Join TSR now to have your say on this topicSign up now
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by assured)
    What if he deems her feelings as inconsequential?

    I see no wrong at all in suicide.

    It doesn't matter.

    I don't think Hitler cared too much about jews' feelings, but still what he did is considered immoral.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Floalley)
    I've never felt the need to rid myself of hypocrisy as it hasn't really effected it or the lives of the people around me in a negative way.
    Do you not think the "moral" way, whichever it may be, is a way you should live by? If not, what does moral even mean to you?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Everyone's ethics are extensive so I doubt my list will cover mine but still, here's some:
    - "Be kind for everyone you meet is fighting a hard battle".

    - I have a lot of piercings and dyed hair etc. and I know that I am judged on that but I still have respect for people. I like to show them that not all "kids these days" are horrid: I offer my seat to old ladies, help older people with their shopping, say my pleases and thank yous etc.
    - Children are the next generation and we should be making our world a better place for them in any way we can.
    - Recycle and put litter in bins.
    - I don't wear fur and I try to avoid leather as much as I can.
    - I don't eat meat.
    - I don't use cosmetics and beauty products that are tested on animals.
    - I donate money to charities and the homeless (when I can) because although I don't have much money these people have even less.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by giuseppe94)
    Animals have brains as well, even computers if we will, but do they have a mind? Infact, killing an animal is perfectly legal (except when it's a property), same thing for computers...
    I have no reason to think "superior" animals (with well developed brains, just to rule out those which don't even have brains and the ones with primitive ones) do not have a mind. They can show emotions, they can learn, and some of them can even use rudimental languages... Sounds mindy to me. What else can a human do that makes him so special? Morality forums? That doesn't apply to newborns, does it?

    Legal doesn't mean moral. This thread would have ended ages ago if it did.

    Try to reboot your convinctions about whether something is either immoral or moral. Now, tell me one thing that is considered immoral that doesn't damage someone else (mentally, phisically, etc...). Except, of course, morality that comes from religion (it's immoral to wear hats in a church for a man but it isn't for a woman, drinking animals blood, etc.)
    Not meant for me, I know, but I couldn't help suggesting... public "indecence"... :evil:
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Jacob :))
    As long as you're not a masochist!
    Could you really blame a masochist for wanting to tenderly make you suffer? That's like blaming a child for trying to give away candy!
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Floalley)
    Incest is considered immoral even by those who are not non-religious, and that doesn't really hurt anyone. (Except, of course upsetting their family which you feel is sufficient for something to be considered immoral.
    How about the children that may be born from such a relation?
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by viriol)
    How about the children that may be born from such a relation?

    What about gay incest (still would be considered immoral by many I would think).

    What about people with a dominant genetic disorder such as Huntington's, should they be restricted from intercourse because they have a high chance of passing on the disease to their children? Would we call their act of intercourse immoral?

    Do you not think the "moral" way, whichever it may be, is a way you should live by? If not, what does moral even mean to you?


    I can be hypocritical without it living in the realms of morality, and I've explained how consequences of an action and the morality of the action itself contradict and cause me to be hypocritical.

    I've also said many times on the thread that I have no moral system, if I have no moral system, how am I supposed to know what moral even means to me. I'm pretty much going on instinct here.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Floalley)
    What about gay incest (still would be considered immoral by many I would think).
    I had never even heard of such a thing before in my life, believe it or not! I suppose that doesn't apply to gay incest, although the genetic predisposition to be against it is there for the same reason.

    What about people with a dominant genetic disorder such as Huntington's, should they be restricted from intercourse because they have a high chance of passing on the disease to their children? Would we call their act of intercourse immoral?
    Good point. I can't give that a good answer right now. They "obviously" shouldn't, but I'm not too sure of the similarities and differences between the two situations. The main difference seems to be that the ones with a disease will have that risk associated if they do it with whoever it is, whereas the risk associated with incest can be avoided if they just do it with anybody else in the world. Still raises odd situations about sex between two people with Huntington's...

