PDA

View Full Version : MORALITY : A controversial topic | Local forum debate!



Hans
12-13-2015, 03:33 PM
So as we all know - morality is rather a standard for everyone. But in every statement, bias and idiosyncrasy will always be involved no matter what. So let us all debate and discuss like civilized men if morality is a general standard or if it is subjective in context! Other topics pertaining morality may be discussed only in due given context if asked, or was just mentioned to contradict a statement. The main topic would be if morality should really be a general standard or is just biased and subjective for everyone.

Sub-topics most likely included:

• What is morality?
• Cite an instance of proper morality as a general usage and/or a contradiction.
• Is morality subjective or general?
• (Optional) If you claim morality is generally an absolute standard, wouldn't that make your standard of morality subjective as all of our opinions vary?
• (Optional) If you claim morality is subjective, then how come people have a sense of guilt and generalization of what is wrong to right and are actually able to identify it?
• Morality cannot be both general and subjective as even if you prove it can be both, that would be another thing and not morality anymore. More of an idealistic pattern humans naturally recognize from simple logic.
• (Updated| Optional) If morality is subjective, then how will you react to the statement that "if morality is subjective, then if your morality of killing a person is OK, it's really OK for you?" Elaborate your reaction.
(Will be adding more)

I'd like to see some opinions. GLHF, matey.

JOSHIE63
12-13-2015, 04:00 PM
Ooh. Let me start this off.

Morality is subjective. It refines the point that all people have, at a point, any set of morals learned in the right-from-wrong, scrupulous method. At any point, these sets of self-defined morals must overlap in some areas — like for example what was stated about guilt and remorse — but that does not mean that the morals in question must be regarded as a finite boundary for all to follow. Of course, the social norms play a part in discerning the necessary requirements to be accepted by society's other ethical selection. Social norms standardize many areas and warrant almost a peculiar stare upon those that do not conform. Therefore, the same morals, if any, must not be regarded in a parallel manner; there is a standard for the group that practices the conformity aforementioned.

Hans
12-13-2015, 04:33 PM
Ooh. Let me start this off.

Morality is subjective. It refines the point that all people have, at a point, any set of morals learned in the right-from-wrong, scrupulous method. At any point, these sets of self-defined morals must overlap in some areas — like for example what was stated about guilt and remorse — but that does not mean that the morals in question must be regarded as a finite boundary for all to follow. Of course, the social norms play a part in discerning the necessary requirements to be accepted by society's other ethical selection. Social norms standardize many areas and warrant almost a peculiar stare upon those that do not conform. Therefore, the same morals, if any, must not be regarded in a parallel manner; there is a standard for the group that practices the conformity aforementioned.

A point-on start-off for a debate! Anyone care to contradict or support this statement? I will try to catch-up later.

|ThyLuigi|
12-13-2015, 05:33 PM
Time to play devil's advocate
While societies boundaries play a role in how we act, what made society was peoples' actions towards each other which was decided as young children, too young to be influenced by things happening outside of their view. We consider certain things to be right or wrong due to the prospect of furthering survival.

Hans
12-14-2015, 01:28 PM
Time to play devil's advocate
While societies boundaries play a role in how we act, what made society was peoples' actions towards each other which was decided as young children, too young to be influenced by things happening outside of their view. We consider certain things to be right or wrong due to the prospect of furthering survival.

So in that view, it is, in a way, a general standard for survival or may be the opposite if opposed.

Hans
12-14-2015, 03:10 PM
Anyone willing to contribute in this mere discussion?

Areodax
12-14-2015, 03:48 PM
What is morality?

I'm a PhD in Doctor Assisted Homicide. How should I know? Haha, just kidding. To me, it's just something society got hold of to make some order. Without it, I guess people would start killing each other for the sake of entertainment, pleasure or anything. Our conscience got hold of its meaning too.

Or what society deems as normal, regular stuff.

