A Challenge for Moral Realists
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
06-01-2016, 06:27 AM
RE: A Challenge for Moral Realists
(06-01-2016 05:47 AM)DLJ Wrote:  
(06-01-2016 05:12 AM)Banjo Wrote:  You may be right. I as you know was never religious. So perhaps understand little. Many brilliant people such as Newtown, Aurelius and others believed. Why, I do not know.

I do know xianity and islam were forced upon individuals by pain of death. Justinian banned paganism and the penalty was death. Xians burned people at the stake and whatnot. How many non believers did not let on is not known.

I have seen people who have been indoctrinated. That this happens is beyond repute. Indeed many stories exist on these pages and many do not escape. So was this system forced upon them?

It is not for me to say really.

I agree entirely that the system was forced upon them ... or for later generations it's what they grew up with so accepted it as normal.

This latter aspect can also be seen in any culture ... we have evolved to accept the wisdom of our elders.
Somewhat blandly, I grew up thinking that having a church in every village was normal. As an extreme I have Chinese friends who were flummoxed when I mentioned the purges of chairman Mao ... they'd quite simply never heard of that! The system they grew up with was normal.

Aurelius and Newton get a pass as the were pre-Darwin.

But this 'force' is what I was referring to earlier ... Organisational Ethics vs. Individual Ethics.

The ones who did not accept the system of ethics decreed (christianity or Islam) i.e. their individual ethics wouldn't let them, were 'removed'. Those that did were assimilated.

Less dramatically, if I don't agree to sign a company's Code of Ethics, they won't recruit me or I won't want to be recruited.

Of course, I could decide that the salary is big enough that I'll put aside my qualms but this just means that financial remuneration is high on my list of my individual ethics.

The choice is still mine.

I agree entirely. It has been noted that Caesar was an atheist. And he was Pontifex Maximus. Big Grin

Like you I chose my moral code. I think I chose fairly and righteously. Even though that sounds horrid. Never do harm, help other etc. Share knowledge and so on.

I am of the opinion, at this time and may later change, that there is no real moral code. Morals seem to have been flexible . The morals of Commodus were very different from Marcus Aurelius.

It is not for me to own a set of ideals as if they are right and correct. More than likely I am wrong. Still I hope to learn and reactivate my brain.

Thanks mate. D.

NOTE: Member, Tomasia uses this site to slander other individuals. He then later proclaims it a joke, but not in public.
I will call him a liar and a dog here and now.
Banjo.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Banjo's post
06-01-2016, 08:49 AM
RE: A Challenge for Moral Realists
(05-01-2016 06:21 PM)Stevil Wrote:  
(05-01-2016 05:09 PM)ClydeLee Wrote:  It is generalizations which isn't a path I'm often a fan of, especially when it comes to the other angle of picking out an individual's presumed other views based on a few generalization.
OK, cool. I was just wanting an acknowledgement of that from TBD. Perhaps this is what he means, perhaps not. I'm not sure.

But if he is saying that he determines the morality of a society merely by making a generalisation based on, perhaps, his own personal experiences with individuals from that society or just perhaps on his own personal perception of that society, then his assessment (although holding some purpose for himself, perhaps helping him to narrate some perceived understanding or meaning about that society), his assessment holds no weight for others unless those others value his personal opinions no matter how lacking of supporting of evidence or method they built upon.

But in the context of "morality" the moral believers tend to have the idea that people are held accountable regarding a moral obligation. IF they deem that morality is a construct of society (owned at the level of society) then do they suggest that members of that society ought to live upto that moral obligation?
For example, in a majority religious society where gay sex is deemed as immoral, should an unreligious gay member of that society accept that their physical love for their significant partner is an immoral act?

If the society had laws in place to uphold the morality of that society, then would they be morally justified in locking up a gay person for behaving immorally? If the consequences are so dire that someone loses their own freedom then shouldn't the law be based on some real determination rather than just the law maker's own perceptions and generalisations regarding the morality of a society?

Personally, I feel the individual's moral beliefs are what holds weight. The individual determines for themself what they perceive to be right and wrong. They then feel guilt themselves if they feel that they have acted immorally. A person does not feel guilt if they feel they have acted immorally according to someone else's perception and generalisation regarding the society within which they live.

If, for example a devout Catholic has sex with his wife and uses a condom because he doesn't want a baby. He will feel guilt even if having sex with your own wife with a condom is legal and isn't perceived by the majority of citizens to be immoral.

The guilt comes with the person's own moral beliefs, the moral beliefs of others within society has nothing to do with it.

(05-01-2016 05:09 PM)ClydeLee Wrote:  The generalizations some make may be way off though it isn't negating that process of individual melting into the masses & melting back into the individual so forth and so on.
I am an individual. I am not merely a NZer, I am not merely an atheist, I am not merely a Moral nihilist.
You could wonder, knowing that I am a kiwi, whether I am mad about rugby. But to know, you would have to ask me.

