13
   

Under what conditions is it morally acceptable to impose our beliefs on others, if they don’t ask?

Forums: Moral Imposition, General, Philosophy, Morality, Virtue Ethics
Email this Topic • Print this Page
 
 
igm
 
Reply Sat 30 Jul, 2011 04:51 am
There is a person who could ask for our advice but doesn’t. That person seems to see the world in a way that appears to us to harm themselves and/or others. We recognise this and believe we could help them. Is it ever moral to do so?

Are we always morally justified or are we sometimes or never justified?

If we do choose to act in this way but we believe that the recipient of our advice will almost certainly ignore our advice or get angry at our advice should we nevertheless try?
  • Topic Stats
  • Top Replies
  • Link to this Topic
Type: Discussion • Score: 13 • Views: 5,999 • Replies: 99

 
Setanta
 
  3  
Reply Sat 30 Jul, 2011 05:18 am
It's "moral" to believe you could help, and to offer to help. It's not acceptable (or "moral") to impose upon them, unless your imposition happens to coincide with the law.
Krumple
 
  1  
Reply Sat 30 Jul, 2011 05:37 am
@igm,
igm wrote:

There is a person who could ask for our advice but doesn’t. That person seems to see the world in a way that appears to us to harm themselves and/or others. We recognise this and believe we could help them. Is it ever moral to do so?

Are we always morally justified or are we sometimes or never justified?

If we do choose to act in this way but we believe that the recipient of our advice will almost certainly ignore our advice or get angry at our advice should we nevertheless try?



Imposing is one thing, giving out advice is another.

Any time you are explaining something to someone it is good to have something that can back it up with. A good basis for the argument and something significant to follow up with so they can pin point the logic.

Now if you are imposing a belief on someone without any basis for the belief then it is immoral to do it. Because something that is baseless is no different than if you just made it up on the spot. It has to have something to back it with.

Giving advice is different than imposing a belief but at the same time you still need to have a basis for the advice otherwise it is just you stating an opinion without anything to substantiate it with.
PUNKEY
 
  1  
Reply Sat 30 Jul, 2011 07:16 am
He is "harming" himself and others?

How so?

Families do interventions all the time. Depending on the situation, you do have an obligation to confront his behavior.

Can you tell us more?
djjd62
 
  1  
Reply Sat 30 Jul, 2011 07:20 am
@igm,
a courtroom or a church is the only place i can think of, but only moral in that the majority of folks uphold the beliefs of said institutions

i for one tend to uphold the law (though i don't always follow or agree with it) but disagree vehemently with most ecclesiastical rhetoric
igm
 
  1  
Reply Sat 30 Jul, 2011 08:04 am
@PUNKEY,
PUNKEY wrote:

He is "harming" himself and others?

How so?...
...
...Can you tell us more?


For example: a moderate or someone with different beliefs deciding whether to confront a fundamentalist when that fundamentalist obviously doesn’t want the person’s opinion. The moderate believes that the fundamentalist’s beliefs have the potential to harm others either directly or indirectly. The exchange could inflame the situation.
igm
 
  1  
Reply Sat 30 Jul, 2011 08:12 am
@Krumple,
How would you handle the example I've just given 'PUNKEY'?
0 Replies
 
igm
 
  1  
Reply Sat 30 Jul, 2011 08:16 am
@Setanta,
Setanta wrote:

It's "moral" to believe you could help, and to offer to help. It's not acceptable (or "moral") to impose upon them, unless your imposition happens to coincide with the law.


Would you adopt the same approach in the example I gave ‘PUNKEY’?
igm
 
  1  
Reply Sat 30 Jul, 2011 08:17 am
@djjd62,
djjd62 wrote:

a courtroom or a church is the only place i can think of, but only moral in that the majority of folks uphold the beliefs of said institutions

i for one tend to uphold the law (though i don't always follow or agree with it) but disagree vehemently with most ecclesiastical rhetoric


Would you adopt the same approach in the example I gave ‘PUNKEY’?
0 Replies
 
PUNKEY
 
  1  
Reply Sat 30 Jul, 2011 08:22 am
Don't worry about what people say or think or believe.

Watch what they DO.

If this person's ACTIONS hurt other people, then it is time to speak up or act.
igm
 
  1  
Reply Sat 30 Jul, 2011 08:37 am
@PUNKEY,
PUNKEY wrote:

Don't worry about what people say or think or believe.

