Morality is not about behavior.

ebrown p wrote:

My hypothesis is that the Rules of Morality that you claim to live by don't always dictate your behavior. There are many things that determine human behavior... our sense of morality is only one factor.

I believe that even given an absolute belief in a Universal Morality, that examples where any human acts against this morality are common.

You're kidding, right? That's your position? That people don't always act according to their own sense of morality? That hardly qualifies as even a minor revelation.

Huck Finn was psychologically (but not morally) torn between the morality he had been taught and brought up with, and internal feelings of his own we often call "conscience". That was not hypocrisy. For he no longer believed that the morality he had been taught was the correct morality. It was just difficult for him to reject his customary beliefs even when he now believed they were mistaken. He was not having a moral crisis, but a psychological crisis.

Thinks I, this is what comes of my not thinking. Here was this nigger which I had as good
as helped to run away, coming right out flat-footed and saying he would steal his children - children that belonged to a man I didn’t even know; a man that hadn’t ever done me no
harm. I was sorry to hear Jim say that, it was such a lowering of him. My conscience got
to stirring me up hotter than ever, until at last I says to it: ‘Let up on me - it ain’t too late,
yet - I’ll paddle ashore at first light, and tell.’ I felt easy, and happy, and light as a feather,
right off. All my troubles was gone.

As I shoved off, [Jim] says: ‘Pooty soon 1’ll be a-shout’n for joy, en 1’ll say, it’s all on
accounts o’ Huck I’s a free man. . . Jim won’t ever forgit you, Huck; you’s de bes’ fren’
Jim ever had; en you’s de only fren’ old Jim’s got now.’
I was paddling off, all in a sweat to tell on him; but when he says this, it seemed to
kind of take the tuck all out of me. I went along slow then, and I warn’t right down
certain whether I was glad I started or whether I warn’t. When I was fifty yards off, Jim
says: ‘Dah you goes, de ole true Huck; de on’y white genlman dat ever kep’ his promise
to ole Jim.’ Well, I just feJt sick. But I says, I got to do it - I can’t get out of it.

I didn’t answer up prompt. I tried to, but the words wouldn’t come. I tried, for a second
or two, to brace up and out with it, but I warn’t man enough - hadn’t the spunk of a
rabbit. I see I was weakening; so I just give up trying, and up and says: ‘He’s white.’

Many of the arguments about morality seem to imply that most people act completely in accordance with their own morals.

Morality is a darned sight more than not stealing or acting beyond your concepts of good behaviour.

I see self admiring Christians who think they are gods example but their politics stink. The good samaritan, a good example, is the hero who brushes into one poor guy and helps him out..... but then refuses to accept the responsibility he holds to all those in need.

I can never understand a christian who admires the capitalist ideology
and screams at socialists as if they were the devils child.

Socialism in its true sense is the politics of Christ. Share without judgement, treat the least as the highest.
Condemn not, lest you be judged..I could go on.

kennethamy wrote:

It seems to me that he continues to believe that turning jim over is the moral thing to do:

’

Now in this case his sympathies led him to do the right thing. But he didn't believe it was the right thing. Our sympathies can lead us to do the wrong thing, as in the case of a mother who won't hand a crying child to the doctor for his vaccination.

So I think it is a genuine case of hypocrisy. There are many other causes of hypocrisy obviously. This is kind of trivial. I brought up the huck finn example because ebrown's thesis seemed to be that morality was what we understand it to be. When actually we can go against our beliefs and be acting morally. If we take our understanding of morality to be what is really moral, then we run the risk of making the immoral choice when in huck's place.

Although ironically I think there are many "understandings" of morality that are post facto created because of someones sympathies. People are most sympathetic towards themselves and are certainly good at rationalizing.

I suppose that if it were a real situation and not fiction, huck might very well consciously reject his understanding of morality and believe it is mistaken.

ebrown wrote:

Many of the arguments about morality seem to imply that most people act completely in accordance with their own morals.

I suppose this was the driving force behind the creation of the thread ebrown? But what does it mean?

The question is phrased... "Would you sleep with that attractive movie star?"

This question has nothing to do with my sense of morality.

Democratic socialism has more christian values

than any twat who thinks that throwing a few bucks out of balloon is fun

and has better moral fortitude than a responsibility in law to help those less able.

Keep it up friend

your expressions are describing the arrogance and self motivated greed
that capitalist are normally so scared to admit to.

For all I know they may be better off than they say..
O my is that your excuse not to pay them attention ...

Now does it matter to you if their disadvantage prohibits them
or lets their children live in poverty, without medical care...DOES IT ?

I'm no christian, are you? What pisses me of is the christian values your type claim
as yours but piss on its requirements.

Yes your not letting me down,

your greed and self interests are obviously your motivation in life.

..Keep it up,

display your values

throw your pennies out of the hot air balloon.

I bet they did not use much gas.

Humans have the ability to justify any behavior by bending, twisting or even changing their own understanding of morality in a way to justify whatever they did. To me this is a bad thing to do. It is self-delusion, and heck; when I do something I know I shouldn't, I figure I should at least own up to it.

I suppose you can call that "hypocrisy" if it weren't so solemn a term for what is often not solemn.

are you a christian ?

When it comes to morality ebrown, I must completely support you on your statement that "When discussing morality... what you "believe" is more important then what you do."

Why is that?

does it conflict with your politics?

Im not asking you to debate your faith just make an admission.
Can I be assured you have never debated religion on this forum?

Can I be assured you have never debated religion on this forum?