    I can be hypocritical without it living in the realms of morality, and I've explained how consequences of an action and the morality of the action itself contradict and cause me to be hypocritical.

    I've also said many times on the thread that I have no moral system, if I have no moral system, how am I supposed to know what moral even means to me. I'm pretty much going on instinct here.[/FONT][/COLOR]
    My point is that somehow you have a notion that you should do some things in some situation. What I have understood from your confusion is that you often act differently, right? If you think you should do differently, why don't you try to?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by viriol;41770952
    Not meant for me, I know, but I couldn't help suggesting... public "indecence"... [s
    )

    evil[/s]
    That still damages other people... A child watching this "indecence" could be traumatised or something...
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by viriol)

    My point is that somehow you have a notion that you should do some things in some situation. What I have understood from your confusion is that you often act differently, right? If you think you should do differently, why don't you try to?
    I keep telling you I don't think I should have to act differently!

    I'm going to give you a few example where I would consider myself hypocritical without it having a (serious) negative impact.

    1. I eat chicken, therefore I don't think it is morally wrong to eat chicken, but you wouldn't catch me killing a chicken. No way José. I consider this very hypocritical, because it's very arguable that if you think it's ok to eat something then it should be ok to kill it.

    2. I agree that the ideal 'treat others as you wish to be treated' is a very good ideal. Say I was wearing a hideous top and I was asking people's opinions on it. I would wish for people to be truthful to me, but, while sometimes I would tell someone else in the same situation the truth, often I will lie to them and say it's ok (to spare their feelings/anger towards me). Sometimes I'll lie and say I'm feeling fine (sometimes I won't, and I'll tell who asked me how I am the entire truth without holding back). This type of lying makes my life easier but it is hypocritical. While I wish people would always tell me the truth, I don't return the favour to others. More often than not, it doesn't hurt anyone (including me) and I wouldn't consider it to make me a bad or worse of person. I find it quite ironic, that while I lie, I'm very honest about the fact that I do lie. It's impossible to tell the truth 100% of the time, and I won't be convinced otherwise.

    Please stop telling me to try and 'improve' myself. Hypocrisy is a perfectly natural part of human nature, and at least I'm accepting this part of me, and though it doesn't seem like it from my second point, trying to live an 'honest' life in many respects. I don't pretend to be someone I'm not, and I do my fair share of self-improvement, but sorting out the hypocrisy in my life is pretty far down on my list.

    TBH, I'm amused that such a flippant comment on my part has turned into a debate like this.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    For all that I try to reduce my hypocrisy and establish a consistent morality, I still download other people's music for free
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Floalley)
    I keep telling you I don't think I should have to act differently!

    I'm going to give you a few example where I would consider myself hypocritical without it having a (serious) negative impact.

    1. I eat chicken, therefore I don't think it is morally wrong to eat chicken, but you wouldn't catch me killing a chicken. No way José. I consider this very hypocritical, because it's very arguable that if you think it's ok to eat something then it should be ok to kill it.
    How'd you guess my first name?

    2. I agree that the ideal 'treat others as you wish to be treated' is a very good ideal. Say I was wearing a hideous top and I was asking people's opinions on it. I would wish for people to be truthful to me, but, while sometimes I would tell someone else in the same situation the truth, often I will lie to them and say it's ok (to spare their feelings/anger towards me). Sometimes I'll lie and say I'm feeling fine (sometimes I won't, and I'll tell who asked me how I am the entire truth without holding back). This type of lying makes my life easier but it is hypocritical. While I wish people would always tell me the truth, I don't return the favour to others. More often than not, it doesn't hurt anyone (including me) and I wouldn't consider it to make me a bad or worse of person. I find it quite ironic, that while I lie, I'm very honest about the fact that I do lie. It's impossible to tell the truth 100% of the time, and I won't be convinced otherwise.

