We only think stealing is wrong because we're not thieves.

Forums: Philosophy
Email this Topic • Print this Page

J. L. Mackie reckons that the source of our moral beliefs is our adherance to particular ways of life. So for example, we believe that it is wrong to steal because we are not thieves. And thieves think it is okay to steal, because that is what they do. This contrasts with the common sense idea that most people don't steal because they know that it is wrong.

Another good example is meat-eating. Ever noticed that nearly all meat-eaters think that it is okay to eat meat? And we get defensive when vegetarians try to tell us it's wrong. It seems to me that we think it's okay to eat meat simply because we are meat-eaters. We clearly don't choose to eat meat because we know it's okay to eat meat. we were raised to eat meat, and it's our way of life, and we justify it with arguments that meat-eating is morally acceptable (perhaps to avoid feelings of guilt?).

A good third example is paedophilia. There are organisations of paedophiles who campaign to lower the age of consent, etc. They think it's okay to have sex with children. That's probably because they're paedophiles, don't you think? Most non-paedophiles think it's wrong.

Discuss.

Topic Stats
Top Replies
Link to this Topic

Type: Discussion • Score: 2 • Views: 1,790 • Replies: 27

No top replies

Quote:

J. L. Mackie reckons that the source of our moral beliefs is our adherance to particular ways of life.

That sounds tautologous to me. "Way of life" and "moral beliefs" seem to me to be synonymous. We are social animals and "way of life" is generally acquired through socialization to statistical norms with a few minor modifications via personal experience. Such norms probably arise either through expediency (it is expedient nobody steals) or through behaviour genetics (the "altruism gene" may be an antithetical program to paedophilia). Sub-groups will develop and reinforce their own norms which can run counter to mainstream. Concepts of "right" and "wrong" are relativistic rather than nebulous ideals.

0 Replies

agrote wrote:

J. L. Mackie reckons that the source of our moral beliefs is our adherance to particular ways of life. So for example, we believe that it is wrong to steal because we are not thieves.

Beneath any notions of thieving lies the concept of ownership or property.

The accepted practice that individuals can own land, for instance, is not neccesarily right. If we think about how some of that land was aquired, imposing moral restraints at this point seems rather hypocritical.

Personally I do not think stealing is ok, but a lot of thieving is done 'legally' these days, and that's supposedly ok.

Morality may be but fine disguises
That vanity, in self defence, obliges. Smile

0 Replies

Cyracuz,

Yes..in the extreme.... "property is theft" (Marx) ....but the de facto failure of Marxism demonstrates the impracticality of that "norm"... nor do I believe that thieves fancy themselves as Marxists !

0 Replies

That is true. But they clearly do not respect the established norm of ownership.

It is almost impossible for us to imagine a society without ownership. Is it because we can't or because we don't want to?

0 Replies

Cyracuz wrote:

That is true. But they clearly do not respect the established norm of ownership.

Don't they? Stealing is the act of taking something that doesn't belong to you and making it yours, no? So they respect ownership for themselves. Do you think a thief would think it was right if another thief stole something from them?

I wager that a thief accepts that stealing is wrong but finds it acceptable to be wrong.

0 Replies

fresco wrote:

That sounds tautologous to me. "Way of life" and "moral beliefs" seem to me to be synonymous.

I wouldn't say they're synonymous, because a person's moral beliefs and their way of life could be completely different, couldn't they? I think I agree with Mackie, so I think that people's moral beliefs do reflect their way of life. But it is possible that somebody could believe that it is wrong to lie, cheat and steal, and yet for some reason become an organised criminal, don't you think? Not likely, but possible. So they're not synonymous.

Quote:

We are social animals and "way of life" is generally acquired through socialization to statistical norms with a few minor modifications via personal experience. Such norms probably arise either through expediency (it is expedient nobody steals) or through behaviour genetics (the "altruism gene" may be an antithetical program to paedophilia). Sub-groups will develop and reinforce their own norms which can run counter to mainstream. Concepts of "right" and "wrong" are relativistic rather than nebulous ideals.

That all seems fairly accurate.

Free Duck wrote:

I wager that a thief accepts that stealing is wrong but finds it acceptable to be wrong.

What makes you say so? If they really believed stealing is wrong, they wouldn't do it would they? Or they would at least feel guilty. Do you think burglars and pick-pockets and gangsters and whatnot feel guilty for stealing things? I doubt that they do.

0 Replies

agrote wrote:

Free Duck wrote:
I wager that a thief accepts that stealing is wrong but finds it acceptable to be wrong.

What makes you say so? If they really believed stealing is wrong, they wouldn't do it would they? Or they would at least feel guilty. Do you think burglars and pick-pockets and gangsters and whatnot feel guilty for stealing things? I doubt that they do.

I'm not certain that it follows that believing something to be wrong would prevent someone from doing it. Nor does guilt necessarily follow. But I'm not really in any position to know whether a thief or all thieves feel guilt. Certainly some must.

0 Replies

FreeDuck wrote:

I'm not certain that it follows that believing something to be wrong would prevent someone from doing it.

We don't have to look far to find examples of people doing something in spite of their belief that it is wrong. It happens all the time. Any public defender can tell you countless stories of poverty-line people who steal stuff with the full knowledge that it's wrong but which is overridden in favor of more immediate concerns like hunger, material discomfort, etc.

0 Replies

Yep.

0 Replies

Shapeless wrote:

We don't have to look far to find examples of people doing something in spite of their belief that it is wrong. It happens all the time. Any public defender can tell you countless stories of poverty-line people who steal stuff with the full knowledge that it's wrong but which is overridden in favor of more immediate concerns like hunger, material discomfort, etc.

They will have the full knowledge that is illegal, and considered to be wrong by most people. But not the full knowledge that it is "wrong", surely?

I'd rather not use the word knowledge, since I don't believe in moral truths, so I don't think that it actually is objectively wrong to steal; there is no knowledge to be had.

But I can use the word belief, since belief is part of knowledge. So you're saying that there are poor, hungry thieves who steal food, while believing that it is wrong to steal food when you're poor and hungry. I'm not convinced. Don't you think it's more likely that they think that stealing the food is a morally acceptable thing to do?

FreeDuck wrote:

I wager that a thief accepts that stealing is wrong but finds it acceptable to be wrong.

I didn't pick up on this before... how could they find it acceptable to be wrong? If they think it is acceptable to do something, then they do not think that it is wrong do something.

0 Replies

agrote wrote:

I didn't pick up on this before... how could they find it acceptable to be wrong? If they think it is acceptable to do something, then they do not think that it is wrong do something.

I don't see how one precludes the other. Are you saying that people never choose to do things that they believe are wrong? If that were true there would be no guilt.

0 Replies

FreeDuck wrote:

Are you saying that people never choose to do things that they believe are wrong?

No. I am saying that nobody believes that it is morally acceptable to do something that they believe is morally wrong.

Acceptable = not wrong. Would you agree?

How could anyone believe that it is not wrong to do something that they believe is wrong? If a thief believes that it is wrong to steal, then they do not believe that it is acceptable to steal, and vice versa.

I believe that most thieves just think it is morally acceptable to steal. When people say "criminals must know that what they are doing is wrong", I suspect that they are merely imposing their own beliefs on the criminals, or perhaps just saying that the criminal must know that most people believe that what they are doing is wrong, which is not the same as "knowing that what they are doing is wrong."

0 Replies

agrote wrote:

FreeDuck wrote:
Are you saying that people never choose to do things that they believe are wrong?

No. I am saying that nobody believes that it is morally acceptable to do something that they believe is morally wrong.

Did I use the words "morally acceptable"?

Quote:

Acceptable = not wrong. Would you agree?

No.

Quote:

How could anyone believe that it is not wrong to do something that they believe is wrong? If a thief believes that it is wrong to steal, then they do not believe that it is acceptable to steal, and vice versa.

I disagree. Again I ask, do you think a thief believes it to be wrong if I steal from them?

Quote:

I believe that most thieves just think it is morally acceptable to steal. When people say "criminals must know that what they are doing is wrong", I suspect that they are merely imposing their own beliefs on the criminals, or perhaps just saying that the criminal must know that most people believe that what they are doing is wrong, which is not the same as "knowing that what they are doing is wrong."

I don't agree. Though I'm not one to linger too long on the categorization of things as "right" and "wrong", I certainly have known people who did things that they knew were wrong, myself included.

0 Replies

agrote wrote:

They will have the full knowledge that is illegal, and considered to be wrong by most people. But not the full knowledge that it is "wrong", surely?

...Don't you think it's more likely that they think that stealing the food is a morally acceptable thing to do?

My roommate is a public defender (specifically in immigration court), and to hear her tell it, the accused seem perfectly aware that what they were doing was wrong, morally as well as legally. Apparently some of them break down into tears and ask for God's forgiveness the moment the word "stealing" comes up. It's just that the choice to do what was right was simply outweighed by the need to fill one's belly. Is that such a surprising notion?

FreeDuck wrote:

Though I'm not one to linger too long on the categorization of things as "right" and "wrong", I certainly have known people who did things that they knew were wrong, myself included.

I'm one of them too. I once stole my best friend's watch for no other reason than that I wanted it. I knew it was wrong. It's not like I felt I was more deserving of it, or that it was supposed to be mine--any way you sliced it, it was wrong. But I did it anyway. (I felt so bad about it that not only did I never wear it, but I eventually threw it as far as I could into the dense thicket of my backyard, and never saw it again.) As I said, it happens all the time. I'm not sure it's useful to have an grand Philosophy of Stealing if it has trouble accounting for realities like this.

0 Replies

Re: We only think stealing is wrong because we're not thieve

agrote wrote:

J. L. Mackie reckons that the source of our moral beliefs is our adherance to particular ways of life. So for example, we believe that it is wrong to steal because we are not thieves. And thieves think it is okay to steal, because that is what they do. This contrasts with the common sense idea that most people don't steal because they know that it is wrong.

What is 'common sense' about believing that people are first and foremost governed by morality? Fear, maybe, but morality?

The assumption seems to be that all of us operate in the same way. For some, their sense right and wrong might trump desire. Or hunger. Or whatever.

For others, no. And at any given point in time, a person may fluctuate on the spectrum of what gets priority in decision making.

The idea being that action helps create moral beliefs? Lots of people have taught that. Act well and your morality will adjust accordingly. To counter hate - act with love. Etc.

I do observe that humans are more complex, though. We are able to explore various moral ground without having acted on. We need only be exposed to something different.

An example: I am not a thief. However, I have stolen in the past. I believed it was wrong. I had not had opportunities to feel I could freely choose between being a theif or no . Punishment and the fear of being doomed blotted 'exposure' to theiving from my vision.
Opportunity presents itself, and I decide to test it out for myself. To theive.
It still feels wrong, and not bc of past adherence to a particular way of life. Because of a free experience and decision on my part. Thieving brings more pain to me than pleasure. Gains are not made, ground is lost.
It doesn't work. Simple enough reason for remourse.

my 2 cents for what it is worth here.

0 Replies

I don't buy it at all.

I have done things even when I "knew" they were morally wrong. I would be willing to bet that everyone has.

There are also things that I have no desire to do (and will probably never do) that I don't think are morally wrong. Learning how to crochet is a good example of this.

I think this disproves the basic premise.

0 Replies

FreeDuck wrote:

Did I use the words "morally acceptable"?

Quote:
Acceptable = not wrong. Would you agree?

No.

What did you mean by 'acceptable', then?

Shapeless wrote:

I'm not sure it's useful to have an grand Philosophy of Stealing if it has trouble accounting for realities like this.

Yeah, I'm starting to realise my view is oversimplified. I also explained it badly.

Mackie's argument is a reaction to the view that, for example, we know that it is wrong to torture children, and that is why we don't do it. Does anyone here actually hold this view?

Mackie believes that the reason we believe it is wrong to torture children is that we've all been brought up in a society where torturing children is a bizarre thing to do, and is considered wrong by most people.

It's not that we have chosen to refrain from child-torture because we have learned that it is wrong. If we had been raised in a cannibalistic tribe, we would think it was morally acceptable to eat people. Or if we were born many years ago we might think that slavery is okay. Some people at the time protested against slavery and called it inhumane - I suspect that those people were not slave-masters. But I'm only guessing. The idea is that if they were slave-masters, they would believe that slavery is okay - it's like a defence mechanism to justify your own existence and avoid feelings of guilt, maybe.

It is, of course, a generalisation, and there are probably exceptions.

flushd wrote:

The idea being that action helps create moral beliefs? Lots of people have taught that. Act well and your morality will adjust accordingly. To counter hate - act with love. Etc.

That's not quite the same as what I'm talking about.

ebrown_p wrote:

I have done things even when I "knew" they were morally wrong. I would be willing to bet that everyone has.

I still think that if you truly believed that the action was wrong, you wouldn't have done it. I think that morals are intrinsically motivating; believing that "murder is wrong" is not a simple statement, but it is a command saying, "do not murder."

Quote:

There are also things that I have no desire to do (and will probably never do) that I don't think are morally wrong. Learning how to crochet is a good example of this.

Crochet is a sport, right? You've probably played other sports, or watched them. You're familiar with sports and you understand their purpose. You could probably relate to a crochet-player to some degree.

But I suspect that something like child torture (which I'm guessing you think is wrong) baffles you. You can't understand why anyone would commit such an act. Same here. Maybe that's the source of our belief that it is wrong? We can't see any reason at all to torture children, it makes no sense to us, and it is cruel and we already have all sorts of beliefs about deliberate cruelty being wrong, so we condemn it. It is cruel and pointless, and therefore wrong.

But the child-torturer won't see it as pointless in the same way as us. They must do it for some reason... however bizarre. THey must have some strange motivation to do it. If we had that same motivation, we'd do it too and we wouldn't say it was wrong. At least not with the same level of conviction.

0 Replies

agrote wrote:

FreeDuck wrote:
Did I use the words "morally acceptable"?

Quote:
Acceptable = not wrong. Would you agree?

No.

What did you mean by 'acceptable', then?

The standard definition of the word.

acceptable/ Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciation[ak-sep-tuh-buhl] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation
-adjective
1. capable or worthy of being accepted.
2. pleasing to the receiver; satisfactory; agreeable; welcome.
3. meeting only minimum requirements; barely adequate: an acceptable performance.
4. capable of being endured; tolerable; bearable: acceptable levels of radiation.

Quote:

But the child-torturer won't see it as pointless in the same way as us. They must do it for some reason... however bizarre. THey must have some strange motivation to do it. If we had that same motivation, we'd do it too and we wouldn't say it was wrong. At least not with the same level of conviction.

It must bring them pleasure in some way to do it. They may still think it's wrong to do it. I imagine if they were tortured they would think that was wrong, so it's not a great stretch to imagine that they forsake being righteous in order to bring themselves pleasure. And that's at the crux of this argument. You say:

Quote:

I still think that if you truly believed that the action was wrong, you wouldn't have done it.

and I couldn't disagree more. Very few of us are motivate by a desire to be "right" or "moral". It is always a weighing of morality vs. needs, wants, desires, self-preservation, you name it.

0 Replies

Some people even derive pleasure from doing things that they consider to be morally wrong.

0 Replies

We only think stealing is wrong because we're not thieves.

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know