Morals - what are they? Are they needed?

McGinty

Okay a question to everyone who is interested, what are morals? Why bother having morals, why not just do what ever you want?

What is right and what is wrong? Should morals be based on relgious principles, the law or society or something I haven't mentioned? Or a combination of all?

I ask this question because I have based most of my morals from a religious aspect plus of course keeping within the law, and it has been suggested I should aquire morals elsewhere. I'm interested in hearing other people's viewpoints.

Silent Bob

from www.dictionary.com:
# morals Rules or habits of conduct, especially of sexual conduct, with reference to standards of right and wrong: a person of loose morals; a decline in the public morals.

Morals don't benefit the individual, they benefit the society that the individual lives in, and society itself creates laws which are used to try and enforce a 'minimum' set of morals upon everybody who lives in that society.

The ten commandments are a source of morals with which I would agree in the main.

I am fairly sure that I would have the same morals had I not been brought up with a Christian background, those that Christianity encourages are pretty much common sense

The above ramblings are, as ever, purely my opinion:)

oscarBravo

Originally posted by Silent Bob
Morals don't benefit the individual, they benefit the society that the individual lives in

...which, ipso facto, indirectly benefit the majority of the individuals that comprise that society. Ergo, individual morals - especially individually tailored morals - are largely useless and pointless. They can seem a burden betimes, but societal norms are a necessary part of what it takes to stay sane in society.

Silent Bob

I meant directly benefiting the individual (for instance stealing something is much easier than working to pay for it)

Indirectly you do get plenty of fringe (:)) benefits, such as being able to walk around fairly certain that someone isn't going to kill you 'cause you looked at them funny...

Zombrex

Quite a complex subject, as I think there a quite a few different levels of morals and that they are shaped from a number of sources (evolution, society, personal belief, person logic and reasoning).

Firstly, if you were referring to my post on you Bible thread when you said "it has been suggested I should acquire morals elsewhere" I did not wish to imply that you should acquire morals from someone, only that guidance in forming your own morals can be obtained in other (better) places than the bible.

I have never believed in the idea that people should follow a moral belief system that they themselves have not formed and do not understand (different from laws of course … someone who doesn’t see the problem in killing someone still shouldn’t be allowed do it). It leads to moral oppression where popular moral views are forced on the minority (look at Ireland 50 years ago .. or even today).

For example, some believe sex before marriage is morally wrong. I would respect that viewpoint if the person has come to it themselves and if they want to argue their morals to me based on logic and reasoning (or simply belief) I would welcome that. But if someone says sex before marriage is wrong because we have been told it is wrong in the Bible, then I have very little time for that kind of moral judgement.

One of the most powerful emotions, guilt, is the main factor in forming a moral or ethical system. We know something is immoral or “wrong” because of the bad feeling of guilt associated with it. Now guilt is a biological response and quite a complex on at that. Why we feel guilty is quite an interesting question, especially if we do something to benefit ourselves but still feel guilty as a result. For example if you steal a babies chocolate bar and enjoy it yourself, most people would feel guilty at doing that, even though it supplied you with food and enjoyment. You feel guilty at upsetting the baby. Is this a evolutionary response, that you must not harm our offspring for the survival of the species? Is it a socially trained response, that stealing is wrong, possibly learned while a child?

It is also very interesting to see how guilt is present (or absent) in different people, especially when you look at their background and up bring. I know a few people who would feel a lot less guilt at stealing that chocolate bar than I would as, in the same way some people feel less guilt about murder, rape, slavery and other horrendous things.

skipn_easy

Originally posted by McGinty
Why bother having morals, why not just do what ever you want?

Thats a good question, obviously we can't all do whatever we want being completely unreasonable to everyone else or society would break down as we know it.

There tends to be a give and take between people - you can't do everything you want to do, you need to make sacrifices and think of other people every now and then for theirs and your own sake. Possibly its a personal growth thing, it makes you feel good to do something altruistic for someone else (maybe its not altruistic then?)

Should morals be based on relgious principles, the law or society or something I haven't mentioned? Or a combination of all?

