differently, are scorned. More people are followers than independent thinkers. More people would rather look good than be honest.

For example, people criticIze the church for pushing their values on people, yet in the next breath will tell you how everything you believe is wrong.

So long as you are not directly hurting people (imposing a tax burden on them is about as close as tenuous as I'm willing to go, even that is edgy) then you are A ok in my book. Of course there are hard cases but an innocent motive will outweigh, not forgive but mitigate, the harshness of the results.


Long story short, I feel that freedom of thought, personal choice to make your own belief system has been replaced with this need to fall in line with popular opinion, even if you yourself don't necessarily believe what you're saying.

'If you do not stick to your values when they are put to the test, they are not values but hobbys' -John Stewart


Your thoughts.

 

[solexsup]

View media item 666555

 

[htg designs]

Morals are innate, not something we create. Its instinctual. Morals are provided through nature, and our environment and influences help dictate the degree in which we hold to these morals, and which morals standards we adopt and relinquish. We all have some sort of moral compass, but we are all different and these compasses vary... Which is why most people feel murder is wrong, but there are people who exist that think its okay under certain circumstances ( or maybe even any circumstances).

Its pretty easy to point out what right and whats wrong. The difficulty is in the consistent follow through. We often know what the right decision is, but yet are the most likely follow through on what ever decision which is most likely more self gratifying or provides immediate pleasure/ appealing results.

 

[am1x90xnike]

Is it right for a man to sleep with a 16 year old girl? It use to be.


Is it wrong for a man to sleep with another man? It use to be.

The Aztecs use to kill, Americans use to be down with dueling.


Doesn't that mean that morals are arbitrary social values, having more to do with time and place than some sense of right and wrong?

Morals are no more real than we make them. I have a hard time believing there is objective right and objective wrong.

The danger is when anyone or anything pushes those morals on others.

 

[htg designs]

Nowadays we (society) are more open to compromising due to harsh treatments associated with exclusion (slavery,no civil rights, genocide). I think its wrong for a man to be with a 16yr old girl and another man. Those are my moral standards. I dont compromise. But then people feel the need to call me intolerant, or hateful, and all the other extremes that get tacked on when you dont agree with popular opinion. I treat everyone with respect and live and let live. I cant force my beliefs on others, and never would want to since that's not what I expect from others.

Killing is wrong. That is MY moral standard. But if my my family members are attacked, best believe my wolverine claws is coming out wit a quickness.. Sometime we do wrong for the right reasons. I still think its wrong and I'll feel bad I had to do what I did, maybe think about it goin down another way, but Ide have no regrets. Its apart of life. Having morals dont mean you perfect. It just lets you know when you in or out of bounds.

Morals ARE real and will never go away. They may bend, or change some with the time (unfortunately, because popular opinion changes with the seasons) but they are apart of our dna/ mental makeup. If there weren't right and wrong than we would have more problems than we have now.

 

[superswag]

i just do what's pure and not what's moral.

 

[x Buddha Bless x]

Morality is not innate. It is definitely NOT instinctual. It is something we as human beings created simply based on the higher functions of reasoning it requires. Morality is simply what a person, group, or society decides is right or wrong and/or good or bad. From there ethical theories are formed.

As far as time changing and things becoming different that has more to do with what's acceptable than morals. It's not that morality is arbitrary, it's that arbitrary things are placed in to strict moral codes. Furthermore, what is moral is not necessarily an absolute given ppl can have opposing views on morality. It's because we exist that morality exists. There aren't objective moral things. We decide that.

 

[am1x90xnike]

Isn't what's acceptable what morals are?

 

[deleted]

It's a kind of mushroom.

 

[spidermachine916]

... a non existent word

 

[x Buddha Bless x]

Isn't what's acceptable what morals are?

No.

What's acceptable can sometimes be a law and the law is not always morally right or good.

Hell there are ppl who accept certain things they feel are morally wrong or bad.

 

[guzzy]

Were created by society to "control"/ unite/ guide us on how we live our lives.