    Please stop telling me to try and 'improve' myself. Hypocrisy is a perfectly natural part of human nature, and at least I'm accepting this part of me, and though it doesn't seem like it from my second point, trying to live an 'honest' life in many respects. I don't pretend to be someone I'm not, and I do my fair share of self-improvement, but sorting out the hypocrisy in my life is pretty far down on my list.
    I'm not telling you such a thing (well, I'm trying to, I reckon sometimes it may come across as something like that). I'm trying to understand a position I find very bizarre.

    The example you gave doesn't enlighten me much. It just tells me that "treat others as you wish to be treated" doesn't fit your moral code. That's just in accordance with your statement about not knowing of a fitting one. So far so good. What baffles me is the hypocrisy part. I'm not sure we're referring to the same thing by using that word. Your actions seem to sound morally inconsistent to you - and that's to be expected since you don't have a moral system, let alone a consistent one - and you seem to be calling yourself a hypocrite because of that. Am I correct?

    The mention of improvement was due to my having been led to believe that you normally do some things that you are more or less certain to be wrong. If you tell me that's the case but you don't want to change that then I don't understand what you're calling "moral" here. "Moral" usually refers to what people think things "should be"...

    TBH, I'm amused that such a flippant comment on my part has turned into a debate like this.
    That's TSR for you!
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by giuseppe94)
    That still damages other people... A child watching this "indecence" could be traumatised or something...
    I seriously doubt the sight of a naked person carelessly walking down the street would traumatise any child. I mean, naked is our natural state...
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by miser)
    A little while ago I attempted to write a rule to classify ethical action versus unethical action. This is what I came up with:

    Any action, intentionally committed, made in the presence of an understanding of its expected consequences, whose intended effect would naturally lead to the unnecessary harm or the unjust suffering of another, that is committed in the absence of unreasonable coercion, nor is committed as a result of a choice deemed to be the lesser of evils, ought rightly and universally, irrespective of time or culture, be declared immoral.

    Essentially, it states that if you do not have to harm another, you should not - even if it is for your own or another's benefit. The only exceptions are if you are coerced into doing so, or are constrained such that your action is the lesser of two evils.

    This is different to the code of conduct I have, for which I made a list of various rules.

    An ethical life, in my opinion, is to make an effort to leave the world a better place for having existed in it.
    Shouldn't your definition therefore say reasonable instead of unreasonable? Seems like a double negative and therefore saying "is committed in the presence of reasonable coercion ... be declared immoral", which doesn't look right for what you explained after.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by viriol)
    How'd you guess my first name?
    I don't know it just felt right

    I'm not telling you such a thing (well, I'm trying to, I reckon sometimes it may come across as something like that). I'm trying to understand a position I find very bizarre.
    I understand why you find my position confusing. I find it very hard to explain so I'll try again

    The example you gave doesn't enlighten me much. It just tells me that "treat others as you wish to be treated" doesn't fit your moral code. That's just in accordance with your statement about not knowing of a fitting one. So far so good. What baffles me is the hypocrisy part. I'm not sure we're referring to the same thing by using that word. Your actions seem to sound morally inconsistent to you - and that's to be expected since you don't have a moral system, let alone a consistent one - and you seem to be calling yourself a hypocrite because of that. Am I correct?

    The mention of improvement was due to my having been led to believe that you normally do some things that you are more or less certain to be wrong. If you tell me that's the case but you don't want to change that then I don't understand what you're calling "moral" here. "Moral" usually refers to what people think things "should be"...
    Ok, so maybe that wasn't the best example. I'd define 'hypocritical' as someone who says one thing but believes or does another/the opposite thing.

    I agree that life is easier to live if you have a set of 'moral' rules. IE. You should not lie, You should not steal, You should not harm others etc etc.

    However, these sort of rules don't fit in with the way I view the world. There are times where these rules seem arbitrary or meaningless, Ie, white lies, or lying when throwing a surprise party. Or it seems necessary to break these rules because otherwise there would be negative consequences, for example lying to a murderer about where there possible victim could be, stealing bread for the sake of feeding your starving family.

    But I can't just disregard the idea of an objective morality and decide for myself whether I find individual action moral or immoral because I'm pretty sure I don't believe that morality is relative, because that also doesn't fit with the world as I view it.