I would imagine a combination of all would be the best way to go, as religious principles, the law and society all change over time, and can have conflicting interests. I think religion was the primary source of morals, but you can get them from other sources as well.

Whatever you base your morals on might not be very good, so its important to think about your own actions and consequences and figure out for yourself if you think you are right or wrong. Religion could say that its ok to steal things from people who don't believe the same as you, but is it? A good guideline imo is 'do unto others as you would want them to do unto you', i don't know where that principle originated - the bible? It seems to work for me anyway...

For me morals are a way to conduct my life and my exchanges with others - i don't have morals because of fear of going to hell or fear of going to prison but because i would find it impossible to like myself if i acted immorally towards people.

Is it possible to change morals as you get older or are they ingrained in you from when you're very young? If at the age of 20 you think it is ok to mug people would you be likely to change your mind when you get to be 40?

potlatch

Morals are distilled maxims for living, for conduct, for control. They emerge or evolve out of psychological and historical but above all pragmatic reasons. When one speaks of 'bad morals', one refers to sequences of actions that have negative effects, which are understood in terms of unpleasurable psychologocal effects of physical pain, suffering or degradation.

However, the ways in which we conceive of morality in terms of demarcations between good and bad, pain and pleasure has in recent decades become much more complex, which only means our conception of the world is becoming much more realistic.

But of course, it's all much more complicated than this.

McGinty

There were two reason's I posted this thread, and before I go on, some really interesting well thought out answers. First of all Wicknight, I hope I didn't sound like smart alec, I was geniunely interested in your comments, hence this thread, your right morals is a complex issue, but good to twist one's head around. Secondly in my limited experience, and search for my religion I have come across a lot of Christians who beleive they are very moral, and some believe that those who don't follow a religion, are not moral. For the record I disagree.

I have a lot of agnostic and atheist friends, who are in my opinion, highly moral, and have very high ethics, in terms of treating those around them, raising families, the environment, political and social issues, and so forth.

I know people who have had no religious upbringing, have no knowledge of God, religion, the bible, the ten commandments, and have had completely agnostic lifestyles and yet to compare their lifestyle to that of a christian who applies say the ten commandments and so forth, they live very similar lifestyles and similar attitudes. This fasinates me, how did this come about? Are we born with inherent morals, or are they aquired?

Also I was reading somewhere that okay in the ten commandments, it is very black and white, for example, thou shallt not kill. No ifs, buts, or how.

In our legal system it is not so black and white, there is murder and manslaughter, there is murder caused in a fit of passion. Again with stealing, thou shallt not steal according to the bible. In legal terms, there is shoplifting, burgulary, theft and so forth.

I agree that morals are neccessary, otherwise we would fall into dissarray, I also believe that one has to ask oneself 'why is such and such bad or good', and come to their own conclusion.

Zombrex

Originally posted by McGinty
First of all Wicknight, I hope I didn't sound like smart alec, I was geniunely interested in your comments

Oh no, I didn't take it that way at all, and I hope I didn't imply that in my earlier post. I think your posts are very interesting, and your quest for different view points and ideas very refreshing.

I think it is very interesting to see how morals and ideas of right and wrong, develop in cultures.

It is also very interesting to see how people apply morals to different situations. For example I have family in the States who would be quite religous. To them the idea of killing someone is a horrendious crime. But they then use the horrific nature of murder to justify the state excutions of those convicted of murder. This introduces the idea of guilt and innocence. Actions seem to be immoral or moral depending on the virtue of the person involved. They believe it is immoral to kill an innocent person but moral to kill a guilty person (I personally don't agree)

DriftingRain

Morals are distilled maxims for living, for conduct, for control. They emerge or evolve out of psychological and historical but above all pragmatic reasons. When one speaks of 'bad morals', one refers to sequences of actions that have negative effects, which are understood in terms of unpleasurable psychologocal effects of physical pain, suffering or degradation

I agree. It is kinda like when you touch a hot pot when your small. You mother/father says don't touch that it's hot, but you do it anyway. Hince, you learn that it's hot and you don't do it again.

