Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free

Is modern culture destroying moral values ? Watch

    • Community Assistant
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    Let's all be Amish.
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    They were saying this in the 1500s
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    Most of your factual claims are dead wrong:

    (Original post by Minju)
    Teenage pregnancies
    ...were higher 60 years ago.

    kids stabbing each others etc....
    Violent crime has been dropping for 20 years

    Modern lifestyle ( drinking, smoking, taking weed) has had an adverse affect on human behaviour in my opinion.
    ...smoking rates have been declining for a long time. They were much higher a generation or two ago.

    Opportunities for women are much better than 60 years ago. My grandmother, for example, was stopped from studying maths at university because her father didn't want her moving away. The only careers available for smart women offered at school were secretarial work or teaching.

    People have always complained about the new generation, and how times were much better in the past:

    Our sires' age was worse than our grandsires'. We, their sons, are more
    worthless than they; so in our turn we shall give the world a progeny yet more
    corrupt.
    - Horace, 20 BC.

    http://mentalfloss.com/article/52209...ing-everything
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Zakirkhan)
    Yes each generations is getting worst.:mad:
    Especially the grammar...
    Online

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Zorgotron)
    Yes, modern culture is destroying moral values and any semblance of a functioning society. Modernity shows that change is not always better and new values are not necessarily superior to the old ones. As OP said, single-parenthood is epidemic, drug and alcohol use is unprecedented, there is absolutely no respect for authority and what's happening is a complete meltdown of moral values.

    People try to show that modern society is more tolerant than it used to be, but again, this isn't true - the witch hunt is still going strong, it's just that the victims are now the oppressors and the oppressors are now the victims. People show, how we've become tolerant of sexual minorities, yet do not mention how intolerant we've become of those who do not agree with liberal sexual values. Liberals watch with glee as conservatives are vilified and demonized as backwards and supposedly bigoted. There is immense ideological pressure to agree with modern liberal values and any sort of dissent is classified as xenophobia, racism, homophobia, bigotry or whatever.

    Drug and alcohol use is unprecedented. There is nothing more disgusting to see a drunk girl - a picture that would have been unimaginable in more refined past eras. Binge drinking was a phenomena associated with the underclass, to whom drunkenness was the only escape from poverty - yet now, binge drinking is no the de facto recreation of everybody, both the poor, the middle and the rich. These days, people will give you strange looks if you do not dull your senses with alcohol and weed.

    Britain was very active in selling opium to China grown in India and precipitated the opium wars when China tried to stop the trade because some many people became addicts and so much money had left China.

    Families have completely been disintegrated. Single-parenthood is epidemic and the government is doing all it can to damage the traditional family even more, by rewarding sexual indulgence and by perverting the marital institution by legalizing gay marriage - this sends the implicit message that marriage exists only for the satisfaction of your carnal desires, not for unity, growth and sustainability or bonds deeper than mere sexual desire. The complete absence of any sort of sexual morality has lead to a major increase of STD-s, illegitimate children, broken families and has facilitated a culture completely obsessed with instant gratification.

    Deviant behavior and poor lifestyle choices are not only encouraged by the current system, but actually rewarded. Practice has shown that if you have a stable relationship with a child on the way and you need larger housing - then the local council will send you right to the bottom of the list. However, if you are a single mother who has 5 different children with 5 different men - the the local council will reward you with a mansion. The implicit message is clear - live a carefree life full of sexual indulgence and irresponsibility and you'll be rewarded with free money in the form of benefits and large housing, complements of the tax payer.

    Educational standards have also largely decreased. We spend more on education than ever before and the results are horrifying. With ever decreasing standards, this problem will become even more prevalent.

    All this is topped with low fertility where we have to bring in third world immigrants who would have children for us. The average white european is more likely to not have children, more likely to divorce, more likely to abort their pregnancies and more likely to have less children than the third world immigrant counterparts. This is the result of rapid individualism, where children are seen as an impediment to personal happiness rather than something intrinsically valuable of its own.