    So I'm sort of stuck with this list of general rules that fit with my small world (it's lucky I'm not in charge of a country or something) because it makes my life easier than just going of instinct all the time because it gives me something to fall back on when I really come to a moral dilemma.

    However, as I have said, it is impossible to live life without breaking these rules. Life would be rigid, and you wouldn't have very good social interactions imho (especially in the case of lying). If I lived by these rules 24/7 I wouldn't be able to steal those little pencils from ikea.

    So I kind of think my hypocrisy is twofold. I'm a hypocrite because I'm saying something while believing something else. I'm also a hypocrite because I say something and do the opposite (sometimes a lot of the time)

    So I'm not certain what I am doing is wrong and until I find a moral system which fits better with the world as I know it I'm going to have to continue as I am.

    And if I do find a system, I'm probably not going to follow it rigidly (mostly because it probably won't be a rigid system) because I'm not angel.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Laozi's Ying Yang principle: every bit of good has an element of bad inside it, just as every bit of bad has an element of good inside it (it's the creation principle).

    I try to live by this in a sense that even though I might see something that is absolutely amazing, it's not necessarily all good. And where I see things pessimistically where everything is completely bad and dark, there is a bit of light within it that can sometimes outshine the dark

    Apart from that, never say the lords name in vain, don't commit adultery, don't kill and all the other commandments
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Floalley)
    I don't know it just felt right



    I understand why you find my position confusing. I find it very hard to explain so I'll try again



    Ok, so maybe that wasn't the best example. I'd define 'hypocritical' as someone who says one thing but believes or does another/the opposite thing.

    I agree that life is easier to live if you have a set of 'moral' rules. IE. You should not lie, You should not steal, You should not harm others etc etc.

    However, these sort of rules don't fit in with the way I view the world. There are times where these rules seem arbitrary or meaningless, Ie, white lies, or lying when throwing a surprise party. Or it seems necessary to break these rules because otherwise there would be negative consequences, for example lying to a murderer about where there possible victim could be, stealing bread for the sake of feeding your starving family.

    But I can't just disregard the idea of an objective morality and decide for myself whether I find individual action moral or immoral because I'm pretty sure I don't believe that morality is relative, because that also doesn't fit with the world as I view it.

    So I'm sort of stuck with this list of general rules that fit with my small world (it's lucky I'm not in charge of a country or something) because it makes my life easier than just going of instinct all the time because it gives me something to fall back on when I really come to a moral dilemma.

    However, as I have said, it is impossible to live life without breaking these rules. Life would be rigid, and you wouldn't have very good social interactions imho (especially in the case of lying). If I lived by these rules 24/7 I wouldn't be able to steal those little pencils from ikea.

    So I kind of think my hypocrisy is twofold. I'm a hypocrite because I'm saying something while believing something else. I'm also a hypocrite because I say something and do the opposite (sometimes a lot of the time)

    So I'm not certain what I am doing is wrong and until I find a moral system which fits better with the world as I know it I'm going to have to continue as I am.

    And if I do find a system, I'm probably not going to follow it rigidly (mostly because it probably won't be a rigid system) because I'm not angel.
    That was clear and understandable

    Good luck with that, but I'm pretty sure those IKEA pencils are meant to be "stolen"
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    My moral code is thus:

    - I do as I please when I please
    - I take as much time as possible to make the lives of younger people hell. If this means bullying them, punching them, etc. so be it
    - I detest Muslims, since they hate our way of life but still opt to live here
    - I don't see it as wrong to harm others
    - I think theists in the UK warrant less legal rights, and frankly should pray to their God if somebody hurts them and not seek police involvement. This is what the Koran, Bible, etc. say they should do.
    - I don't see it as wrong to lie to others
    - Some peoples (like Africans) are generally inferior to others

    This is just a snippet, and my full list will exceed about 3000 words.
 
 
 
Poll
Should MenACWY vaccination be compulsory at uni?
Useful resources

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.