Morals are kinda the same way. Your taught them from teachers, parents, society, preists, and history. You become you, as your mind grows and you get older. You grow up and have different views and feelings about certain things and morals are what your gut feeling tells you is right or wrong in my opinion. I believe that laws are laws derived of morals for the common good, and this

In our legal system it is not so black and white, there is murder and manslaughter, there is murder caused in a fit of passion. Again with stealing, thou shallt not steal according to the bible. In legal terms, there is shoplifting, burgulary, theft and so forth.

is why.
you have laws. Say morally a person knows it is wrong to steal bread. But, he is hungry and his childern are starving so he thinks it is the only way to feed them so in his mind it is morally right . So to keep him locked up forever is wrong, hince the diffenence in the laws. Not to sure if that made any sence but...there is my opinion.
Good Luck in finding you answer McGinty!

McGinty

Good point raised driftingrain, also I agree Wickedknight, regarding those who say murder is wrong and then condone execution, plus its that kind of thinking that interests me. Like your relatives, they believe murder is wrong and yet in their minds they can justify in their minds that execution is right.

I beleive this kind of thinking is dangerous. It is my belief that is how religious persecution came about, slavery and so forth. I beleive if you have a set of morals, they should apply to all aspects. For example I believe the intentional taking of life is wrong, that includes all methods, be it execution, murder, abortion, euthanasia and suicide. When I say to me it is wrong, that is my personal beleif and I don't beleive in condemning or judging others. I beleive that a person's morals should be completely consistent throughout their life, I am not saying it is easy and all ways achievable but if one tries all the time and acknowledges when they mess up instead of brushing it under the carpet.

Another example is whereby a person goes to mass/church/whatever, says they are a good christian, but has no problem with carrying out company policy which may involve serious pollution (dumping chemicals in the river) or swindling people out of money through various corrupt methods, and so forth. I beleive the term is compartmentalisation, whereby a person sets areas of their life into neat sections in their mind, so like Sunday is church day (they feel good) monday to friday is work (don't think about actions, just work) and so forth.

Just another of my thoughts on this topic.

PeterODonnell

I regard "morals" as meaning "Live and let live", i.e. "Do not harm another person". As such, I believe the state should keep out of adult's bedrooms, as long as what is happening is between consenting adults only. I believe that the corruption uncovered in the Flood/Mahon Tribunal is a clear example of corruption, especially as it has culminated in the present housing-crisis i.e. frequent dubious re-zoning, and destroyed vital parts our national heritage. There are allegations in particular concerning the Carrickmines issue, i.e. the decision to built the M50 through it. Why has a decision been taken to delist Markievicz House? Is open-season being declared on our national heritage? Scandalous. That is immorality if you ask me. Some people know the price of everything and the value of nothing!

Sarky

Originally posted by McGinty
I beleive that a person's morals should be completely consistent throughout their life, I am not saying it is easy and all ways achievable but if one tries all the time and acknowledges when they mess up instead of brushing it under the carpet.

That can be dangerous too. What about someone who believes slavery is moral? I think people should be prepared to admit that their belifs may be misguided or wrong, and change their beliefs accordingly. I have no problem with people strongly believing in whatever they believe in, but if it can be proven that their morals go against or cause harm to their society then ideally they would modify their beliefs.

In Ireland, corruption or "being a cute hoor" is pretty much taken for granted. That doesn't mean it's an acceptable code of conduct though. I would dearly love to see an end to it, preferably by the people responsible waking up and realising what they're doing to their victims, and understanding why acting truthfully and honourably would benefit everyone, including themselves.

It'll probably never happen, but I can dream...

Nevyn

yes there are moral standards imposed on us and morals that are taught at home, but your own morals are the ones that you choose to live by , by choice or by trail and error. Not everyone views life the same way so thier moral or rules are differnt.

DriftingRain

yes there are moral standards imposed on us and morals that are taught at home, but your own morals are the ones that you choose to live by , by choice or by trail and error. Not everyone views life the same way so thier moral or rules are differnt.

Sweet and simple...Such a wise woman