The Student Room Group
Uni students - Complete our survey >>
Uni students - Complete our survey >>
Uni students - Complete our survey >>

This discussion is now closed.

Check out other Related discussions

There is no such thing as right and wrong. Morality is entirely fabricated.

There is no such thing as objective good or evil, and no action is intrinsically right or wrong. Good and evil are completely subjective, and for the most part what we consider good or evil is just a reflection of social attitudes at the current time. For example, pedophilia was accepted in Greek times (men would have relations with teenage boys below the age of 16), but now its considered completely abhorrent.

Discuss, rebutt, support, etc

Scroll to see replies

Of course it should be noted that the fact that things considered unacceptable today were acceptable in ancient times does not mean there's no such thing as objective morality. The people in ancient times might simply have been wrong. Or we are.

Just some food for thought.
I believe right and wrong depends on how it affects people around you,
if your actions will hurt someone then that's wrong,
if it will make someone happy then chances are you are probably doing the right thing.
Original post by Ishea16
I believe right and wrong depends on how it affects people around you,
if your actions will hurt someone then that's wrong,
if it will make someone happy then chances are you are probably doing the right thing.


Exactly! PRSOM!!
Original post by Gucci Mane.
There is no such thing as objective good or evil, and no action is intrinsically right or wrong. Good and evil are completely subjective, and for the most part what we consider good or evil is just a reflection of social attitudes at the current time. For example, pedophilia was accepted in Greek times (men would have relations with teenage boys below the age of 16), but now its considered completely abhorrent.

Discuss, rebutt, support, etc


Welcome to Nihilism
Original post by Ishea16
I believe right and wrong depends on how it affects people around you,
if your actions will hurt someone then that's wrong,
if it will make someone happy then chances are you are probably doing the right thing.


Thats the answer OP!

Posted from TSR Mobile
Reply 6
Avatar for john2054
john2054
6
Deontology (the princles of right and wrong) versus ultilitarianism. I've just done an hour on it for an online nursing certificate i'm reading! They both have their place, such as i try to make the effort to tell the truth, and consider that i do it a lot more than most people. But I would tell lies, if it meant preventing harm to myself or others!
Reply 7
Avatar for Gucci Mane.
Gucci Mane.
OP
1
Original post by Ishea16
I believe right and wrong depends on how it affects people around you,
if your actions will hurt someone then that's wrong,
if it will make someone happy then chances are you are probably doing the right thing.


What if "hurting" someone else benefits you or your friends/family, or what if you have to "hurt" someone to prevent someone else from hurting themselves (eg. reporting your kid's friend to the police because you are worried they are going to get your kid in trouble)?
Yeah.
Welcome to Nihilism
Original post by Formless
Welcome to Nihilism


^ Damn you beat me!
Original post by Gucci Mane.
What if "hurting" someone else benefits you or your friends/family, or what if you have to "hurt" someone to prevent someone else from hurting themselves (eg. reporting your kid's friend to the police because you are worried they are going to get your kid in trouble)?


hurting someone for personal gain is selfish tbh but it really depends on the situation
I would look for a way in between in this situation so I would talk to my child and try to explain or I would talk to their friends parents, I wouldnt take it straight to the police...
as long as what you are doing has good intentions for others but still might 'hurt' someone then it wouldnt be a case of 'right' and 'wrong' anymore
it would be more personal to the individual and their morales and priorities I guess.
Tbh, I don't think Hitlers the best philosopher to be looking at :curious:
Reply 13
Avatar for RobML
RobML
6
Original post by Ishea16
I believe right and wrong depends on how it affects people around you,
if your actions will hurt someone then that's wrong,
if it will make someone happy then chances are you are probably doing the right thing.


Quite an empty argument. Why is hurting people wrong?
Original post by RobML
Quite an empty argument. Why is hurting people wrong?

Maybe because you would not want someone hurting you or someone close to you so the feeling of empathy encourages you to believe hurting others is 'wrong'.
Reply 15
Avatar for RobML
RobML
6
Original post by Ishea16
Maybe because you would not want someone hurting you or someone close to you so the feeling of empathy encourages you to believe hurting others is 'wrong'.


If morality is nothing but a personal belief then surely you're agreeing with OP?
Original post by RobML
If morality is nothing but a personal belief then surely you're agreeing with OP?

i dont see how you came to that conclusion as i never disagreed with OP
i was merely pointing out my opinion, i said I 'believe', this is my way of deciding
between right and wrong
there are things that every one agrees on
e.g stealing of an innocent is wrong, all would agree thats wrong as no one would want someone else stealing from them
and thats why 1 person doesnt decide the law, the law is basically opinions of people living at the time at that place
and the law is the minimum benchmark that shows right and wrong
and these morality come from the people so it is personal but its not personal to a single person if most other people agree with it
some people use religion to decide between right and wrong and that would be personal
(edited 8 years ago)
Reply 17
Avatar for RobML
RobML
6
Original post by Ishea16
i dont see how you came to that conclusion as i never disagreed with OP
i was merely pointing out my opinion, i said I 'believe', this is my way of deciding
between right and wrong
there are things that every one agrees on
e.g stealing of an innocent is wrong, all would agree thats wrong as no one would want someone else stealing from them
and thats why 1 person doesnt decide the law, the law is basically opinions of people living at the time at that place
and the law is the minimum benchmark that shows right and wrong
and these morality come from the people so it is personal but its not personal to a single person if most other people agree with it
some people use religion to decide between right and wrong and that would be personal


Oh sorry; I thought you were arguing for the notion of objective morality.
Btw I think the term you're looking for is intersubjective https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intersubjectivity
Original post by RobML
Oh sorry; I thought you were arguing for the notion of objective morality.
Btw I think the term you're looking for is intersubjective https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intersubjectivity


Yh I think this is the word lol
thanks:smile:
Original post by Gucci Mane.
There is no such thing as objective good or evil, and no action is intrinsically right or wrong. Good and evil are completely subjective, and for the most part what we consider good or evil is just a reflection of social attitudes at the current time. For example, pedophilia was accepted in Greek times (men would have relations with teenage boys below the age of 16), but now its considered completely abhorrent.

Discuss, rebutt, support, etc


Descriptive relativism (a position that's been heavily criticised) does not necessarily entail moral nihilism. Your conclusion that "there is no right or wrong" simply does not follow from the simplistic argument you've presented.

Related discussions

Latest

Trending

Trending

Articles for you