Watch what they DO.

If this person's ACTIONS hurt other people, then it is time to speak up or act.


Aren’t their words a possible precursor to action and isn’t it too late when they’ve acted to prevent the onset of for e.g. fundamentalist action? Some would say it's too late when the next action starts i.e. attempted prevention is better even if they don't want your opinions or reasons given by you to undermine their (in your opinion) wrong views. What do you think?
0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Sat 30 Jul, 2011 09:12 am
@igm,
I wonder if you understand the implication of what i wrote. Believing that you are correct in your assessment, you are entitled to tell them as much and offer to help. To attempt to impose on them or to interfere is just not acceptable.
0 Replies
 
igm
 
  1  
Reply Sat 30 Jul, 2011 09:16 am
How about a child with no set views, is it morally acceptable to explain (in the hope the child will adobt your beliefs) your beliefs to that child in order to 'help' that child to have (in your opinion) your favored view of the world?
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Sat 30 Jul, 2011 09:19 am
@igm,
Jeeze . . . if you're the guardian, certainly. If you're not, only with the prior consent of the parents or guardian, and if refused, to persist would be an imposition.

Was what i wrote not clear to you?
igm
 
  1  
Reply Sat 30 Jul, 2011 09:34 am
@Setanta,
Setanta wrote:

Jeeze . . . if you're the guardian, certainly. If you're not, only with the prior consent of the parents or guardian, and if refused, to persist would be an imposition.

Was what i wrote not clear to you?

Yes, you have made your position clear. I was asking an 'open' question to all. You didn't have to reply. But thanks for your input overall and in the consistency of view you’ve put forward. It is definitely one possible stance to adopt. I’m not sure that it would be the morally best course of action in ‘all’ situations. But in many it would seem to be perfectly cogent.
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Sat 30 Jul, 2011 09:38 am
@igm,
Actually, i'm trying to accomodate the question, which i find foolish. There is no such thing as "morality," at least not in the sense of an absolute standard, and your remarks about belief and opinion inferentially confirm that. If moraltiy were an absolute standard, there could be no disagreement about it. However, people do not agree completely about what is moral and what is not, therefore morality is subjective, and in the end, is indistinguishable from any other form of opinion.
igm
 
  1  
Reply Sat 30 Jul, 2011 09:43 am
@Krumple,
Krumple wrote:

Now if you are imposing a belief on someone without any basis for the belief then it is immoral to do it. Because something that is baseless is no different than if you just made it up on the spot. It has to have something to back it with.

If one has a basis are there times when one could attempt to impose one's belief on someone and it wouldn't be immoral to do it?
djjd62
 
  1  
Reply Sat 30 Jul, 2011 09:50 am
@PUNKEY,
PUNKEY wrote:

Don't worry about what people say or think or believe.

Watch what they DO.

If this person's ACTIONS hurt other people, then it is time to speak up or act.



agree, i actually think the more outrageous the belief the more it deserves to be heard, i used to love when howard stern would talk to daniel carver from the KKK or now when ron bennington talks to the westboro baptist church folk
0 Replies
 
igm
 
  2  
Reply Sat 30 Jul, 2011 09:53 am
@Setanta,
Setanta wrote:

Actually, i'm trying to accomodate the question, which i find foolish. There is no such thing as "morality," at least not in the sense of an absolute standard, and your remarks about belief and opinion inferentially confirm that. If moraltiy were an absolute standard, there could be no disagreement about it. However, people do not agree completely about what is moral and what is not, therefore morality is subjective, and in the end, is indistinguishable from any other form of opinion.

It is useful to find out what others’ believe is moral though and why they believe it to be so. In that way one has the chance to amend ones own beliefs and actions arising from their replies to the question posed or to maintain one’s own current beliefs because one’s own beliefs, checked against others, seem to be currently suitable. That is why I've posed the question. That is why I don't believe it is 'foolish' to do so.
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Sat 30 Jul, 2011 09:55 am
@igm,
Someone has tagged this thread "virtue ethics." That is a much better description. Morality does not exist as advertised. It's a waste of discussion to behave as though it does, the more so as you continue to inferentially recognize that as fact.
 

 
  1. Forums
  2. » Under what conditions is it morally acceptable to impose our beliefs on others, if they don’t ask?
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.05 seconds on 12/26/2024 at 11:07:07
▲ ▼