Absolute Morals

[zildjian133]

I dunno I quit this thread : (

[PowerCosmic]

I like the way DonCasablanca described right and wrong motivations versus right and wrong actions, but I feel the motivations for your actions and the actions themselves are two seperate things. Motivations can be good or evil, and actions right or wrong. You could do a wrong deed for good reasons, or a good deed for evil reasons. Of course, it is impossible to convince others that there are specific moral absolutes, especially if they don't agree with your views of right and wrong.

[User6773]

There are certain things that just sit wrong in every human's conscience because of the pain and suffering they cause, like torture, rape, murder, etc. People who believe these things are okay have either a) been brainwashed/miseducated/trained into thinking they're okay or b) have psychological problems. These things are matters of absolute morality.

Now here's where my idea comes in. I think that there are some things that are innately considered wrong to everyone but because of society we are trained into believing that they are okay. One example would be cheating. I think everyone innately feels that cheating is wrong but some people, because of academic repression and difficulty at succeeding on their own, or perhaps simply a set of values that encourages laziness over hard work as long as you succeed, develop an eventual "tolerance" for cheating and then it gets to the point where it's not considered wrong at all. But does this mean cheating isn't inherently wrong? No, it's just that people have trained themselves to not be naturally inclined to think it's wrong anymore.

I think all morality is objective, and "subjective morality" comes from societal meddling.

[Kilgamayan]

Who are you to say that someone else has psychological problems or is brainwashed just because they hold morals that different from yours? Am I brainwashed/psychologically unsound because I'm pro-choice? Because you were equally vehement on that issue too.

Murder I already explained with Hitler, and by extention torture as well. Rapists probably derive pleasure from what they do, and so they likely view it as right.

[User6773]

I think that abortion is naturally abhorrent. I think people accept it because of the live-for-themselves mentality society teaches us, as well as the fact that abortion was quickly labeled an issue of "women's rights" which made it difficult to contest in the 70s. I think that if abortion were not naturally abhorrent, half the country would not be pro-life. Nor do I think that society and culture are encouraging pro-life thoughts. Thus, the natural reaction of rational-minded individuals who are uninfluenced by society and know the facts is to abhor abortion.

"Brainwashing" is a harsh term I used to describe acceptance of more violent crimes. "Imposition of societal ideas" is better.

[Kilgamayan]

But society dictates that murder, rape, etc. are bad, so someone who derives pleasure from those things isn't exactly being affected by that imposition.

[User6773]

Hence why I offered psychological problems and brainwashing as possible explanations, too.

[Kilgamayan]

While they are possible solutions, they aren't the only solutions, as you made them out to be.

Getting back to Hitler, we just got to Nazi Germany in my German History class, and one of the things we learned was that when he had a listen at each party's standpoint about what to do about the country, he agreed with party that essentially believed "Jews are bad, mmmkay?". Would you call this brainwashing or making one's own decisions based on what one has been presented?

[User6773]

Brainwashing.

[Kilgamayan]

...

And The Q wonders why I don't post here more.

[PowerCosmic]

If you are trying to use the case of nazi germany as a place where murder was accepted, from my point of view that is an innacurate example. Most germans went along with it not because they agreed, but because they feared the consequences of their rejection. a book called "Ordinary Men" is about a group of german citizens who are inducted into the army and become an execution squad. Initially, they are disgusted, they can't believe this is happening, and many won't go along with it. But over time, they all become "brainwashed" into liking what they do. However, after the war most of them agree what they did is wrong, and they don't understand even themselves why they did it.

Another great example brought to us by psychology is the milgram obedience study. Look it up, it is about obedience, and what seemingly normal people will do under the duress of authority. It showed that "normal" people would do things that endanger and harm someone they don't even know simply because an authority figure asks them to. These are both examples of reasons for people going against absolute morals and doing things most consider terrible.

[Kilgamayan]

I was using Nazi Germany as an example because Hitler believed it was right. The rest of the population becomes moot at that point. It doesn't take several million counterexamples to prove a theory wrong, it only takes one.

I just kinda threw them on because I figured at least one agreed with his policies - Hitler was most certainly not alone in Anti-Semitism, and he was not the origin of it either.

[omgwtfToph]

Unless you believe in God, or a God, there is no such thing as an absolute set of morals, because unless there is a supreme being, there is no one besides fellow man to make the rules. Only if God or a God exists can absolute morals exist. Without the presence of a superior being, every human can make his own rules, because every human is, logically, equal.

I believe that in every situation, there is one absolute truth. It's just that the truth is not always the same for every situation. For example, let's say stealing is wrong, but what if someone pickpockets your wallet and runs off with it? Would it be wrong to steal it back because "absolute morals" say it is wrong to steal? No, I would say that in this situation, the absolute moral would make it acceptable to take back your wallet. However, is it right to murder this man who stole your wallet? No, it is not.

Since I believe in God, I guess believing in absolute morals is easy for me - but let's not turn this into a religious debate huh?

[Privateer]

Holy shit, reading what Kilga has been saying in response to everything so far has been great. Genius responses. He is so right in my mind.

[User6773]

...

And The Q wonders why I don't post here more.

Ask a question, get an answer.