Morality is subjective to pretty much everyone, as what they deem normal and proper are all different, yet the same.

I'm not a man of big words, and I'd suck at debating.

Guess that's all I'd be adding in this thread for now.

Hans
12-14-2015, 05:15 PM
Added a question! Pretty easy, yet confusing if you don't know the initial reaction to it.

Magicalfishy
12-14-2015, 09:44 PM
The base set from knowing right or wrong.

You can't deny that you always get a thought or feeling before you do something wrong. However, you can numb yourself to morals by constantly drowning them out and ignoring them until you become completely numb to what's right and wrong. Kill a man, right or wrong? Tell a lie, right or wrong? Steal money from someone, right or wrong? You feel bad when you do something bad, but if you keep doing it and ignore your morals you become completely blind to evil. Moral of the story, don't screw with morals.

Take for example you are a thief. The first time you need money, and you take it from someone. You begin to feel horrible and even think about giving it back. But then pride and greed kick in. You begin to think to yourself, "but I needed the money more." The next week you find the key to someone's apartment. You find out when that person goes to work and you go inside to find plenty of food and gadgets. You help yourself to the food, and you take an ipod or two. You begin to think to yourself that you deserved that stuff. You are poor, you are always getting pushed down, you are always being shamed by the middle-class.

The next month you have committed several acts of thievery when a suspicious number calls you. You pick up the phone and have a short but sweet conversation. It was someone from the underground community. A no-name crime association contacted you and offered you the chance to rob a rich man's home. They had the keys and the layout of the house. The old man was gone for a week and you had plenty of time to pull off the job. The next day you are three million dollars richer. You think to yourself that you stole from the rich stuck up man who makes all the poor people poor. You justify your actions by saying that he got what he deserved, and so did you. A couple months later you are a master thief. You've hacked ATM's, robbed banks, and stolen cars. You get a phone call from a huge underground gang. They offered you a chance to rob a bank with them, no strings attached. The grand prize is well over 2 billion dollars. They have everything covered, from the cameras to fingerprints to security and police. The only think you have to do is kill the overseer. Twenty years have passed. You are a multi-millionaire. You've got all the money you could need.

Little did you know, that apartment you broke into was an old woman's who was dying of cancer. He friends and family bought her all of that stuff so she could enjoy her last days on earth. That rich man's home you broke into was a starving boy from a foreign country. The next day he was going to donate all the money in his safe to feed kids in foreign countries. That woman you shot on the 12th floor of that bank was an abused mother of 3. Her husband was going to apologize to her for all the nasty things he had done to her as soon as she got home from work, and he was going to change for the better. Her kids cried for the next 10 years. One of the committed suicide at the age of 14. One died of mental disorder and stress related causes relating to the shooting of his mother at the age of 19. The third one grew up to become a detective and find out who killed his mother.

A month later you are diagnosed with a life threatening illness. The doctor gives you two weeks to live. You put a halt to crime. Three months have passed and you have been entirely cleared of your disease. It just wasn't your time to go yet. Three more months have gone by, and you swore to yourself you would never commit a crime again, but that detective is hot on your case. He shows up to your doorstep with a warrant and a gun in his hand. Tears falling down his face he tries very hard to proclaim "YOU ARE UNDER ARREST!" All choked up and shaking, he has the gun pointed at you. You have a machete in your hand. You think to yourself that you will spend your life in jail if he brings you into court. You think about yourself and how horrible your life will be, but not about how horrible this man's friends and family will handle his loss the rest of their lives. You kill the man in cold blood. You hide the evidence and nobody ever finds out.

Four years later you have become a serial killer. You've killed all your enemies and nobody ever found out. You have long lost your morals. Nobody can stop you anymore, you always get away. You play God's role and get away with it. Everyone you killed has friends and family who suffered tremendously. All of this came from one simple key. You've killed for the stupidest reasons, but you don't regret a single thing you have done.

