Poll: Do you believe in morality?

[Firepowered]

Do you believe in the existence of personal or cultural values, codes of conduct or social mores that make it possible to people to distinguish between right and wrong in the human society?
If so, do universal definitions of "right" and "wrong" exist, or is ethics a more subjective and personal thing?

 

[Flames66]

I live by my own moral code. It differs in some way from other peoples but is similar in others.

 

[manaman]

You going to get a crap ton of "enlightened" morality is only subjective and does not exist statements.

Really morality is determined by the society you live in, and most center around certain specific things. Protections for people and their property. Seems nobody in the world likes a thief unless they are stealing from some other people, and nobody likes a killer unless they are killing some other people.

 

[The Maddest March Hare]

Morality exists, but it is a personal thing that will be different for everyone. Society has a set of general rules for morality that we have to live by, but not everyone will fully agree with them. Just look at the Escapists stance on political correctness, that's an imposed moral code that most of us will happily call bullshit on.

The only other time a large group of people willingly follow an identical moral code is religion. Beyond that, there may be a lot of overlaps in what is right and wrong in our eyes compared to someone else's, but we we will rarely have an identical moral code.

 

[Tharwen]

I believe that there is absolutely no binding, universal definition of right or wrong (or of anything, for that matter), but that we can define it using the resources our minds give us the opportunity to use. Human minds are unique in the universe, in that they can assign importance to certain parts of it. There is no reason why we shouldn't do that.

 

[Kollega]

Yes, i believe that there are universally good things (such as helping those in need) and universally bad things (such as torturing people for fun). What a shocking, profound revelation.

But... i think i have voted wrong in the poll. On one hand i believe that some things are universally good or bad. On the other hand, i agree that there may and should be differences (stance on official law, for example). There are certainly some gray areas in which everybody decides for themselves.

***

[HEADING=2]Wave of smug nihilistic jerks incoming in 3... 2... 1...[/HEADING]

 

[Captain Pancake]

I believe that everybody should have morals, but that those morals are completely subjective. There are some things that there is no discussion on, like murder. But for smaller things like petty theft, it depends on the situation. Some people believe that when you steal a loaf of bread from the supermarket nobody in the immediate area is being affected, but it has a domino effect. Others find that if a hard line wasn't maintained on the topic, then more would do it and the ripple would become a wave of debt. But morally, it depends on who steals the loaf, a starving mother with three children to feed and no money, or a cocky teenager who believes he's doing it "for the principle"?

 

[Rarhnor]

I actually don't. Right and Wrong differs from individuals. I might think my neighbour's dog is annoying and that it should be taken away. My neighbour however, may think it's wrong because he loves his dog the way it is...

So short answer: No

 

[Agayek]

I would posit that there is in fact a definitive morality (in terms of defining "right" and "wrong") for the human species, and they come almost entirely from a biological/evolutionary source. As we evolved, generally the humans that cooperated and refrained from putting the self above the whole survived better than those who focused solely on the self. This gave rise to the basics of morality, which every culture and society I've ever heard of shares (being that murder, theft, etc committed against a member of the society is wrong).

There are certainly more... refined, for lack of a better word, aspects of morality that vary by culture, but the core principles are universal throughout (successful) human history. It's a biological fact that the average human is predisposed to be repulsed by the concept of murder, torture, and the like.

And before anyone raises the point, sociopaths and the like are simply another evolutionary path of the human mind. It came about because if there is a small minority of people who abuse the trust of the rest, they can successfully come out ahead. However, if the whole behaves in that fashion, it renders their most powerful, and necessary, tools null and void.

Edit: On a side note, none of this applies to any other sentient species. They will have followed an entirely separate evolutionary path, and thus cannot be expected to have the same biological/cultural inhibitions. I guess, in a way, there is no real "universal" morality that applies to all beings, in all places, and at all times, but there almost certainly is within the human species.

 

[MGlBlaze]

I don't think there is a true universal idea of 'right' and 'wrong'. It all depends on person to person usually. How a person's morals work can have an even greater variance.

I just do what I think is right. That said, though, I have a strong measure of contempt for people who think "It must be right/wrong because everyone else says it is" or "It must be right/wrong because the law says so". The former is only really a problem when ignorance comes into play, the latter because, while laws are useful tools to maintain order, there are many cases where they are anything but just.

