Fun, moral or immoral?

Reply Sun 18 Nov, 2018 10:25 am
Is 'fun' moral or immoral?
  • Topic Stats
  • Top Replies
  • Link to this Topic
Type: Discussion • Score: 0 • Views: 1,453 • Replies: 4
No top replies

Reply Sun 18 Nov, 2018 10:29 am
Maybe fun is about not wanting to get 'busted' or 'in trouble'.

Taking a look at all current and past 'cultures' with their sets of ideologies, what would have been 'fun' for those 'cultures'? What would have stepped outside of their own 'moral' rules/laws?

An example: Before the Unification of the Islands of Hawaii, it was 'wrong', morally wrong, for men and women to 'dine' together. Both the males and females had their own 'houses', or hale(s) (pronounced; hah-leh) to eat/dine within. But after King Kamehameha the First's death, this 'kapu' or 'taboo', was abolished.

Did what was once 'taboo/kapu' become 'fun'?

Kapu is the ancient Hawaiian code of conduct of laws and regulations. The kapu system was universal in lifestyle, gender roles, politics and religion. An offense that was kapu was often a capital offense, but also often denoted a threat to spiritual power, or theft of mana. Kapus were strictly enforced. Breaking one, even unintentionally, often meant immediate death,[1] Koʻo kapu. The concept is related to taboo and the tapu or tabu found in other Polynesian cultures. The Hawaiian word kapu is usually translated to English as "forbidden", though it also carries the meanings of "keep out", "no trespassing", "sacred", "consecrated", or "holy".

The opposite of kapu is noa, meaning "common" or "free".


In the wake of inconsistencies of judgment, necromancers and other practitioners of the magic arts were able to utilize spells featuring holy names with impunity,


exemption from punishment or freedom from the injurious consequences of an action.

Proverbs 29:18 "Where there is no vision, the people perish: but he that keepeth the law, happy is he."

Was it ever 'taboo' or morally wrong to be a necromancer?
Reply Sun 18 Nov, 2018 10:45 am
The word "necromancy" is adapted from Late Latin necromantia, itself borrowed from post-Classical Greek νεκρομαντεία (nekromanteía), a compound of Ancient Greek νεκρός (nekrós), "dead body", and μαντεία (manteía), "divination by means of"; this compound form was first used by Origen of Alexandria in the 3rd century AD.[5] The Classical Greek term was ἡ νέκυια (nekyia), from the episode of the Odyssey in which Odysseus visits the realm of the dead and νεκρομαντεία in Hellenistic Greek, rendered as necromantīa in Latin, and as necromancy in 17th-century English.


Shamanism is a practice that involves a practitioner reaching altered states of consciousness in order to perceive and interact with what they believe to be a spirit world and channel these transcendental energies into this world.


Early necromancy was related to – and most likely evolved from – shamanism, which calls upon spirits such as the ghosts of ancestors.

(The only difference maybe being): commonly associated with necromancy. Rituals could be quite elaborate, involving magic circles, wands, talismans, and incantations. The necromancer might also surround himself with morbid aspects of death, which often included wearing the deceased's clothing and consuming foods that symbolized lifelessness and decay such as unleavened black bread and unfermented grape juice. Some necromancers even went so far as to take part in the mutilation and consumption of corpses.


Shamans act as mediators in their culture.

Moral; immoral to that 'culture'.
0 Replies
Reply Mon 19 Nov, 2018 12:10 am
Your premise is flawed. Fun means different things to different people. Sometimes it's not immoral, sometimes it is.

Sailing on a yacht in challenging seas, is fun to some people. Playing sports can be the same. Some people like Karaoke, Charades, etc. Of course, each of those can, depending on the intent and nature of the activity, involve immoral actions, or not.

The real question is, why all the other elaborate thoughts surrounding it?
0 Replies
Jewels Vern
Reply Mon 24 Dec, 2018 03:03 pm
When two or more people live in the same area they have to adopt some rules about who does what to whom. Any such rule is called a more', French accented e pronounced "mor-ay". The adjective form is moral, and the habit of following more's is morality. More's are arbitrary: they do not have to be right, only accepted. Another group on the other side of the river might have very different more's. A collection of more's defines a culture.

Fun is a separate subject. You don't have to feel guilty about something just because you like it.
0 Replies

Related Topics

How can we be sure? - Discussion by Raishu-tensho
Proof of nonexistence of free will - Discussion by litewave
morals and ethics, how are they different? - Question by existential potential
Destroy My Belief System, Please! - Discussion by Thomas
Star Wars in Philosophy. - Discussion by Logicus
Existence of Everything. - Discussion by Logicus
Is it better to be feared or loved? - Discussion by Black King
  1. Forums
  2. » Fun, moral or immoral?
Copyright © 2020 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.04 seconds on 08/07/2020 at 09:23:50