I don't care too much about what the "moral believers" think their particular meaning of morality is. I'm talking about morality via what it is though philosophy and sociology. Not though just some idealized religious meaning of the term. Idk of TDB is or not or what that angle was all about. I guess this can be why there is a cycle ongoing in many of these threads.

These types of examples of a society of people interpreting a moral code this way and thinking if others should obey it's order or not. That's what a particular perceived group think morality is and means. Though it doesn't generate what morality is or means all that effectively.

The pattern in these threads of some to think morality has to mean you're talking about some obligation you hold others to is interesting. That's just a portion of what morality can mean in these contexts. Not the whole context at all.

Individuals do determine it, technically, but to what degree is unknown. Situation & experiences of the world around them massively influence positively or negatively the way one will accept it. It boarders into questioning how strong the tide of freewill is or isn't to mark where one stands on their own vs their worlds influence.

(05-01-2016 07:42 PM)Stevil Wrote:  
(05-01-2016 07:04 PM)Banjo Wrote:  "I disagree. In this case these morals are not his own. They were given to him to follow my the catholic church."
They became his, regardless of where they came from, because he chose to believe them. If he didn't believe them then he wouldn't feel guilt.

There are probably lots of Catholics that don't believe this to be a sin and hence they don't feel guilt. But I'm sure there are some Catholics that do believe this to be a sin, they do the "crime" feel the guilt and ask for forgiveness at the confessional.

This really doesn't make much sense psychologically... because it doesn't matter only if they do believe it or not. There are tons of Catholics or formerly raised Catholics that don't believe things they do are morally wrong or bad at all. Though they feel that same guilt from these choices. That's really just a too thin layer of how one actually becomes mentally attached and bothered by the concepts of their life.

"Allow there to be a spectrum in all that you see" - Neil Degrasse Tyson
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
06-01-2016, 12:00 PM
RE: A Challenge for Moral Realists
(06-01-2016 08:49 AM)ClydeLee Wrote:  There are tons of Catholics or formerly raised Catholics that don't believe things they do are morally wrong or bad at all. Though they feel that same guilt from these choices.
Have you ever felt guilt for doing something that you don't think is wrong?
How can someone experience guilt from doing what they believe to be the right thing?

When I use a condom, I most certainly don't feel guilt.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
06-01-2016, 12:15 PM
RE: A Challenge for Moral Realists
(06-01-2016 12:00 PM)Stevil Wrote:  
(06-01-2016 08:49 AM)ClydeLee Wrote:  There are tons of Catholics or formerly raised Catholics that don't believe things they do are morally wrong or bad at all. Though they feel that same guilt from these choices.
Have you ever felt guilt for doing something that you don't think is wrong?
How can someone experience guilt from doing what they believe to be the right thing?

When I use a condom, I most certainly don't feel guilt.

Yes, because you're ingrained into thoughts far more than your own in a society by influences from all across people. That's a regular effect of human psychology.

"Allow there to be a spectrum in all that you see" - Neil Degrasse Tyson
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
06-01-2016, 12:28 PM
RE: A Challenge for Moral Realists
(06-01-2016 12:15 PM)ClydeLee Wrote:  
(06-01-2016 12:00 PM)Stevil Wrote:  Have you ever felt guilt for doing something that you don't think is wrong?
How can someone experience guilt from doing what they believe to be the right thing?

When I use a condom, I most certainly don't feel guilt.

Yes, because you're ingrained into thoughts far more than your own in a society by influences from all across people. That's a regular effect of human psychology.
I'm not sure what you mean by this comment.
I don't feel guilt simply because I don't have a belief that it is morally wrong to use a condom.
Guilt is consequence of personal moral beliefs.

Moral beliefs can be accepted or passed on from an authority. e.g. from the Church to the follower. But for it to be accepted it must be believed.
When I was at school they tried to get me to pull my socks up. I didn't believe there was anything wrong with not having my socks pulled up, I never felt guilt from it, even when teachers told me off. It was a rule of theirs, but I didn't accept that it was wrong for me not to do it.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
06-01-2016, 12:41 PM
RE: A Challenge for Moral Realists
(06-01-2016 12:28 PM)Stevil Wrote:  I'm not sure what you mean by this comment.
I don't feel guilt simply because I don't have a belief that it is morally wrong to use a condom.
Guilt is consequence of personal moral beliefs.

Sorry to interject, but it seems you would say you don't hold any personal moral beliefs either. Does that mean that you can't feel guilt? Or that you would feel guilt as a consequence of something other than personal moral beliefs?

"Tell me, muse, of the storyteller who has been thrust to the edge of the world, both an infant and an ancient, and through him reveal everyman." ---Homer the aged poet.