You're 60 years old. You've gotten away with crime your entire life... but what have you gained? You've always had the money... and you tried to buy happiness but you were never happy. You became a moral-less man who stole and murdered for a living.

syrup
12-14-2015, 10:15 PM
life sucks and then you die, badabingbadaboom

actually, you should make your life worthwhile, go to college, get a job, have friends

anyone who uses mortality as an excuse to not care about the world is probably emo or an unemployed leech suckling off the free money from welfare

Tempting
12-14-2015, 11:21 PM
Morality is a word. It starts with M, and ends with y. If a=1, b=2 and etc. then morality is 113.

JOSHIE63
12-15-2015, 12:16 AM
Added a question! Pretty easy, yet confusing if you don't know the initial reaction to it.

In response: morality is, as previously mentioned, frangible. It is not clearly finite, and therefore is bended to fit the needs of others. For example, how is self-defense killing any the more justified than straight murder. Some will say the malicious intent defined the crime; candidly, are they not the same crime? The ethics of killing (I am researching capital punishment, so I can debate that all day with substantiation) is only one topic of the myriads of examples of everyday unstable morals.

It is hard to envision a state of anarchy, but it proves pertinence to my next topic: standardized morals. The set of morals one follows are undoubtedly reliant on society, but society is proven just as frangible as the morals themselves. If one were to be raised in an anarchic state, would their regard for ground rules and manners be acceptable? If the majority sets the standard, is the majority always "right?" The powers each human wields to conform or rebel are remarkable, but the first one to break the cycle of religious-based wars after the Crusades and again after terrorism ceases has the adept capability of acceptance. White activists that preached with MLK had the moral capacity to grind against the norm and set a trend otherwise. Morals are subjective to culture, to mentality, and to experience.

I probably just went way off topic…


life sucks and then you die, badabingbadaboom

actually, you should make your life worthwhile, go to college, get a job, have friends

anyone who uses mortality as an excuse to not care about the world is probably emo or an unemployed leech suckling off the free money from welfare

Pretty solid. Too didn't; long read — still good.

Hans
12-15-2015, 02:39 PM
The base set from knowing right or wrong.

You can't deny that you always get a thought or feeling before you do something wrong. However, you can numb yourself to morals by constantly drowning them out and ignoring them until you become completely numb to what's right and wrong. Kill a man, right or wrong? Tell a lie, right or wrong? Steal money from someone, right or wrong? You feel bad when you do something bad, but if you keep doing it and ignore your morals you become completely blind to evil. Moral of the story, don't screw with morals.

Take for example you are a thief. The first time you need money, and you take it from someone. You begin to feel horrible and even think about giving it back. But then pride and greed kick in. You begin to think to yourself, "but I needed the money more." The next week you find the key to someone's apartment. You find out when that person goes to work and you go inside to find plenty of food and gadgets. You help yourself to the food, and you take an ipod or two. You begin to think to yourself that you deserved that stuff. You are poor, you are always getting pushed down, you are always being shamed by the middle-class.

The next month you have committed several acts of thievery when a suspicious number calls you. You pick up the phone and have a short but sweet conversation. It was someone from the underground community. A no-name crime association contacted you and offered you the chance to rob a rich man's home. They had the keys and the layout of the house. The old man was gone for a week and you had plenty of time to pull off the job. The next day you are three million dollars richer. You think to yourself that you stole from the rich stuck up man who makes all the poor people poor. You justify your actions by saying that he got what he deserved, and so did you. A couple months later you are a master thief. You've hacked ATM's, robbed banks, and stolen cars. You get a phone call from a huge underground gang. They offered you a chance to rob a bank with them, no strings attached. The grand prize is well over 2 billion dollars. They have everything covered, from the cameras to fingerprints to security and police. The only think you have to do is kill the overseer. Twenty years have passed. You are a multi-millionaire. You've got all the money you could need.

Little did you know, that apartment you broke into was an old woman's who was dying of cancer. He friends and family bought her all of that stuff so she could enjoy her last days on earth. That rich man's home you broke into was a starving boy from a foreign country. The next day he was going to donate all the money in his safe to feed kids in foreign countries. That woman you shot on the 12th floor of that bank was an abused mother of 3. Her husband was going to apologize to her for all the nasty things he had done to her as soon as she got home from work, and he was going to change for the better. Her kids cried for the next 10 years. One of the committed suicide at the age of 14. One died of mental disorder and stress related causes relating to the shooting of his mother at the age of 19. The third one grew up to become a detective and find out who killed his mother.

A month later you are diagnosed with a life threatening illness. The doctor gives you two weeks to live. You put a halt to crime. Three months have passed and you have been entirely cleared of your disease. It just wasn't your time to go yet. Three more months have gone by, and you swore to yourself you would never commit a crime again, but that detective is hot on your case. He shows up to your doorstep with a warrant and a gun in his hand. Tears falling down his face he tries very hard to proclaim "YOU ARE UNDER ARREST!" All choked up and shaking, he has the gun pointed at you. You have a machete in your hand. You think to yourself that you will spend your life in jail if he brings you into court. You think about yourself and how horrible your life will be, but not about how horrible this man's friends and family will handle his loss the rest of their lives. You kill the man in cold blood. You hide the evidence and nobody ever finds out.

Four years later you have become a serial killer. You've killed all your enemies and nobody ever found out. You have long lost your morals. Nobody can stop you anymore, you always get away. You play God's role and get away with it. Everyone you killed has friends and family who suffered tremendously. All of this came from one simple key. You've killed for the stupidest reasons, but you don't regret a single thing you have done.

You're 60 years old. You've gotten away with crime your entire life... but what have you gained? You've always had the money... and you tried to buy happiness but you were never happy. You became a moral-less man who stole and murdered for a living.

Such a clichè answer that I've read in facebook a million times now (well, not exactly the same paragraphs, but same concept). I can't go on all blind here now and deny what you have said, so in return — I appreciate your time given into this. In a perpectual perspective, morality is what you can call a recursion of decisions ONLY and ONLY depending on each other to repeat themselves over and over through a series of consequences and created conducts by this society? And in this context, you have defined it as "greed and pride kicking in". Being said, big things start with the small things.

So do you deny that the concept of morality is subjective and it is rather a forsaken and absolute standard for all human being?

- - - Updated - - -


Morality is a word. It starts with M, and ends with y. If a=1, b=2 and etc. then morality is 113.

i see. so u r tempting me to answer in a jocular way too, eh

Magicalfishy
12-15-2015, 02:44 PM
Such a clichè answer that I've read in facebook a million times now (well, not exactly the same paragraphs, but same concept). I can't go on all blind here now and deny what you have said, so in return — I appreciate your time given into this. In a perpectual perspective, morality is what you can call a recursion of decisions ONLY and ONLY depending on each other to repeat themselves over and over through a series of consequences and created conducts by this society? And in this context, you have defined it as "greed and pride kicking in". Being said, big things start with the small things.

So do you deny that the concept of morality is subjective and it is rather a forsaken and absolute standard for all human being?

- - - Updated - - -



i see. so u r tempting me to answer in a jocular way too, eh

I always believed humans were born with morals. I mean, you do get a bad feeling when you do bad things. That is of course unless you keep doing those things and think to yourself that it was okay. And small things really do lead to big things, because if humans figure out they can get away with the small things they slowly build up over time. When my dad told me that stealing food from the pantry would make me think steal was okay made me laugh honestly. But as grew older I realized what he said was right. Stealing food from you "own" pantry, more or less taking food from your parents without permission, actually encouraged sneaky behavior that I never even noticed until I made serious moral changes in my life. :sweatdrop:

It's kinda like figuring out you can get away with stealing a certain amount of money from someone every month and never get caught. If you stick to your morals you will do the right thing and not steal the money. But if you think you'd just do it once you'd most likely find yourself coming back for more with the thought that it's just a small thing amount that nobody will notice. Slowly over time you can even see yourself building up.

