Welcome to Gaia! ::

Reply General Discussion
Morality and such Goto Page: [] [<] 1 2

Quick Reply

Enter both words below, separated by a space:

Can't read the text? Click here

Submit

Do you know whats "right"?
  Yes I do.
  No, not really.
  ...doesn't change how I act.
View Results

Belthasar727

PostPosted: Thu Apr 12, 2007 10:08 pm


Dorian Requiem
So, what are your morals? What morals do you think you have, or don't, that you suspect most other people do or do not have? Do you have any interesting moral dilhemas to share that we can compare what we would do on?


I am an individualist; my morals, or ethics, revolve around the principle or axiom of non-aggression. I also borrow a little bit from egoism, but I don't take it to the peculiar extreme of, say, charity being an evil thing.

I don't follow the golden rule of "treat others as you would like to be treated," so much as weigh the benefit/consequences before making any choice. Unless there is mutual benefit, for the most part you stay out of my way and I'll lead by example by staying out of your way.

The moral values I have developed are strong. I also do not believe that morals are relative. Obviously people have different perceptions of what is moral, but it only makes sense that some systems of ethics are superior to others. Also, different ethical systems have different focuses, to me the only genuine ethical philosophy is that which recognizes the importance of the autonomy of the individual.

I can't categorize the sort of morals that society follows, but it certainly isn't strict. All society has is a long list of taboos, long held myths and a few loose but undeveloped rules.

Only individuals can truly be moral, not society.

Moral dilemmas? Well I have a problem with taxation. I am morally opposed to force, and cannot honestly find any justification for taxes. Taxes are implemented with force, and I do not believe the ends justify the means. My dilemma is without taxes there is no government, and I don't have an answer for how to fill the resulting hole.
PostPosted: Thu Apr 19, 2007 6:26 pm


In my mind, every situation has to be taken individually, not as some generallized assumption about an act. It's not like I can lump all acts of murder under the same blanket "wrongness".

Say someone physically assults someone who was planning and fully intending on commiting murder. Who is the victim? Was the assulter wrong? Eh, probably not, if he did it to save another's life.

To compare the slaughter/killing of a cow, cheetah, and a pet dog are totally irrelevant.

The cow lacked the genetic qualities to be a producing cow, thus it was culled out of the herd for meat. Simple logic.

The cheetah was a valued member of it's genetically similar species, because for every individual dead, the genome of the cheetah becomes weaker. That I don't like, because messing with the ecosystem = bad karma, always.

The dog, as a companion didn't deserved to be killed by manner of however, because it was functioning as a human compainon and valued friend. I don't mind euthanizing dogs at shelters, but killing a dog for meat, fur, or other cosmetic and human reasons isn't very nice, for lack of better words. (I do support biomedical animal testing, because it benefits all species)

The only way to decide whether an action is wrong or right is to think and debate upon it. However, a lot of times (the opening situation) there isn't time to think. So, without analysis, nothing is right or wrong.

Gone Arai


Lizzie-DS

PostPosted: Thu Apr 26, 2007 7:15 pm


Morality is different from person to person in my honest opinion.
For instance, mine can be considered somewhat dark, however I won't go into that right now.
PostPosted: Thu May 17, 2007 10:10 am


Ah, the great thing about being a sentient creature. The ability to know what is right and what is wrong. Does it mean that when we are "right" we are right? *shrugs* It is subjective and a like many said, a personnal perspective. Though what I believe we do is that we follow the majority though on what is right or wrong for the sake of being socially accepted. We are a social creature by nature and bound ourselves to rules and ideas of morality for security and comfort. Well, that's what I think anyways.

Maku the Dark

Wheezing Smoker


MyOwnBestCritic

Dapper Dabbler

PostPosted: Mon May 21, 2007 8:56 pm


There is no concrete "right" or "wrong" - people are too different for that. The Zulu tribe in Africa kills criminals regularly and thinks it's horrible to keep a man locked up in a cage like a beast, but a lot of people in America say that anything is better than death. Some religions killed those that were "unholy," and it's well known that some religions performed human sacrifice because they thought it would keep the sun running. Simply put, there is no right way or wrong way; it's an illusion of society. Knowing that, I still apply my own morals anyway, though.
PostPosted: Tue May 22, 2007 7:06 pm


Sometimes I think it's easy to fall back on utilitarianism and forget morals for a little while.

Mongler Of Cocks


LightGrey_Shadow

PostPosted: Tue May 22, 2007 8:48 pm


Morals, and most other things are insubstantial. Ones person morals can be completely different from anothers. Until we can all agree on something nothing has truth. Humans are imperfect and cannot agree on anything as a whole, therefore by my logic nothing has complete truth value.
PostPosted: Wed May 23, 2007 2:42 pm


Morals and ethics differ from person to person. This is obvious: I consider fishing to be moral. You may not.

You may be a vegan, and believe all cruelty towards animals is wrong.

I believe that historically we are omnivores. And while I recognize animal cruelty as morally wrong, I also believe if one has respect for the animal and kills and prepares it with their own hands, then they are justified in eating it.

This is just an example, but looking elsewhere we see different people have radically different ideas about what is "moral" and "ethical." So I find it baffling and frustrating when a group of people claims to have a monopoly on "true morality."

So personal morals differ, but are there universal morals? Perhaps, I am still undecided.

Murder is almost universally recognized as wrong. Of course, murderers do not think so. And historically, in some times and places, killing a slave was not considered murder.

So we are left with quite a bit of a problem: how do we define a universal moral?

Antel Daisy

Reply
General Discussion

Goto Page: [] [<] 1 2
 
Manage Your Items
Other Stuff
Get GCash
Offers
Get Items
More Items
Where Everyone Hangs Out
Other Community Areas
Virtual Spaces
Fun Stuff
Gaia's Games
Mini-Games
//
//

// //

Have an account? Login Now!

//
//