    Modern culture is destroying Europe. Darwinian selection, however, is punishing us accordingly - the conservatives and the religious will simply outbreed the decadent liberals and that will be the end of it. The future looks grim and Eurabia is on the horizon.
    You have no knowledge of history.

    Otherwise you would know alcohol abuse has a long history dating back to the 1736 Gin Act that tried to control the consumption of gin which was causing huge social problems. Drug use was widespread in the last 300 years, opium and cocaine were popular in many patent medicines and tonics such as coca cola that also contained alcohol and a cheap and handy way for addicts to get their fix.

    Likewise, marriage has always been a volatile institution with many couples not being married or wives being deserted by their husbands rather than going through the expensive business of divorce. Illegitimacy was widespread as cursory glance of contemporary literature would testify.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by #Ridwan)
    You claimed that single parenthood was not on the rise and that families are not being disintegrated. This is incorrect.
    Source that.

    (Original post by #Ridwan)
    They are prioritised. If you have children you jump to the top of the social housing queue.
    And that.

    (Original post by Zorgotron)
    There isn't much to respond here and you could have saved your time by simply quoting my entire post and disagreeing with it than quoting in in part and disagreeing in part.
    Way to miss the point.

    Fact of the matter is that i'm not going to waste my time digging up studies and referencing data for some guy on the internet.
    Then why the hell are you in a debate thread if you aren't willing to back up your arguments?

    While I probably exaggerated some of it, it's equally clear that you're deluded if you think my post is completely wrong.

    All you have to do is go into poverty zones or to the streets at friday nights to see our enlightened civilization.
    I live in the middle of one half the year around. I also spend a fair amount of time working with these people you're busily dehumanising, and I've noticed that they're mostly wonderful, friendly people.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Llamageddon)
    They were saying this in the 1500s
    Longer than that, actually. “Our youth now love luxury. They have bad manners, contempt for authority; they show disrespect for their elders and love chatter in place of exercise; they no longer rise when elders enter the room; they contradict their parents, chatter before company; gobble up their food and tyrannize their teachers.” - Socrates, some time in the 5th century BC.
    Offline

    6
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by BlueSam3)
    Then why the hell are you in a debate thread if you aren't willing to back up your arguments?
    I'm simply giving a personal account. This has been my experience and this is what I've come to know, especially when asking the elderly to compare how life used to be and how it is now. It's from the books I've read and other contemporary social commentary's I've had the pleasure of reading. Keep in mind, I'm not talking about technology and convenience, I'm talking about the moral degeneracy that plagues us.

    Sourcing on an online forum is pointless, because these aren't academic articles that need thorough citation. You can find a study/article to support anything. Even if I do cite my sources, I would also have to read it and make sure that it's solid. This takes an enormous amount of time that no reasonable person can spend on an online student forum. You standard of acceptable argumentation is unrealistic and is a convenient way to dismiss opposing views and interpretations of modernity.

    If I do cite my sources, spend hours on it, what's gonna happen is that you'll dismiss it with some cliche critique, such as ''Sample size is too small'', ''study was done by people on the right, so not trustworthy'' etc. It simply isn't worth the time.

    (Original post by BlueSam3)
    I live in the middle of one half the year around. I also spend a fair amount of time working with these people you're busily dehumanising, and I've noticed that they're mostly wonderful, friendly people.
    So you expect others to source every single one of their claims, whereas you can happily resort to personal anecdotes? Give me a break.

    If you have a problem with my post, then at best you can say that my post is untrustworthy, since I haven't linked every one of my sentences and letters with studies and reports. Yet you didn't say that, you actively disagreed and took the opposite stance - and you did so without substance, without sourcing anything yourself.
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by BlueSam3)
    Longer than that, actually. “Our youth now love luxury. They have bad manners, contempt for authority; they show disrespect for their elders and love chatter in place of exercise; they no longer rise when elders enter the room; they contradict their parents, chatter before company; gobble up their food and tyrannize their teachers.” - Socrates, some time in the 5th century BC.
    Reckon cave men were saying it?
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Llamageddon)
    Reckon cave men were saying it?
    Almost certainly. That's just the earliest written one that I'm aware of.

