|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
EvC Forum active members: 64 (9163 total) |
| |
ChatGPT | |
Total: 916,419 Year: 3,676/9,624 Month: 547/974 Week: 160/276 Day: 34/23 Hour: 1/3 |
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: A personal morality | |||||||||||||||||||||||
New Cat's Eye Inactive Member |
That doesn't make any sense. If your other reasons are sufficient, then they don't get less sufficient just because one reason has been removed. For some things, the other reasons are NOT sufficient, I'm sorta teetering on the edge. With God I don't fall, but without him I would. I don't really want to expose myself by getting into specific behaviors, if you don't mind. I agree with you for most things, that taking god out really wouldn't have an effect. But there are things, for me, that it would. I would be less moral if I didn't believe in God.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
crashfrog Member (Idle past 1488 days) Posts: 19762 From: Silver Spring, MD Joined: |
I agree with you for most things, that taking god out really wouldn't have an effect. But there are things, for me, that it would. I would be less moral if I didn't believe in God. If we're talking about things that are only immoral because it's your belief God says they are, then if you stopped believing in God, why would doing those things still be immoral?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
New Cat's Eye Inactive Member |
If we're talking about things that are only immoral because it's your belief God says they are, then if you stopped believing in God, why would doing those things still be immoral?
We're
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
ringo Member (Idle past 433 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined: |
Catholic Scientist writes: I would be less moral if I didn't believe in God. There's more to morality than just avoiding "immoral" acts. Doing a "bad" thing for a good reason is usually forgiveable. Doing a "good" thing for the wrong reason may not be. As long as you're being "good" out of fear of punishment, you're really not being moral at all. You're just faking it, going through the motions. Help scientific research in your spare time. No cost. No obligation. Join the World Community Grid with Team EvC
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
New Cat's Eye Inactive Member |
As long as you're being "good" out of fear of punishment, you're really not being moral at all. You're just faking it, going through the motions. Well, then for some of the morally correct things that I do, I am just faking it.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
ringo Member (Idle past 433 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined: |
Catholic Scientist writes: Well, then for some of the morally correct things that I do, I am just faking it. So, do you think your fake morality is fooling God? If you're afraid of punishment, shouldn't there be more punishment for being dishonest? Help scientific research in your spare time. No cost. No obligation. Join the World Community Grid with Team EvC
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
New Cat's Eye Inactive Member |
So, do you think your fake morality is fooling God? If god says "Don't lie or I'll kick your ass" and the only reason I'm not lying is to avoid the ass kicking, then what is it that I'm faking?
If you're afraid of punishment, shouldn't there be more punishment for being dishonest? How am I being dishonest (in the above situation)? Now, if God says "always tell the truth because it is the right thing to do, and if you don't then I will kick your ass" and I'm only telling the truth to avoid the ass kicking, then No, I wouldn't think that I would be fooling God. And no, I don't think there should be more punishment than for the liars. Now, most of God's commands were "Thou Shall Not's", not "Thou Shall's".
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Stile Member Posts: 4295 From: Ontario, Canada Joined: |
Catholic Scientist writes: Its easy for someone to say they do the right thing only because its the right thing when they ain't doin' shit. Or when they're deluding themselves because they can't admit they do the right things for selfish reasons.
I agree. It's easy for anyone to talk about the right things to do, and much harder to actually do them. Harder still to do them for unselfish reasons.
Tell me, have you ever held a management position? Ever tried to get employees to be good workers without a fear of punishment? Positive reinforcement can work a little, but when it comes down to it, sometimes you gotta bust out the whip. Actually, yeah. I manage the construction (wiring/building/part development) of automated assembly lines (those car-building lines with all the robots). In that scenario, yes, I agree that a fear of punishment is extremely useful. However, my lines come out with much more profit because I use a good dose of positive reinforcement. However, regardless... I find your metaphor lacking. I don't think God's relationship is a boss/employee one. I don't think it should be, don't think it's described as such in the bible, and don't think that would even be a very nice God to have. I don't think being a good person is a "job". That is, I don't do it for money, I don't do it for compensation, and I definitely don't do it because of fear of reprisal.