"In Him was life, and the life was the Light of men. The Light shines in the darkness, and the darkness did not comprehend it."
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
06-01-2016, 12:48 PM
RE: A Challenge for Moral Realists
(06-01-2016 12:28 PM)Stevil Wrote:  
(06-01-2016 12:15 PM)ClydeLee Wrote:  Yes, because you're ingrained into thoughts far more than your own in a society by influences from all across people. That's a regular effect of human psychology.
I'm not sure what you mean by this comment.
I don't feel guilt simply because I don't have a belief that it is morally wrong to use a condom.
Guilt is consequence of personal moral beliefs.

Moral beliefs can be accepted or passed on from an authority. e.g. from the Church to the follower. But for it to be accepted it must be believed.
When I was at school they tried to get me to pull my socks up. I didn't believe there was anything wrong with not having my socks pulled up, I never felt guilt from it, even when teachers told me off. It was a rule of theirs, but I didn't accept that it was wrong for me not to do it.

I'm not sure what your basis for this is. Guilt is not some consequence of personal moral beliefs. Guilt can be evaluated on leaps far beyond that. I don't know where these views of these concepts come from. Guilt can grow from all types of scenarios from failed motivations, expectations of others, social norms like morals, or anxiety. It's not merely just from ones own moral beliefs.

If it's merely your experienced past, perhaps that's more to you. Maybe you're better off. Not everyone can or does manage to quite know what causes a direct emotional reaction or what for certain is the position they're gonna hold in a scenario. People experience guilt for far more reasons than what it is they believe.

The entire point of moral belief needing to be "accepted" to be believed is confusing. I'm not at all aware of what you mean by accepting.

"Allow there to be a spectrum in all that you see" - Neil Degrasse Tyson
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
06-01-2016, 01:50 PM (This post was last modified: 06-01-2016 02:08 PM by Stevil.)
RE: A Challenge for Moral Realists
(06-01-2016 12:41 PM)Tomasia Wrote:  Sorry to interject, but it seems you would say you don't hold any personal moral beliefs either. Does that mean that you can't feel guilt? Or that you would feel guilt as a consequence of something other than personal moral beliefs?
I don't know when was the last time I've felt guilt for anything. It has been many years.
Guilt comes as a consequence from believing that you have done something morally wrong.

I accept that I make mistakes. I accept that I'm not perfect. Making mistakes doesn't mean that I am a bad person. Making mistakes is a part of life. You can't expect to be perfect.

I think being a parent is a great learning experience on this. No-one really knows the best way to parent their children. I've done things as a parent that seemed like a decent approach at the time, but then later you work out it isn't the best approach. So you adapt and try something else. A parent can worry about whether their approach may affect their kids in certain ways, how it may affect their children. For example, with my eldest child I was too protective with her. When I put her on roller blades at 4yrs, I used to hold her hand, make sure she wouldn't fall over. I used to make sure she was safe. But now I see that she is scared to take some risks and it holds her back from being adventurous. Now I have been trying hard to push her to get here to come out of her comfort zone. It is an effort and maybe it is because I was too protective earlier. IDK. But parenting isn't an exact science. You try things and learn by your mistakes, you often wander into further mistakes, but you learn and move on. If you take it upon yourself to blame yourself, to feel like you are a bad person or bad parent then you will set yourself up to fail. You will be racked with guilt, you will be scared to try things. You will then need to seek guidance. You will become dependent on what the "experts" tell you. You will be too scared to try things yourself, too scared to think for yourself.

I imagine this is what it may be like to be an adult theist. They have been nurtured by religious organisations to feel guilt for almost everything. To be scared to trust themselves. Hence they give themselves over completely to the authority of the "church". They feel the need to beg forgiveness from their beloved and trusted church for making "mistakes". They feel the need to just do what the church tells them so that they can avoid making "mistakes", avoid being a bad person or atone for their "sins".

I want my kids to learn that it is OK to make mistakes, that there is nothing to feel guilty about, that mistakes are a natural part of live. We trying things, we assess the outcome, we adjust or change accordingly. "mistakes" aren't things to be avoided, they are instead learning opportunities.

It's about perspective on life, it's about accepting yourself and moving forward rather than regretting past events. Nothing is ever morally wrong, you don't have any moral obligations, other people don't need to live according to anyone's moral standards. People believe all sorts of things, you are always going to break someone's moral code. You can't live life trying to please everyone else. Don't worry if others are disappointed. Live your own life for you. Live and learn.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Stevil's post
06-01-2016, 02:02 PM
RE: A Challenge for Moral Realists
(06-01-2016 12:48 PM)ClydeLee Wrote:  Guilt can grow from all types of scenarios
Guilt is a consequence from you believing that you have not done the right thing.
It is a way for you to punish yourself.