    (Original post by Zorgotron)
    I'm simply giving a personal account. This has been my experience and this is what I've come to know, especially when asking the elderly to compare how life used to be and how it is now. It's from the books I've read and other contemporary social commentary's I've had the pleasure of reading. Keep in mind, I'm not talking about technology and convenience, I'm talking about the moral degeneracy that plagues us.

    Sourcing on an online forum is pointless, because these aren't academic articles that need thorough citation. You can find a study/article to support anything. Even if I do cite my sources, I would also have to read it and make sure that it's solid. This takes an enormous amount of time that no reasonable person can spend on an online student forum. You standard of acceptable argumentation is unrealistic and is a convenient way to dismiss opposing views and interpretations of modernity.

    If I do cite my sources, spend hours on it, what's gonna happen is that you'll dismiss it with some cliche critique, such as ''Sample size is too small'', ''study was done by people on the right, so not trustworthy'' etc. It simply isn't worth the time.
    So you don't actually have an argument, good to know.

    So you expect others to source every single one of their claims, whereas you can happily resort to personal anecdotes? Give me a break.

    If you have a problem with my post, then at best you can say that my post is untrustworthy, since I haven't linked every one of my sentences and letters with studies and reports. Yet you didn't say that, you actively disagreed and took the opposite stance - and you did so without substance, without sourcing anything yourself.
    No I haven't. I've dismissed your claims - without evidence - because they were made without evidence.
    Offline

    6
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by BlueSam3)
    No I haven't. I've dismissed your claims - without evidence - because they were made without evidence.
    You didn't dismiss anything - you blatantly addressed their truth value by virtue of calling them false, which implies that the opposite of my claims is factually correct.

    Disagreeing is not the same thing as dismissing. Calling a claim false is also not the same thing as dismissing. For example, by disagreeing with my claim about increase in teenage pregnancy, you've taken a stance that teenage pregnancy is not increasing. This is something that needs to be substantiated along with everything else that's supposedly false

    Dismissal would involve not taking any position other than - ''your claim cannot be verified so I can't comment on it.'' Besides, you yourself use personal anecdotes to argue your points as well. I might as well quote a fellow user about the pedantry in this forum about ''evidence'':

    (Original post by #Ridwan)
    Also, this constant demand for "evidence" every time someone expresses an opinion on here is ridiculous. This is not a journal, this is an informal debating forum and if you disagree with my opinion then state why mine is wrong and present your own opinion. All newspaper opinion articles in papers ranging from the Guardian to the Sun to the Times to the Telegraph contain unsubstantiated opinion, stop demanding evidence for people's opinions, it's totally impractical and serves no purpose other than to shut down debate. If you want opinions backed by evidence then go read a social science journal. This isn't one.
    You can have the last word.
    Offline

    5
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Zorgotron)
    I'm simply giving a personal account. This has been my experience and this is what I've come to know, especially when asking the elderly to compare how life used to be and how it is now. It's from the books I've read and other contemporary social commentary's I've had the pleasure of reading. Keep in mind, I'm not talking about technology and convenience, I'm talking about the moral degeneracy that plagues us.

    Sourcing on an online forum is pointless, because these aren't academic articles that need thorough citation. You can find a study/article to support anything. Even if I do cite my sources, I would also have to read it and make sure that it's solid. This takes an enormous amount of time that no reasonable person can spend on an online student forum. You standard of acceptable argumentation is unrealistic and is a convenient way to dismiss opposing views and interpretations of modernity.

    If I do cite my sources, spend hours on it, what's gonna happen is that you'll dismiss it with some cliche critique, such as ''Sample size is too small'', ''study was done by people on the right, so not trustworthy'' etc. It simply isn't worth the time.

    So you expect others to source every single one of their claims, whereas you can happily resort to personal anecdotes? Give me a break.

    If you have a problem with my post, then at best you can say that my post is untrustworthy, since I haven't linked every one of my sentences and letters with studies and reports. Yet you didn't say that, you actively disagreed and took the opposite stance - and you did so without substance, without sourcing anything yourself.
    Well said.