One could also argue, though, that you're doing the right thing NOT because it is the right thing but because it makes you feel good. Perhaps a selfish reason.
Certainly. One would be wrong, but one can argue anything they'ed like. This arguement would come down to neither person (myself included) being able to actually prove my motives. Therefore, with equal probability that I'm doing good things because they're good to do, or because I'm selfish... I'm right that I do them because they're good to do soley because I say so, and I am me. I could be lying, but if I was a liar, I'd hardly be worried about being moral enough to come and discuss it on internet message boards
But what if you just don't care? Or what if you don't feel anything extra from doing the right thing? The threat of punishment should put you on the straight and narrow, no? Sure it would. Like a 5 year old who doesn't steal cookies from the cookie jar because he knows he'll have his TV-time taken away. The threat of punishment is an effective moral motive. I just see it as an immature, and low-level one. With "because it's the right thing to do" or "because I want to help others" being much more mature and advanced motives. I would even put "for selfish how-it-makes-me-feel" reasons above fear of punishment (but not above the other two I just mentioned).
I don't know why I'm feeling so hostile today, maybe I woke up on the wrong side of the bed I didn't find your post hostile. Why shouldn't we question and try to understand where our morality comes from? To me, it's very important to understand these things in order to be a moral person for the right motives/reasons.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Stile Member Posts: 4295 From: Ontario, Canada Joined: |
Catholic Scientist writes: When confronted with the option to just do the bad thing anyways, sometimes I think about God and then NOT do them. If I didn't stop to think about God then I'd just go with it and have fun being bad. I think what crash is trying to get at is (and I agree with him): You think about God and then don't do the bad thing. Now, ask yourself this question: Would thinking about your loved ones, or yourself even, not prevent you from doing the bad thing? Answer Yes (I don't think you're really worried about this one): Then your normal "non-God related" morals are sufficient for you to restrain yourself. And therefore, you are not losing any sense of morality. More... cleaning it up and making it more efficient. Sort of... more succinctly defining what's actually driving your morals. Answer No (the troubling topic): No "A": You are not worried about any affects on your loved ones/yourself because no one's getting hurt, or no one's being negatively impacted in any physical or mentally abusive way.-Like crash mentioned. Who cares, then? Maybe it really isn't immoral to do this thing in the first place. No "B": You are not worried about any affects on your loved ones/yourself even though they are getting hurt either mentally or physically in some way.-Like Nator and I mentioned. You are probably not a very nice person. If you do want to improve, perhaps the problem isn't with your morality, but with your relationship with your loved ones/yourself. You may want to look into some social help, such as therapy. If you do not want to improve, then yes, I am glad your thinking of God is there to prevent you from going here. Otherwise, I would be hoping that the local authorities would pick you up before I ever had the misfortune of being on the negative side of your actions.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
New Cat's Eye Inactive Member |
. The threat of punishment is an effective moral motive. I just see it as an immature, and low-level one. With "because it's the right thing to do" or "because I want to help others" being much more mature and advanced motives. I would even put "for selfish how-it-makes-me-feel" reasons above fear of punishment (but not above the other two I just mentioned). I agree. You won't see me sitting on a moral high horse. I need the threat of punishment as an incentive to avoid the immoral behaviors that I would enjoy doing.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
nator Member (Idle past 2191 days) Posts: 12961 From: Ann Arbor Joined: |
quote: Do you really think that your God is interested only in blind obedience? That seems to be only a simplistic understanding of why god chose those particular rules (the 10 commandments). I mean, don't you think God is more interested in how lying to other people hurts those other people, or how being in the habit of lying makes people less able to trust each other, thus keeping people from being able to love and depend upon each other? I mean, isn't the first and most important of God's commandments "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you"? Aren't most of the ten commandments simply more specifications on how to treat others the way one would like to be treated? They seem to me to mostly be a bunch of rules for how people should live so they can come together and live in harmony and community.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
ringo Member (Idle past 433 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined: |
Catholic Scientist writes: ... what is it that I'm faking? Uhhh... you said in Message 155 that "...for some of the morally correct things that I do, I am just faking it." Don't try to weasel out of it now with examples that don't fit.
