What constitutes a moral wrong?

Post Reply New Topic

I have seen the consequent issues of morality discussed in some detail, but I have been watching these discussion forums for a long time and rarely seen the discussion actually go anywhere. I think that one of the problems here is that nobody can seem to agree on what does and does not constitute a moral act.

For starters, then, I would like to address a simple, important issue that I see a lot assumptions made about but little direct discussion being given: what makes it wrong to commit the act of murder? How would you convince a person--utterly innocent in every way--who truly does not understand the concept that we should not take the lives of innocent people? What makes this behavior so wrong that most people seem to reject and despise it above and beyond all others?

Now, if you must know, I do not consider the act of murder itself to be inherently evil. Whoever can guess why gets a cookie.

Obviously, since innocent people are intentionally killed every day for doubtful purposes murder is not considered universally as immoral.

I would refer to my new avatar. Morality is relative. So, what constitutes a moral wrong is merely your opinion of what is morally wrong.

I've heard this said a lot. What makes you think this?

Because I am my own authority.

I don't believe in moral absolutes, and for those that do, I see them as merely applying their own perception of morality, which of course, is relative.

So making a moral choice is like choosing which ice-cream to have?

in my opinion culture determines morailty. so i would say, whatever is moral in your culture that is what you can define it with. now if it is correct or not is a whole nother issue, because ones culture will different from someone elses

Last edited by richardbenson on 24 Apr 2009, 9:15 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Well, not exactly, but there are some correlations. Specifically, taste in ice-cream is going to be relative the same way that morality is. I like vanilla, you like chocolate, I think the Iraq war is immoral, you think it is moral (just an example, I have no idea what your opinion on this is).

Of course though, a moral decision will tend to be more complicated than what flavor of ice cream to go with.

How big is a culture? I mean, if my sense of morality is different to another's who is a part of what I assume to be the same culture (let's say we went to the same schools, and we are now of the age of leaving school), are we actually from a different culture, or does culture not entirely imbue those within it with its values (and so we can gain a moral sense from something that isn't our culture)?



Why, then, do people argue about morality with more fire than they do about ice-cream?

I was also wondering, because it is an obvious question to ask, if an action becomes moral just because we will it, is everything moral? Is it o.k. for me to punch my granny in the face and then turn to my crying mother when she asks me, "why?" and say, "because it is my will."

im not going to front. i have no idea what you just said, but i think your talking about nitpicking. people arent much smarter than sheep so when one jumps off the cliff guess what? most of them if not all of them usually do

Fair enough.

I'm not to great at expressing these things, I know, so I apologise for it.

no need for apologies my good man, we would both still be alive on the cliff edge anyways.

Not exactly. A culture creates a moral barometer, but they do not determine what is actually moral. Showing the differences in morality from culture to culture enforces my view that morality is relative.



People are arrogant, and like to live in a world where they are "right". Nobody wants to be "wrong". People are willing to accept relativity with regards to ice-cream preference because it doesn't seem all that important to them, but an issue such as morality is directly tied to one's world-view. People like to be comfortable in the idea that their world-view is the correct worldview, and as such will argue vehemently to show that their morality is somehow "more moral" than another viewpoint.



I think it is more correct to say that morality, as an absolute, does not exist. It's a concept we create to define that which we feel is "right". So, if you actually felt that punching your granny was a moral action, it would in fact be moral, because you hold it to be so. Now, we can likely both agree that our personal moralities do not include granny-punching, but that is irrelevant to whether it is absolutely moral or not.

It's not really about "will". People often do things they feel to be wrong.

But if you do something, and feel it to be morally right, then it is right?

I kind of feel iffy about saying that the cult that starved the infant because it wouldn't say, "Amen," after its meal was acting in a morally upright fashion, just because they believed it to be right. (backstory: the infant wouldn't say, "Amen," after its meal, so in order to teach it a lesson, it was starved to death. The cult-leader told the followers that it would be resurrected, so this was just a strong punishment which would impress the power of the divine upon the infant, teaching it a lesson)

Incidentally, I actually am not sure that it's okay for two opposite things to be right at the same time. Why isn't this a contradiction?

vibratetogether i am honored to be having this discussion with you, as i make my 10,000th post. hey im not gonna lie, i need to mention this because this is only my second time ive ever got to 10,000 posts on a bb. and i look forward to your 10,000th post here because i like the way you say things here most times.

i know it doesnt determine what is moral, this is why i said, "if it is correct or not" implying that it can never be proven to be an absolute truth

It's quite simple. It's not a contradiction because there is no such thing as an absolute "right" or an absolute "wrong". You need absolutes to manage a contradiction.

You're not wanting to admit that this action is "morally upright" is merely the manifestation of your personal morality, which would say that this act is immoral (I would agree, but that's not the point).