Quotations and Literature Forum

It is currently Mon Sep 15, 2014 8:02 pm

All times are UTC - 7 hours




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 51 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next
Author Message
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Apr 09, 2005 11:52 pm 
Offline
New member
New member

Joined: Sat Apr 09, 2005 10:50 pm
Posts: 3
Location: USA
Wow, there's some pretty heavy stuff in here. I think I've understood the previous posts, but feel free to pm me if I'm mistaken. It doesn't seem to me that anyone has taken free will into account. It is true that society feeds us what are supposed to be morals. However, that doesn't explain why different people from the same society have differing morals. I find it very difficult to believe that a person's morals come from only one place. One's parents may feel one way about an issue, due to their parents' views and their experience. I may take those views into consideration (or not) and come to a completely different conclusion as to what I think is right in a given situation. There are so many factors in a person's life to consider: religion (if one believes in a religion), family, peers, media, experience, etc. To try to say that morals come from only one place is to narrow the things in the world that influence that person.

I don't have all the answers, that's just what I've come across thus far in my short time on this planet. :)


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Apr 10, 2005 12:15 pm 
Offline
The Sceptic
The Sceptic

Joined: Thu Jan 20, 2005 1:07 pm
Posts: 1811
Location: Yorkshire, United Kingdom
WE are mainly talking about evolution before consciousness. Once we hit consciousness could we have already had some morals? If not where have they come from? If so how did they evolve?

The other issue is to what degree are the contents of our mind genitic, memic or free will.

_________________
"The Truth may be out there but the lies are in your head"
"I tend to think if God wanted us to believe in him he'd exist."


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Apr 11, 2005 5:45 am 
Offline
Member
Member

Joined: Mon Aug 23, 2004 5:50 pm
Posts: 33
I believe we are born with a sense of right and wrong, and there ia a universal code of right and wrong. As we make the decision to do the wrong thing and the justify it, our morals begin to change. Right is right and wrong is wrong. That does not change, we just tend to justify things and convince ourselves that things have changed.

_________________
"Nature never deceives us; it is always we who deceive ourselves" - Jean-Jacques Rousseau


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Apr 11, 2005 8:01 am 
Offline
The Sceptic
The Sceptic

Joined: Thu Jan 20, 2005 1:07 pm
Posts: 1811
Location: Yorkshire, United Kingdom
Where does this absolutee code come from?

_________________
"The Truth may be out there but the lies are in your head"
"I tend to think if God wanted us to believe in him he'd exist."


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Apr 11, 2005 12:32 pm 
Offline
New member
New member

Joined: Mon Apr 11, 2005 11:59 am
Posts: 5
Location: Definitely not where I used to be, but nowhere near where I wanna be
There's no doubt in my mind that morals evolve...just take a look around you, see what is acceptable in 2005 and go back 10-20 years and compare.

_________________
"Don't knock the weather. If it didn't change once in a while, 9 out of 10 people couldn't start a conversation" - Kin Hubbard


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Apr 11, 2005 12:54 pm 
Offline
The Sceptic
The Sceptic

Joined: Thu Jan 20, 2005 1:07 pm
Posts: 1811
Location: Yorkshire, United Kingdom
O.K. the question should have been:
Are morals of an evolutionary advatage to a member of the human speicies?

_________________
"The Truth may be out there but the lies are in your head"
"I tend to think if God wanted us to believe in him he'd exist."


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Apr 11, 2005 6:23 pm 
Offline
Member
Member

Joined: Mon Aug 23, 2004 5:50 pm
Posts: 33
Well speaking as a Christian, there are things that are absoluely wrong. The bible tells us that from the beginning of time man has had a sense of God a sence of right and wrong. But we have also been given free will.
Right and wrong does not change, we as a socirty and individually justify our wrong.
We have found many reasons to justify infidelity, but it is still morally wrong. We justify lying and stealing, giving it a different name, but it is still morally wrong and deep inside we know these things are wrong, we tell ourselves "times have changed, we have been enlightened, we have freedom", but we know when we are wrong.
Nothing has really changed, everything old becomes new again (and people think they were the first ones to see it.) and then the pendulum swings back the other way.

_________________
"Nature never deceives us; it is always we who deceive ourselves" - Jean-Jacques Rousseau


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Apr 12, 2005 7:18 am 
Offline
New member
New member

Joined: Mon Apr 11, 2005 11:59 am
Posts: 5
Location: Definitely not where I used to be, but nowhere near where I wanna be
sigsfried wrote:
O.K. the question should have been:
Are morals of an evolutionary advatage to a member of the human speicies?


My opinion would vary depending on the issue at hand...whereas 100 years ago women had little rights, they now have a lot more rights, a lot more possibilities to pursue careers,etc., and I think that's a good thing...