    The lefties on TSR have now realised that they can shut down debates with those who disagree with them by demanding a source for absolutely everything. Make any statement and they will refuse to debate with you unless you can produce robust sources. FFS this is TSR, not an academic journal. BlueSam even wanted me to provide a source that single parenthood is on the rise. Damn, has this guy ever left the house? Why does a clear societal trend that everyone who has friends or family knows is true require a source? This is all getting very tiresome and will shortly lead to the death of the debate and current affairs forum if it continues.
    Offline

    5
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Zorgotron)
    You can have the last word.
    Only just noticed this - thanks.

    Worth noting that I don't oppose the use of sources - if you can provide them then great - but don't use the lack of sources to shut down all debate. A far better approach, if you disagree with an opinion expressed on here, is to find a source of your own that contradicts my view - don't just demand a source for obvious societal trends. It's childish and not conducive to healthy debate.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Legit. Nowadays it's 100% about looks.

    Look at the recent Jeremy Meeks case, the guy was a thug yet people were requesting for him to be pardoned and forgiven because he looks like a male model.

    In the past under the leadership of strong men like Juluis Caesar, Winston Churchill, Napoleon etc people's virtues, actions and productivity counted for more. Nowadays you just need to look good and you can get away with murder [or be rich but the bourgeois have always had special privileges].
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    Depends on what's being talked about. In all honesty morals are subjective and down to the individuals beliefs of what is right and wrong. Some may consider homosexuality, abortions and gay marriages immoral and others may not. On a more general and broad point, you've used the word "destroy" but in some cases it may be for the better and it adapts and welcomes societies change in moral attitudes. There are so many examples such as allows same sex couples to get married legally. Modern culture is subjective to and depends on where you live. I do agree with the points you've raised in relation to attitudes towards parents and teachers and also certain recreational activities. On the whole though, I believe to some extent that modern culture and acceptance of behaviour which would be considered immoral in the past has some what damaged and had an influence in "destroying" morals. But we must remember morals are down to the individuals beliefs and this is affected by many factors.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Zorgotron)
    You didn't dismiss anything - you blatantly addressed their truth value by virtue of calling them false, which implies that the opposite of my claims is factually correct.

    Disagreeing is not the same thing as dismissing. Calling a claim false is also not the same thing as dismissing. For example, by disagreeing with my claim about increase in teenage pregnancy, you've taken a stance that teenage pregnancy is not increasing. This is something that needs to be substantiated along with everything else that's supposedly false

    Dismissal would involve not taking any position other than - ''your claim cannot be verified so I can't comment on it.''
    No, I very specifically asserted the null hypothesis: that there is no significant trend. In several of these cases, there is, in fact, a trend in the other direction, but that's not what I'm asserting. I am asserting, until you produce evidence to the contrary, that there is no significant trend. Later on, I might well start asserting other things, and when I do, I'll provide evidence.

    Besides, you yourself use personal anecdotes to argue your points as well. I might as well quote a fellow user about the pedantry in this forum about ''evidence'':



    You can have the last word.
    Yeah, no. That doesn't work. You don't get to get away with posting blatant lies left, right and centre and whine your way out of producing evidence. Produce evidence for your claims, or they remain bull****. You have near-instant, very low effort access to the single largest repository of information on these (and most other) topics, so you have absolutely no excuse for not producing some.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Decline in overall religious practices in families across the west seems to be directly linked to the increase in moral values.
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    Oh yeah, drinking and smoking. Such a modern innovation.

    And women, brain dead whores the lot of them!
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    Back in the good old moral days it was a lot easier to be:

    - a wife beater

    - a paedophile

    - a racist
    • Offline

      0
      Moral values continually shift, they are never in stone nor have they ever been.

      So yes Modern Culture is detroying Moral Values and creating new ones in it's place, in generations to come no doubt "modern culture" will destroy those values and create new ones, and someone like you will be equally as likely to moan about it.
     
     
     
  1. See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  2. Poll
    Did TEF Bronze Award affect your UCAS choices?
  3. See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  4. The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

    Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

    Quick reply
    Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.