And no, I don't think there should be more punishment than for the liars. What I'm saying is that faking morality makes you a liar, even if you weren't one before. So you'll be punished for one count of forging morality and one count of attempting to pass forged morality. Help scientific research in your spare time. No cost. No obligation. Join the World Community Grid with Team EvC
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
nator Member (Idle past 2191 days) Posts: 12961 From: Ann Arbor Joined: |
quote: Yes.
quote: Yes. It works very well.
quote: Well then, you must be doing something very wrong if you find that the carrots don't work and you frequently have to resort to the whip. Management experts, the management methods used by the best companies, and psychologists all know that the way to get the best performance out of anyone is NOT to rely mostly upon punishment. Rewards and clear expectations work far, far better.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
New Cat's Eye Inactive Member |
Would thinking about your loved ones, or yourself even, not prevent you from doing the bad thing? For some things it would and for some it wouldn't.
Answer Yes (I don't think you're really worried about this one): Then your normal "non-God related" morals are sufficient for you to restrain yourself. And therefore, you are not losing any sense of morality. More... cleaning it up and making it more efficient. Sort of... more succinctly defining what's actually driving your morals. What about something of questionable morallity that the non-God related morality is not sufficient, where the God-related morality is neccessary. People would probably argue that these things are not immoral, but that is not what my conscience is saying. Of course, I could just be brainwashed but I think I've wiped the slate clean and doubt it.
No "A": You are not worried about any affects on your loved ones/yourself because no one's getting hurt, or no one's being negatively impacted in any physical or mentally abusive way. -Like crash mentioned. Who cares, then? Maybe it really isn't immoral to do this thing in the first place. The point is that my conscience has labeled some behaviors as immoral, a priori. The idea that if nobody is getting hurt then its okay does not sit well with me. Especially when it effects my realtionship with God.
No "B": You are not worried about any affects on your loved ones/yourself even though they are getting hurt either mentally or physically in some way. It would be easier for me to accept the above if I was an atheist. If there are some behaviors that hurt others that I don't care about, the last chance for me to not do it is with God.
-Like Nator and I mentioned. You are probably not a very nice person. Lets assume I'm not. So what?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Stile Member Posts: 4295 From: Ontario, Canada Joined: |
Catholic Scientist writes: You won't see me sitting on a moral high horse. I need the threat of punishment as an incentive to avoid the immoral behaviors that I would enjoy doing. I see. I don't know how to objectively tell you that I think this is a rather bad thing. As in, I think that you think I am in a biased position becuase of what I've been saying already. I will just try a metaphor of my own: -----------------------An 8 year old boy is in Grade 2. A 19 year old girl is beginning her 1st year of university. The 8 year old understands he has less education than the 19 year old girl. The boy decides to drop out of school. The girl tries to convince him that this is a bad idea, and that there is still a lot more to learn. "I understand I only have a 2nd grade education" the boy says, "you won't see me sitting on an educational high horse." ----------------------- The girl here shouldn't feel guilty about her education, or for trying to show the boy that there is more.Nor should the boy feel easy in the fact that he's being honest with himself. The fact remains that they boy has less education. The fact remains that the boy is quite capable of learning more. The fact remains that neither student has completed their learning (and hopefully never will). We both agree it's easy to talk about doing good things, yet harder to actually do them. It is also easy to fool yourself into thinking you're not capable of being more. I don't see any reason for anyone to ever stop trying to improve upon themselves.
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024