Hans
12-15-2015, 02:52 PM
In response: morality is, as previously mentioned, frangible. It is not clearly finite, and therefore is bended to fit the needs of others. For example, how is self-defense killing any the more justified than straight murder. Some will say the malicious intent defined the crime; candidly, are they not the same crime? The ethics of killing (I am researching capital punishment, so I can debate that all day with substantiation) is only one topic of the myriads of examples of everyday unstable morals.

It is hard to envision a state of anarchy, but it proves pertinence to my next topic: standardized morals. The set of morals one follows are undoubtedly reliant on society, but society is proven just as frangible as the morals themselves. If one were to be raised in an anarchic state, would their regard for ground rules and manners be acceptable? If the majority sets the standard, is the majority always "right?" The powers each human wields to conform or rebel are remarkable, but the first one to break the cycle of religious-based wars after the Crusades and again after terrorism ceases has the adept capability of acceptance. White activists that preached with MLK had the moral capacity to grind against the norm and set a trend otherwise. Morals are subjective to culture, to mentality, and to experience.

I probably just went way off topic…



Pretty solid. Too didn't; long read — still good.

Differences are inevitable, some are exceptions to this law. Care to answer in a manner that does not involve politics, and just the plain state of the world — rather a major answer of what you normally see. What are conducts, what is initiative and what is etiquette? I cannot deny that morals are subjective pertaining some subjects, but if it comes to that, then that is another thing you HAVE to answer for yourself. So as if anyone says that morality is an absolute law in itself, it becomes another thing. As an out-come, all these "controversial" debates I'll be releasing are all huge mind-games just playing with the norm, and as a conditioned reaction, these kinds of answer were inevitable. There was no problem to begin with. Some may just say than I'm spewing non-sense and paradox, but despite all that, I have never made a point to begin with — just asking questions.

No, I am not saying you should think out of the box most of the time, but it is reccommended at times. Now I'm the one who went off-topic :,)

- - - Updated - - -


I always believed humans were born with morals. I mean, you do get a bad feeling when you do bad things. That is of course unless you keep doing those things and think to yourself that it was okay. And small things really do lead to big things, because if humans figure out they can get away with the small things they slowly build up over time. When my dad told me that stealing food from the pantry would make me think steal was okay made me laugh honestly. But as grew older I realized what he said was right. Stealing food from you "own" pantry, more or less taking food from your parents without permission, actually encouraged sneaky behavior that I never even noticed until I made serious moral changes in my life. :sweatdrop:

It's kinda like figuring out you can get away with stealing a certain amount of money from someone every month and never get caught. If you stick to your morals you will do the right thing and not steal the money. But if you think you'd just do it once you'd most likely find yourself coming back for more with the thought that it's just a small thing amount that nobody will notice. Slowly over time you can even see yourself building up.

And your answer to my last question would be..?

Magicalfishy
12-15-2015, 02:57 PM
And your answer to my last question would be..?

I answered it in my first sentence. (:

Hans
12-15-2015, 02:59 PM
I answered it in my first sentence. (:

SO IS IT ABSOLUTE OR SUBJECTIVE?

serry fer ceps

Magicalfishy
12-15-2015, 03:00 PM
SO IS IT ABSOLUTE OR SUBJECTIVE?

serry fer ceps

Absolutely absolute so absy.

PotatoMarco
12-15-2015, 03:55 PM
Good morals (kindness, generosity, etc.) were made so weak people can have something against strong people (those who are rich, strong, etc.).

Hans
12-15-2015, 06:05 PM
Good morals (kindness, generosity, etc.) were made so weak people can have something against strong people (those who are rich, strong, etc.).

Lmao. Let dem food come.

Hans
12-16-2015, 08:23 PM
Not giving up.