Redefining Ancient Right and Wrong in the Glowing Screens of . . .

[Vastator]

This question may not be possible to answer, when as a parameter for said answer, one is bound by a definition of “right” that we may not agree upon....

By all means, please feel free to define "right" and "wrong" as you choose and believe. I had hoped most would do so in the body of their answers. Of course my thread starter was biased; how can one not be? I'd rather save my glacial objectivity to put out the last marshmallow cooked in the last bonfire of Western civilization.

Irreconcilable differences regarding social morality are typically caused by Religious dogma; however, as we can see with the Christian Bible ~ secular morals become increasingly better in terms of evolution and even most modern Christians would find that following the literal morality of the Bible is barbaric in many cases.

Modern Christians cannot follow biblical morality literally--within the constraints placed upon them by modern society's laws. As we drift back through history, however, societies existed where that was more of an option, at least from the top down.

Thats because of the social evolution I was talking about, and thank the Universe for that! Stoning folks is barbaric, let alone killing babies and codifying slavery.

Agreed. Where do you think the evolution of human moral reasoning is headed in the near future? Better or worse places than the barbarism of antiquity?

If one holds the prospect of a “better” human moral reasoning” for the future, a possibility by some form of evolution... How can one then look on the human moral reasoning of antiquity with disdain? For without it we could not have arrived to where we are today. It would be intrinsic to the process that brought us here.

 

[BlackSand]

.​

Pineapple​

.​

 

[BlackSand]

This isn't the 1600's ... And exposure/opportunity are in a different galaxy figuratively speaking.

If you expect a child/teen to manage today's atmosphere with yesterday's tools ...
Then you only desire to handicap the young person.

Provide them with better tools and understanding to engage the environment around them.
No matter what you do to limit their exposure ... It will cease to be effective when they walk out the door.

Right and wrong doesn't necessarily have to change ...
How you teach your children to manage conflicts and make better decisions may have to change.

.​

 

[WinterBorn]

Funny story about limiting access online.

My first wife and I divorced when our kids were entering their teenage years. To say my kids are bright would be an understatement. Anyway, my ex realized the kids needed a computer for school. So she bought an HP desktop model with a printer. She spent the entire evening setting up all the parental blocks and passwords. Plenty of frustration involved (she called me 3 or 4 times for help) and she was worn out by the time it was done. But she felt good about having the computer and having set up all the protections and limitations to keep the 11, 12, & 13 year old safe. She goes to bed.

Next morning she gets up and finds Post-It notes all around the screen listing all the passwords for every block and every access point. The boys spent a couple of hours hacking the entire system. According to them, they didn't go anywhere bad. They just wanted to see where all that stuff was stored.

This is why you should get to beat your kids senseless at least twice a year.

Why would we beat them? They didn't do anything they were told not to do.

For mental health reason.

I mean, you could laugh at how easy it was for them, but a good beating leaves a lasting impression.

I only punished my kids when they did something wrong. Not just to leave an impression.

I’ll stick with laughing at how easy it was for them.