Morality (a discussion)

@Albuquerque,

Albuquerque, I am sure ants do what is best for ants. without much theory, biology its grand!

0 Replies

@Smileyrius,

Smileyrius, Morality is intended to nurture life and its well-being, as such there is only one source of that well-being. The source is the common biology of humanity. All meaning, all values, are the property of a biologically conscious being/subject. In this sense alone is a morality based on our common biology absolute. Morality is or should be concerned about the biology that creates it. The sane thing to do is free ourselves of the harmful mythologies/religions of the past, and look squarely at what morality is relative to, our common biology our common well being.

0 Replies

@Smileyrius,

Smileyrius wrote:

What is morality? How does it impact society?

Do you believe in an absolute or flexible concept of morality?

Morality is well defined by dictionaries but a short form would be the thinking that leads to the ethics/actions that would be the best end for the majority.

Moral tenets are almost all subjective and not objective so yes indeed, there is a lot of flexibility in interpretation of the perceived harm.

You and I might think a thing evil, if it hurts, but if you are into S & M with another, hurt is good.

Regards
DL

0 Replies

@neologist,

neologist wrote:

Lustig Andrei wrote:
neologist wrote:
Depends on whether or not you feel some obligation to a creator.
Why?
A creator, much like the manufacturer of a fine machine, is the one most in a position to instruct in the use and maintenance of his creation. Hence, his standards would carry more weight than those determined by either the machine itself or some user who may first be confused over the location of the on/off button.

Makes sense, but have you noted that the manufacturer has abandoned the factory and is not allowing warranty claims for defective products?

The manufacturer is bankrupt.

Which is nice if it happens to be Yahweh, the genocidal prick god of Christianity.

Regards
DL

0 Replies

@neologist,

neologist wrote:

Lustig Andrei wrote:
Are you implying that without a belief in a creator, morality is not possible?
Not at all. The world is full of highly moral people

Even more moral that the genocidal Yahweh. Right?

Regards
DL

0 Replies

@popeye1945,

popeye1945 wrote:

Not all cultures are equal and moral relativism is just a copout, a morality to make sense across the board must be base upon our common biology. A measure of the quality of life and well being is something which can be universally applied. The trouble in many cases is morality has been governed by moronic religious fairytales, that more then boarder on the absurd and/or insane.

How close is across the board.

I have seen stats that show that better than 70% of us all base or start our morals on some kind or reciprocity rule.

Fact is, we are born knowing good and evil and default to good because it is the better survival strategy. We are forced to do so by our selfish gene and DNA.

In genetic terms, we choose to cooperate instead of compete.

Regards
DL

1 Reply

@popeye1945,

popeye1945 wrote:

All values are biologically based, therefore a reasonable morality must be based upon/relative too, the life of that biology and its well being. This could and should be applied across the board, a morality based upon culture would be global chaos. May Ali kill you!!

You made me remember this.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iV2VjdpVonY

I agree with your notion and think that all humans have an internal moral code and if religions and governments worked to define it, we would soon have world peace.

Regards
DL

1 Reply

@Greatest I am,

Not entirely no! More effective cooperation yes, specially as we get more interdependent and globalized. But war is a part of reality just like natural fires do recycle forests, or predators help the ecosystem and the grazers be checked in balance so the pastures are not overgrazed.
In our social ecosystem even the 3% psychopaths play a role in the checks and balances that keeps us alert and aware.
Nonetheless it is true that the more intertwined and linked we become the more we are forced to cooperate instead of competing.

0 Replies

@Greatest I am,

Greatest, Are you aware that we seem to be on the same page? I don't believe we have an argument.

1 Reply

@popeye1945,

I doubt you know guy.

But your bell rings every time somebody knocks 'God' .

1 Reply

@Leadfoot,

Leadfoot, Which god?

1 Reply

@popeye1945,

Whatever you want the most.

1 Reply

@Leadfoot,

Leadfoot--- LOL!! So all gods are the same, just depends upon which one you want on the team the most? Are there many gods to chose from Leadfoot? Can we make up our own?

2 Replies

@popeye1945,

Old fashion me likes Superman...

0 Replies

@popeye1945,

Quote:

LOL!! So all gods are the same, just depends upon which one you want on the team the most? Are there many gods to chose from Leadfoot? Can we make up our own?

Definitely not all the same.

And you do get to make up your own if you choose, most people do.
Whatever you want/value/prioritize the most, IS your God.

If you want specifics, popular choices include: money, social status, power, sex, toys, family, etc.

1 Reply

@Leadfoot,

Leadfoot, You have a rather expansive definition of god, really then making it indefinable for the purpose of dialogue. I think you're talking about something that most people would not consider a concept of god.

3 Replies

@popeye1945,

Concepts of God that are not trivial are not exactly news...they have some mileage done for a while already. My idea of "God" is really disappointing for most people. A impersonal mathematical rational underlying all Reality. Just that!

1 Reply

@popeye1945,

Quote:

I think you're talking about something that most people would not consider a concept of god.

Mine told me never to take that into consideration.

Maybe yours is 'the approval of your peers'.

0 Replies

@popeye1945,

popeye1945 wrote:

Leadfoot, You have a rather expansive definition of god, really then making it indefinable for the purpose of dialogue. I think you're talking about something that most people would not consider a concept of god.

You are one of those posters who never seems to assert a position...rather just assails the positions of others.

My reading of your comments leads towards: Popeye seems to think there are no gods at all...perhaps even that "the existence of gods (or at least one GOD) is impossible."

Is that your position?

Are you able (willing) actually to state YOUR position on the issue?

2 Replies

@Frank Apisa,

While we await Popeye's potentially eponymous riposte I'd like to play.

Do you really want to go through your tiresome spiel again Francis?

1 Reply

Morality (a discussion)

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know