Enough of my gushing, though.

 

[CognitiveDissonance]

Yes, i believe that there are universally good things (such as helping those in need) and universally bad things (such as torturing people for fun). What a shocking, profound revelation.

[HEADING=2]Wave of smug nihilistic jerks incoming in 3... 2... 1...[/HEADING]

Well, kid. Clearly you haven't given this any thought whatsoever. Allow me to educate you in my enlightened ways. Just kidding, I'm not really /that/ much of a smug nihilistic jerk.

Anyhow, I still have to disagree. If they were universal they would have to apply to serial killers, rapists, thieves and lawyers. And in regards to helping those in need, even people who may be considered "good" by some, would be opposed to charity. They may be opposed either by appealing to a naturalistic ethic, in that they are circumventing natural selection. Or they may be basing their position on the economic disturbances that charity can cause.

Either way, and regardless of how sound their reasoning may be, there is such a diverse range of ethics all over the world, I guarantee that at least 1 person, at some stage, will have gone against anything ethical system that you can think to universalise.

 

[Layz92]

I say there is a basic set of universal morals that everyone understands. Bringing misery to someones life (murder, theft, manipulation etc) that obviously is wrong. Not dragging others down or making their lives brighter is obviously the moral thing to do.

 

[cerebus23]

I think that when we were hunter gathers/pastorialists and other more tribal forms of existence that we fell naturally into the basic laws of ecology. Since back then you lived in as balance as you could with nature of you ruined the area you lived in. Tribal peoples then probably had basic laws against thing like murder and theft.

As we moved from the old ways into agricultural existence, we broke each and every one of the laws of ecology and we started creating laws and religions that would shape and mold our "moral" outlooks into something that could work for our new ways of living.

I doubt sociopaths could have existed very well under a tribal system, they probably would have not gotten very far at all in such a close knit bonded community that has to work together to survive period.

So i think there are certain basic and fundamental laws of nature that were the earliest morals for early humans. So in a way i do think there are universal truths that are part of nature, part of living period. Most animal species follow basic laws of nature, very few species kill for sport or pleasure and do not over hunt or graze their living areas before moving on, so they do not exhaust the food chain. They do not attack for no reason at all or commit cold blooded murder in other words.

Course there are exceptions like everything house cats kill for pure pleasure and given enough freedom they can decimate bird populations, killer whales sometimes play with prey that they have no real intention of eating, been a few incidents of "psychotic" primates murdering others in their tribes, and even eating family members. Probably many other exceptions to the basic rules and other abberations. But the vast majority of creatures do follow the basic laws.

 

[tsb247]

Morailty is not relative.

The Kantian model for morailty tends to point us in that direction.

 

[Marter]

Morality exists, and it differs from person to person.

 

[RQuote]

Morality? Bah, humbug!

 

[Irony's Acolyte]

Well morality exists, thats for sure. It just differs from person to person. Not believing in morality is like how my friend doesn't believe in religion. Yes those are the exact words he used. I would classify him as an apathetic atheist, but he probably wouldn't be able to tell the difference (he's not that much of an intellectual).
I don't believe in any sort of universal "right" or "wrong". "Right" and "wrong" (at least in the moral sense) are created entirely by each person. I believe that right and wrong depend entirely upon the situation and the viewpoint of each person involved in the decision. Sometimes things are consider wrong while other times they are considered justified (at least by some people). Thats not to say I don't generally follow certain rules. Like I don't really think that just randomly killing someone is right. It's not universally wrong, but in my opinion its never really right. Of course all this is just my opinion as an 18 year old, white, middle-class male. I could be horribly wrong with all this.

[HEADING=2]Wave of smug nihilistic jerks incoming in 3... 2... 1...[/HEADING]

*Looks around* I don't know what you're talking about. I don't see any smug nihilistic jerks around.

 

[child of lileth]

I think everyone has their own ideas of what's right and wrong in their lives. I also think some people like to pretend there's a universal right thing to do, but that right thing doesn't always hold up in all situations.

 

[Jedoro]

I believe that right and wrong depend mostly on the motivations and reasons behind an act, that few actions are inherently "good" or "evil."