(06-01-2016 12:48 PM)ClydeLee Wrote:  from failed motivations,
Perhaps you feel that you need to lose weight, but then you end up eating a whole bag of biscuits. You feel that you gave in to temptation, you let yourself down, you believe you did the wrong thing. You feel guilt.

(06-01-2016 12:48 PM)ClydeLee Wrote:  expectations of others
You feel that you have a moral obligation to make others happy, especially those that you care about. You do something to disappoint them, you realise that your actions have let them down, you believe you have done the wrong thing. You punish yourself by feeling guilt.

(06-01-2016 12:48 PM)ClydeLee Wrote:  social norms
You feel you have an obligation to obey social norms. You don't live upto those social norms, you feel you have done the wrong thing, you punish yourself with guilt.

(06-01-2016 12:48 PM)ClydeLee Wrote:  It's not merely just from ones own moral beliefs.
When have you ever felt guilty about something that you believe was the right thing to do?


(06-01-2016 12:48 PM)ClydeLee Wrote:  The entire point of moral belief needing to be "accepted" to be believed is confusing. I'm not at all aware of what you mean by accepting.
I was discussing in the context of a religious organisation.
There is the perception that people feel guilt for going against the "morals" of their church. But not every person that belongs to a religious organisation believes everything their church tells them. If the church tells a person that it is immoral to have sex without trying to make a baby, this doesn't mean that all church goers believe this to be true. Many church goes can still use a condom and not feel that it is immoral, hence not feel guilt. They haven't accepted the church's position, hence they don't take this to be their own belief. They do not believe that it is immoral to have sex using a condom.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
06-01-2016, 02:20 PM
RE: A Challenge for Moral Realists
(06-01-2016 02:02 PM)Stevil Wrote:  
(06-01-2016 12:48 PM)ClydeLee Wrote:  Guilt can grow from all types of scenarios
Guilt is a consequence from you believing that you have not done the right thing.
It is a way for you to punish yourself.

(06-01-2016 12:48 PM)ClydeLee Wrote:  from failed motivations,
Perhaps you feel that you need to lose weight, but then you end up eating a whole bag of biscuits. You feel that you gave in to temptation, you let yourself down, you believe you did the wrong thing. You feel guilt.

(06-01-2016 12:48 PM)ClydeLee Wrote:  expectations of others
You feel that you have a moral obligation to make others happy, especially those that you care about. You do something to disappoint them, you realise that your actions have let them down, you believe you have done the wrong thing. You punish yourself by feeling guilt.

(06-01-2016 12:48 PM)ClydeLee Wrote:  social norms
You feel you have an obligation to obey social norms. You don't live upto those social norms, you feel you have done the wrong thing, you punish yourself with guilt.

(06-01-2016 12:48 PM)ClydeLee Wrote:  It's not merely just from ones own moral beliefs.
When have you ever felt guilty about something that you believe was the right thing to do?


(06-01-2016 12:48 PM)ClydeLee Wrote:  The entire point of moral belief needing to be "accepted" to be believed is confusing. I'm not at all aware of what you mean by accepting.
I was discussing in the context of a religious organisation.
There is the perception that people feel guilt for going against the "morals" of their church. But not every person that belongs to a religious organisation believes everything their church tells them. If the church tells a person that it is immoral to have sex without trying to make a baby, this doesn't mean that all church goers believe this to be true. Many church goes can still use a condom and not feel that it is immoral, hence not feel guilt. They haven't accepted the church's position, hence they don't take this to be their own belief. They do not believe that it is immoral to have sex using a condom.

It's not tied to such strong absolutes. This is the point I don't get in some conversations on this. It's not if one's done the "right" thing. Or the Moral good thing. Just as the "moral" thing itself isn't the "obligated" action only. That is PART of what they are & can be what they are.

This absolute break down doesn't reflect humans actual interaction and the layers that exist within these concepts socially. Especially not the layers of them on other grounds.

Anyone can feel guilty from the slightest of things they don't have anything to do with any concept of "right" or "wrong" which is why that is just a limiting scope that is out of the realm. I've felt guilty over taking an orange instead of one of the two bananas sitting there, it's nothing wrong about it. I've felt guilty about being in a building while 7 people were murdered in the building next door. There's nothing reflective of wrongness but by contemplating the scenarios and situations.

Guilt can also itself not be only bad. It can be a motivator for some people. I've had a philosophy teacher with a view that it was the strongest central motivator for making us human. I'm not along that lines in viewing it but it's a concept with more depth than I think you keep wanting to discuss it as. That same goes for morals as well which is the point of this going to that step. It can be something more than the generic perceived religious notion of moral good & evil.

"Allow there to be a spectrum in all that you see" - Neil Degrasse Tyson
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes ClydeLee's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: