What’s the difference between Right and Wrong?

[Brian Blackwell]

...and what IS morality? How does it work, what is its purpose?

 

[frigidweirdo]

...and what IS morality? How does it work, what is its purpose?

Right and wrong is all about perspective and attitude.

What's right for one person might be wrong for another.

In England and France a theory developed over a long period of time that all humans are equal. Some agree, others don't. Those who agree will think right is different to those who don't agree.

 

[Brian Blackwell]

...and what IS morality? How does it work, what is its purpose?

Right and wrong is all about perspective and attitude.

What's right for one person might be wrong for another.

In England and France a theory developed over a long period of time that all humans are equal. Some agree, others don't. Those who agree will think right is different to those who don't agree.

So it seems there are two possibilities by this description - Morality is consistent, though understanding of it varies (like the physical laws of nature); or morality is merely another word for preference (either personal or cultural).

 

[OldLady]

...and what IS morality? How does it work, what is its purpose?

Right and wrong is all about perspective and attitude.

What's right for one person might be wrong for another.

In England and France a theory developed over a long period of time that all humans are equal. Some agree, others don't. Those who agree will think right is different to those who don't agree.

So it seems there are two possibilities by this description - Morality is consistent, though understanding of it varies (like the physical laws of nature); or morality is merely another word for preference (either personal or cultural).

Which do you hold with?

 

[Brian Blackwell]

So it seems there are two possibilities by this description - Morality is consistent, though understanding of it varies (like the physical laws of nature); or morality is merely another word for preference (either personal or cultural).

Which do you hold with?

The former.

 

[expat_panama]

...two possibilities by this description - Morality is consistent, though understanding of it varies (like the physical laws of nature); or morality is merely another word for preference (either personal or cultural).

Whether there is right and wrong is something that can be verified by direct observation. The reasoning being that different people can independently see for example that it's good to improve humankind's well-being, or that making others needlessly suffer is wrong. Sure, we all got different perspectives on details but the central theme's usually the same.

It's like if someone tells me there's an elephant on my front lawn eating the grass I may dismiss the report as a fantasy. However is someone else independently reports to me there's an elephant pooping on my driveway I'd better take 'em both seriously.

Someone insisting that there's no external right/wrong is imho as crazy as a guy saying there's no elephants anywhere in the world.

 

[HaShev]

...and what IS morality? How does it work, what is its purpose?

I've discussed this many times in these forums, let me make this simple and brief.

WE focus and gather and keep the city(YeruShalem) holy for a reason, it's to set it as a beacon, to recognize that everything we need is in that holy city's name. Like Cliff notes for the Bible and purpose of life is in the legend of how YeruShalem becomes the city of Shalom. The purpose in life is in the name, discerning right from wrong,good from evil is no longer subjective when you have that defined name.
Even the good cop bad cop story is in the name and legend of the holy city- like I said the ultimate cliff note to the book.
Shalem means stability, completeness, and wholeness.
Your purpose is to be stable and all you could and should be.
Mankinds purpose and direction is to progress to be complete and whole aka EVOLVE to be all we could and should be.
That simple!
All understanding of
right and wrong acts,
good vs evil, depend on discerning, is it towards or opposing that direction/path to becoming stable, complete and whole.

 

[Brian Blackwell]

...and what IS morality? How does it work, what is its purpose?

I've discussed this many times in these forums, let me make this simple and brief.

WE focus and gather and keep the city(YeruShalem) holy for a reason, it's to set it as a beacon, to recognize that everything we need is in that holy city's name. Like Cliff notes for the Bible and purpose of life is in the legend of how YeruShalem becomes the city of Shalom. The purpose in life is in the name, discerning right from wrong,good from evil is no longer subjective when you have that defined name.
Even the good cop bad cop story is in the name and legend of the holy city- like I said the ultimate cliff note to the book.
Shalem means stability, completeness, and wholeness.
Your purpose is to be stable and all you could and should be.
Mankinds purpose and direction is to progress to be complete and whole aka EVOLVE to be all we could and should be.
That simple!
All understanding of
right and wrong acts,
good vs evil, depend on discerning, is it towards or opposing that direction/path to becoming stable, complete and whole.

I agree with this take. Morality guides us "lifeward"; toward a more faithful expression of spirit. Our discernment has been purposefully clouded, however, and moral relativism is rampant in the absence of true understanding. And of course, an earnest desire must proceed that understanding, and this is thwarted by decoys like materialism (both economic and scientific), and misguided motivations born of fear and perceived unworthiness.

 

[HaShev]

There are many factors that affect subjective views on morality like "Folk Ways" of a region or community or ways of a race within the community, even financial stress related to
depressed areas affect views on morality and what is acceptable or unacceptable behavior.

As a Jew often being insulted by proselytizing in the "need to be saved" rhetoric, I have to point out the injury which is done to humanity by the Christian church proselytizing and in "establishing itself", as being negative to society.

You not only tempt some men to equivication or hypocrisy, but exclude from the office others of sounder integrity who follow higher morality standards and laws while they reject the laws for free get out of jail cards given in a name j image=idol worship. And even the few when they insist on the purity and sanctity of the moral law they violate the law themselves or add subjective additions or interpretation. They also end up lowering the standard in other issues like handling sin and following the commandments. Their problem is also that they end up playing judge and playing God in judge and jury, often times frowning down upon people who might have better understanding or purity than those imposing their impressions. By trying to convert people who already have G-d and his Laws they are bringing them down that Ladder instead of up it, and they also admit they worship another G-d other then the G-d of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob.

 

[Votto]

...and what IS morality? How does it work, what is its purpose?

I've discussed this many times in these forums, let me make this simple and brief.

WE focus and gather and keep the city(YeruShalem) holy for a reason, it's to set it as a beacon, to recognize that everything we need is in that holy city's name. Like Cliff notes for the Bible and purpose of life is in the legend of how YeruShalem becomes the city of Shalom. The purpose in life is in the name, discerning right from wrong,good from evil is no longer subjective when you have that defined name.
Even the good cop bad cop story is in the name and legend of the holy city- like I said the ultimate cliff note to the book.
Shalem means stability, completeness, and wholeness.
Your purpose is to be stable and all you could and should be.
Mankinds purpose and direction is to progress to be complete and whole aka EVOLVE to be all we could and should be.
That simple!
All understanding of
right and wrong acts,
good vs evil, depend on discerning, is it towards or opposing that direction/path to becoming stable, complete and whole.

I agree with this take. Morality guides us "lifeward"; toward a more faithful expression of spirit. Our discernment has been purposefully clouded, however, and moral relativism is rampant in the absence of true understanding. And of course, an earnest desire must proceed that understanding, and this is thwarted by decoys like materialism (both economic and scientific), and misguided motivations born of fear and perceived unworthiness.

Morality is simply YOUR perception of right and wrong. Some people have "good" morals and some people have "bad" morals.

Naturally, my use of "good" and "bad" is based upon my own moral code.

But there still seems to be a general sense of an universal morality. For example, most cultures believe murder and theft is wrong, etc.

My take is that we are all wired by a higher power with a moral code we basically agree with. The essential rule of thumb is to do unto others as you would have them do to you. Jesus said that this was the law of God, for if you do this you maintain a civil society. However, there are some variations, such as abortion. The question there becomes, "When does human life start" and not, "Should we be able to murder people" So the morality is not the issue, it's the realization of reality that is the issue. Granted, one may know the answer deep down but lie to themselves which is an underlying moral issue. These types of people tend to go against their conscience either knowingly, or unknowingly for perceived personal benefit. In either case, it contributes to all types of psychological issues for which the person inflicts upon themselves.

 

[Taz]

Right is what I do. Wrong is all you peeps.

 

[Votto]

Right is what I do. Wrong is all you peeps.

Women.

 

[Brian Blackwell]

...and what IS morality? How does it work, what is its purpose?

I've discussed this many times in these forums, let me make this simple and brief.

WE focus and gather and keep the city(YeruShalem) holy for a reason, it's to set it as a beacon, to recognize that everything we need is in that holy city's name. Like Cliff notes for the Bible and purpose of life is in the legend of how YeruShalem becomes the city of Shalom. The purpose in life is in the name, discerning right from wrong,good from evil is no longer subjective when you have that defined name.
Even the good cop bad cop story is in the name and legend of the holy city- like I said the ultimate cliff note to the book.
Shalem means stability, completeness, and wholeness.
Your purpose is to be stable and all you could and should be.
Mankinds purpose and direction is to progress to be complete and whole aka EVOLVE to be all we could and should be.
That simple!
All understanding of
right and wrong acts,
good vs evil, depend on discerning, is it towards or opposing that direction/path to becoming stable, complete and whole.

I agree with this take. Morality guides us "lifeward"; toward a more faithful expression of spirit. Our discernment has been purposefully clouded, however, and moral relativism is rampant in the absence of true understanding. And of course, an earnest desire must proceed that understanding, and this is thwarted by decoys like materialism (both economic and scientific), and misguided motivations born of fear and perceived unworthiness.

Morality is simply YOUR perception of right and wrong. Some people have "good" morals and some people have "bad" morals.

Naturally, my use of "good" and "bad" is based upon my own moral code.

But there still seems to be a general sense of an universal morality. For example, most cultures believe murder and theft is wrong, etc.

My take is that we are all wired by a higher power with a moral code we basically agree with. The essential rule of thumb is to do unto others as you would have them do to you. Jesus said that this was the law of God, for if you do this you maintain a civil society. However, there are some variations, such as abortion. The question there becomes, "When does human life start" and not, "Should we be able to murder people" So the morality is not the issue, it's the realization of reality that is the issue. Granted, one may know the answer deep down but lie to themselves which is an underlying moral issue. These types of people tend to go against their conscience either knowingly, or unknowingly for perceived personal benefit. In either case, it contributes to all types of psychological issues for which the person inflicts upon themselves.

Absolutely. You hit it right on the head with the abortion issue. I've heard the golden rule flipped to say, "Do not do unto others what you would not have done unto you." Obviously, it's the same thing, but in some instances it can elucidate the spirit of the expression even more.Take taxes, for example... many will say "I don't mind having taxes done unto me" so they feel perfectly justified supporting taxes being done unto you. The focus is on what you're OK with.

By turning it around, the focus becomes what you're not OK with, which I believe highlights our own immorality more clearly. Well, I don't want people coercing me under threat of violence - is there anywhere where I am doing this to others, personally or by proxy? You see what I mean.

I would not admit any moral relativity at all, other than one's understanding of morality (as you said, one's perception). I don't think it can ever be the case that something is good in one instance, and bad in another, all things being equal (of course the same action may be good or bad depending on surrounding circumstances - punching you in the face is bad if you're standing at a bus stop, but good if it knocks your head out of the way of an oncoming cannonball).

 

[frigidweirdo]

...and what IS morality? How does it work, what is its purpose?

Right and wrong is all about perspective and attitude.

What's right for one person might be wrong for another.

In England and France a theory developed over a long period of time that all humans are equal. Some agree, others don't. Those who agree will think right is different to those who don't agree.

So it seems there are two possibilities by this description - Morality is consistent, though understanding of it varies (like the physical laws of nature); or morality is merely another word for preference (either personal or cultural).

Well, morality is kind of a loose term for what "society thinks". Sometimes this morality is entrenched in society. Children are brought up to believe this, schools teach it, churches teach this, pressure is put on them to believe.

In the modern world people are more independent, less constrained by the morality police. They have their own ideas, some people don't care about this or that.

So instead we end up with laws. Break the law, you're punished.

In the US you have lots of different groups of morality. Regional differences, social differences etc.

 

[Brian Blackwell]

...and what IS morality? How does it work, what is its purpose?

Right and wrong is all about perspective and attitude.

What's right for one person might be wrong for another.

In England and France a theory developed over a long period of time that all humans are equal. Some agree, others don't. Those who agree will think right is different to those who don't agree.

So it seems there are two possibilities by this description - Morality is consistent, though understanding of it varies (like the physical laws of nature); or morality is merely another word for preference (either personal or cultural).

Well, morality is kind of a loose term for what "society thinks". Sometimes this morality is entrenched in society. Children are brought up to believe this, schools teach it, churches teach this, pressure is put on them to believe.

In the modern world people are more independent, less constrained by the morality police. They have their own ideas, some people don't care about this or that.

So instead we end up with laws. Break the law, you're punished.

In the US you have lots of different groups of morality. Regional differences, social differences etc.

Well, we can’t definitively say that morality is solely “what society thinks”, as this is a matter for some debate. Many would argue that morality is a singular set of principles; the misunderstanding of which accounts for the variation we see between societies.

The burden of proof in this matter lies with the person making the claim that such a uniform standards exists. I submit that morality is merely the cause-and-effect of human behavior - a set of natural laws - and that it can be discovered by logic, and proved by experience.

Morality concerns itself with the rights of man. Which actions will yield results consistent with a faithful expression of his nature, and the nature of others? These actions are called “rights”, or moral actions. All other actions are “rights violations”, or immoral actions.

Man’s nature is that he is inherently free, autonomous, sovereign, able to make descisions on his own; to choose certain actions of his mind and body independently of another’s aid or direction. Actions which acknowledge this aspect of himself and others will promote an evironment conducive to harmonious interaction, and greatest benefit overall.

It’s no different than acting in acknowledgement and conformity with the natural laws of physics. Nature, to be commanded, must first be obeyed.

 

[frigidweirdo]

...and what IS morality? How does it work, what is its purpose?

Right and wrong is all about perspective and attitude.

What's right for one person might be wrong for another.

In England and France a theory developed over a long period of time that all humans are equal. Some agree, others don't. Those who agree will think right is different to those who don't agree.

So it seems there are two possibilities by this description - Morality is consistent, though understanding of it varies (like the physical laws of nature); or morality is merely another word for preference (either personal or cultural).

Well, morality is kind of a loose term for what "society thinks". Sometimes this morality is entrenched in society. Children are brought up to believe this, schools teach it, churches teach this, pressure is put on them to believe.

In the modern world people are more independent, less constrained by the morality police. They have their own ideas, some people don't care about this or that.

So instead we end up with laws. Break the law, you're punished.

In the US you have lots of different groups of morality. Regional differences, social differences etc.

Well, we can’t definitively say that morality is solely “what society thinks”, as this is a matter for some debate. Many would argue that morality is a singular set of principles; the misunderstanding of which accounts for the variation we see between societies.

The burden of proof in this matter lies with the person making the claim that such a uniform standards exists. I submit that morality is merely the cause-and-effect of human behavior - a set of natural laws - and that it can be discovered by logic, and proved by experience.

Morality concerns itself with the rights of man. Which actions will yield results consistent with a faithful expression of his nature, and the nature of others? These actions are called “rights”, or moral actions. All other actions are “rights violations”, or immoral actions.

Man’s nature is that he is inherently free, autonomous, sovereign, able to make descisions on his own; to choose certain actions of his mind and body independently of another’s aid or direction. Actions which acknowledge this aspect of himself and others will promote an evironment conducive to harmonious interaction, and greatest benefit overall.

It’s no different than acting in acknowledgement and conformity with the natural laws of physics. Nature, to be commanded, must first be obeyed.

No, morality isn't solely what society thinks. But that's a large part of it. Where does a child learn morality from?

Parents or guardians would probably be the largest part.
Teachers and other people who educated these children too.

They are all imbued with morality that came from their parents and teachers. Yes it'll be somewhat distorted as they've grown up, but still there.

I don't think morality is natural. It's gone through a long process. Different countries have different morality because the changes have taken place away from human nature.

Sex is a part of human nature. Yet some religions have said sex is bad and as such have changed morality.

 

[Brian Blackwell]

No, morality isn't solely what society thinks. But that's a large part of it. Where does a child learn morality from?

Parents or guardians would probably be the largest part.
Teachers and other people who educated these children too.

They are all imbued with morality that came from their parents and teachers. Yes it'll be somewhat distorted as they've grown up, but still there.

I don't think morality is natural. It's gone through a long process. Different countries have different morality because the changes have taken place away from human nature.

Sex is a part of human nature. Yet some religions have said sex is bad and as such have changed morality.

Ah, I see. We're using the terms a little differently. I'm defining human nature as that which is absolutely intrinsic to, and inseparable from, the individual. This wouldn't include behaviors like sex, or circumstances like culture. I'm saying that man's inherent autonomy is the foundation for morality. He is free, and to behave toward him in a way that does not duly acknowledge and respect that freedom is to deny reality, and is therefore "wrong" (incorrect, immoral). As is the case when one is wrong about any law of nature, undesirable consequences will result.

What you're calling "morality" I would call "moral understanding"; namely how closely an individual's (or society's) notions about morality conform with the actual reality. It's fundamentally a scientific understanding, and therefore is dependent upon the level of consciousness of the being, as well as their education.

 

[IsaacNewton]

For many morality is a moving ambiguous target. One day they espouse cheating on your wife is wrong as is sex with prostitutes. The next day they say it's perfectly fine. These people are not moral but they likely will be the ones that claim they are the most moral.

Funny that.

 

[hobelim]

For many morality is a moving ambiguous target. One day they espouse cheating on your wife is wrong as is sex with prostitutes. The next day they say it's perfectly fine. These people are not moral but they likely will be the ones that claim they are the most moral.

Funny that.

Jesus openly ran around town partying with sinners and prostitutes and keeping company with all sorts of bad characters. The pharisees called him an immoral glutton and a drunk, a false prophet, most likely insane, who was leading people astray.

The Pharisees ran around town celebrated as highly respected and dedicated orthodox moral authorities. Jesus called them perverse actors and lying frauds peddling death and were most likely deliberately evil.

How could Jesus have been right calling them imposters when they obsessively conformed to the literal letter of the moral law?

How could the Pharisees have been wrong to accuse Jesus of being a sinner when he was openly doing naughty things?

How could Jesus have claimed to always do exactly what God commands without conforming to the literal letter of the law apparently doing whatever he pleased?


Solve that riddle and you will discover the key to eternal life.

 

[frigidweirdo]

No, morality isn't solely what society thinks. But that's a large part of it. Where does a child learn morality from?

Parents or guardians would probably be the largest part.
Teachers and other people who educated these children too.

They are all imbued with morality that came from their parents and teachers. Yes it'll be somewhat distorted as they've grown up, but still there.

I don't think morality is natural. It's gone through a long process. Different countries have different morality because the changes have taken place away from human nature.

Sex is a part of human nature. Yet some religions have said sex is bad and as such have changed morality.

Ah, I see. We're using the terms a little differently. I'm defining human nature as that which is absolutely intrinsic to, and inseparable from, the individual. This wouldn't include behaviors like sex, or circumstances like culture. I'm saying that man's inherent autonomy is the foundation for morality. He is free, and to behave toward him in a way that does not duly acknowledge and respect that freedom is to deny reality, and is therefore "wrong" (incorrect, immoral). As is the case when one is wrong about any law of nature, undesirable consequences will result.

What you're calling "morality" I would call "moral understanding"; namely how closely an individual's (or society's) notions about morality conform with the actual reality. It's fundamentally a scientific understanding, and therefore is dependent upon the level of consciousness of the being, as well as their education.

This is one of those things where people will probably see things differently.

For me what you're calling morality and moral understand are pretty much the same thing.

What is human nature? If you look around the world, and you see differences in how things work, you'll see that perhaps there isn't that much that could be defined as human nature.

We're biological beings and as such a lot of what we do is automatic, we believe we are free to do as we choose, but really we're not.

It's why religion took off, it's about taking control from something we actually don't have control over. We need to believe we have such control.

But that biology can be shaped. We've learned to shape ourselves into something more than the sum of our parts. Morality comes more from that, than from our biological selves.

Though the thought process for the whole thing might take a long time as this is a complex topic and I've not thought about it that much.