But also look back and see how children used to be raised, where a spanking was part of every kid's life, and kids had respect for their parents, etc. Nowadays, you wonder who the parent is, the kids talk back, they talk trash, spanking is viewed by many as unnecessary, human rights, children's rights, blablabla...by the time I have kids, I'll probably be put in jail for raising my kids the way my parents raised me. The future is not bright.

Basically, if society were to examine consequences of making certain morals evolve (far from an easy task), I think a lot of things would be different today. I don't think you can say that morals should or should not evolve, you'd have to treat this case by case...

_________________
"Don't knock the weather. If it didn't change once in a while, 9 out of 10 people couldn't start a conversation" - Kin Hubbard


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Apr 13, 2005 1:58 am 
Offline
The Sceptic
The Sceptic

Joined: Thu Jan 20, 2005 1:07 pm
Posts: 1811
Location: Yorkshire, United Kingdom
Interesting point though not acctually answering the question (not a bad thing necessairly) but what we were debating originally was does some with morals have a better chance of surivial (hence giving it evoultionary advantage) over someone without them. This came about becuse it appears at face value tobe something that can only otherwise be explainwed by religion.

However I do agree with you that we should try to cpntrol how our morals evolve but I'm not sure if controlling it is possible.

_________________
"The Truth may be out there but the lies are in your head"
"I tend to think if God wanted us to believe in him he'd exist."


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri May 20, 2005 8:31 am 
Offline
Member
Member

Joined: Fri May 20, 2005 5:50 am
Posts: 11
Howdy, I made a huge post in the 'is stealing right?' forum and found this continuation later on, I'd like to say again, have a look at some of the work by the psychologist Kohlberg, and also evolution of morals in human beings probably has some sort of basis on the factthat we are social beings, living in close proximity to each other, it could be kind of like game theory, the nash equilibrium, if most people chose not to steal somone elses pie, it could be more likely that no one will steal THIER pie as it sits on THIER window. Also, there are examples of co-operative behaviour throughout the animal kingdom (i'm sure most biology text books would have at least one example of this), maybe human's morals are just a complex version of this?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Animals do have morals
PostPosted: Mon May 23, 2005 3:44 am 
Offline
New member
New member

Joined: Mon May 23, 2005 3:31 am
Posts: 1
Have you ever heard the storys of dolphins saving humans from sharks or dogs that save ther masters from certain dome


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon May 23, 2005 5:52 am 
Offline
Member
Member

Joined: Fri May 20, 2005 5:50 am
Posts: 11
Yes, dogs are naturally social animals like humans, they live in packs with a structured order of who is in charge, our domestic dogs have the pack instinct still in them, with us as their leaders (in most cases). It is interesting also that mother wolves etc. have been known to raise abandoned human babies with their own puppies in places such as india, it is generally only mothers who are nursing pups at the time that they find a baby who adopt it rather than (as yucky as it is ) eat it. To me these variations in actions of the mother dogs imply that their social actions are based on instinct, eg when in mothering mode adopt, when not, eat.
The cases of dolphins saving human lives I find facinating and cannot think of an expalination for unless..... :idea: the dolphins really like the taste of human flesh but don't like pulling us apart, so they try to keep the sharks away untill we drown so they can enjoy a delicious meal, except sometimes their meal is rescued :P just kidding about the dolphins


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon May 23, 2005 6:24 am 
Offline
Member
Member

Joined: Fri May 20, 2005 5:50 am
Posts: 11
Also, another evolutionary advantage of 'morals' is that when creatures, such as humans live in family groups, indivduals have at least some of their genetic make up in common with their relatives, by each individual working together for the benefit of the group, they have equal or better chances of genes the same as their own being passed on to the next generation. I know this is silly, being a wuoptes site and all and can't rememebr who said it but it went something life " I would lay down my life for a brother or eight cousins" and the guy was joking about how as much of his genetics would be passed on by eight cousins as by one brother.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon May 23, 2005 7:37 am 
Offline
The Sceptic
The Sceptic

Joined: Thu Jan 20, 2005 1:07 pm
Posts: 1811
Location: Yorkshire, United Kingdom
Yes but I don't think the genetic value is sufficient to explain our moral code as certain things we think as wrong have positive genitic value to us.

_________________
"The Truth may be out there but the lies are in your head"
"I tend to think if God wanted us to believe in him he'd exist."


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon May 23, 2005 6:55 pm 
Offline
New member
New member

Joined: Mon Mar 28, 2005 7:40 pm
Posts: 3
I have to agree with sigsfried. Morals arise from social interactions. Your genetics give you certain innate behaviors, but these are those of survival, including feeding and reproduction, not socially acceptable behaviors. For instance, you can be totally devoted to a marriage, but not turn down the chance to have a one night stand with someone you find nothing but physically attractive. Your morals contradict your innate behaviors. Morals are learned.

_________________
Alis volat Propiis.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 51 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next

All times are UTC - 7 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 14 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group