 

[00david00]

personal view: society would not progress without moral guidelines.

as far as moral ambiguity, we have certain margins we could have that in without really harming the society as a whole. for example, someone stealing to feed their family falls in there, and it can be tolerated within those margins, now imagine if everyone were stealing to feed their family.

it's always tough to really give concrete answers for matters regarding ethics and morality, as well as why/how we should develop/follow a moral code

If the subject interests you, I'd recommend reading a little on Aristotle and his works regarding ethics. He's a good starting point, IMO had the earliest impactful work in ethics as far as western philosophy and ethics with Nicomachean Ethics.

loads to read though: http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/aristotle-ethics/

 

[htg designs]

It's because we exist that morality exists.

Exactly. We are operate on a functional level in which this is required. Morals have always existed as long as we have and will always exist. It is another form of law, but different , as it can vary in terms of subject and degree. They may have been more basic/ primitive, but its pretty much as innate as emotions are.

With the need to do things, enact, perform, there are limits that come from within. Things that we believe we shouldn't do, that help govern and guide our actions. With out morals we would be lawless being and prolly wouldn't at this point. They are the building blocks in which our man made laws are built upon.

Moral standards can be dictated by a society, but aren't soley created by society and will never cease to exist because they come from within us.

 

[am1x90xnike]

So when cavemen were killing each other out of pure survival instinct, or when tribes destroyed other tribes were those the morals of the time? Which would mean that morals are attached to our basic need to survive, changing through times to fit that goal.

 

[htg designs]

^^^Yea. (they prolly felt morally violated, so they rode on their enemies) They did things a certain way based on their inner guidelines and their societies social accepted beliefs at the time. Did they bury their dead? Did they unjustly kill their own families for no reason? Im sure there are things that they wouldnt do, and a certain type of way they did things aswell, which would reflect some level of morality.


I have a friend that has killed, steals on the regular. But dude went to jail twice because he wouldnt rat on his friends. His morals are vastly different from mine. But he has some type of morals (how ever miniscule they'll be). Its not a social construct, but society does fight for control to have everyone have the same morals (which I dont like).

I kind of agree with "morals are attached to our basic need to survive, changing through times to fit that goal." That would make them innate.

 

[RIP sleazyy]

Morality is not innate. It is definitely NOT instinctual. It is something we as human beings created simply based on the higher functions of reasoning it requires. Morality is simply what a person, group, or society decides is right or wrong and/or good or bad. From there ethical theories are formed.

As far as time changing and things becoming different that has more to do with what's acceptable than morals. It's not that morality is arbitrary, it's that arbitrary things are placed in to strict moral codes. Furthermore, what is moral is not necessarily an absolute given ppl can have opposing views on morality. It's because we exist that morality exists. There aren't objective moral things. We decide that.

All of this + the mushroom reply. All comes down to societal norms.

I have flimsy morals but there are clear right and wrongs to me that don't match others ideals.

 

[am1x90xnike]

My biggest hang up is the 'innate' idea. How can they be innate and shared?

We generally agree that hitting people for no reason is wrong, yet a baby will hit people out of a selfish desire. We teach kids to have morals, shaping them as they grow.

I don believe anything but math and survival are innate (not algebra, but the concept of one thing and another thing), everything else must be shaped by society because we arbitrarily share 'common sense'

 

[htg designs]

My biggest hang up is the 'innate' idea. How can they be innate and shared?

We generally agree that hitting people for no reason is wrong, yet a baby will hit people out of a selfish desire. We teach kids to have morals, shaping them as they grow.

I don believe anything but math and survival are innate (not algebra, but the concept of one thing and another thing), everything else must be shaped by society because we arbitrarily share 'common sense'

I hear you. But a baby is an undeveloped mind.( they cant even see color until a months times) My parents taught me and my sibs the same stuff, yet we all think differently and hold different standards.
When I say innate, I mean the need for these guidelines.that is instinctual. We actually want some kind of boundaries, we want to know what we can and cant do naturally. We have this body, we "know" that with anything comes rules. We all have this need but we try to dictate to each other what these rules should be.