[–] xTreme_Hotel 0 points 1 point 1 point (+1|-0) ago
Not really. I mean it's not going to do much more than delay you in finishing your errands if I decide to shoot you dead in a walmart parking lot. And your family will have to take a couple days off work for your funeral.
[–] xTreme_Hotel ago
That premise is like saying you're having a discussion about math but the number 2 doesn't exist. That there can only ever be a distinct thing and the number 2 is simply a pair of those 1 distinct things. True, but it is also something more than that. If one were to follow that argument to it's end then there wouldn't be any numbers besides 1. This would give a vastly limited picture of mathematics and arithmetic, discounting all of the subtleties, nuances, and description it provides.
If you don't like that argument, say there are no limits on killing and nobody gives a shit about anyone. I shoot someone dead in a parking lot because why not? Would the victims family, in not giving a shit about anyone, simply not care, be entirely indifferent to my action? While I may be on the internet and you all are aspergers as fuck most people would feel something. That's hardwired into the brains of mammals. That's why they are mammals, because at the very least mothers care for their offspring.
If I kill enough people one of those mothers is going to think me a mother fucker and want me dead. With no limits, what's to stop her? I'm either shot dead myself or spend the rest of my life holed up or constantly looking over my should. Hardly the life I want to live. More than an inconvenience, my experience of pleasure would be diminished and my experience of pain increased. Not to mention the victims' mothers and my own once I'm eventually shot dead myself.
Do we set up external controls to encourage and force certain behaviors? Of course we do. Just like having more numbers than 1 gives us the ability to do multiplication in arithmetic (and all the results of that ability), seeing society as something more than a collection of individuals leads us to a system where more individuals can have a greater experience of pleasure than they could if everyone was simply left to the whims of their own devices.
Is society perfect? No. But would you rather be living as an ancient hunter gatherer, chasing zebras in Africa and always on the lookout for someone else to come by and steal your prey? And by learning and refining our morals over time we have steadily increased the amount of happiness and reduced pain for larger and larger swaths of people in society. Would you rather have your current life or be some broke ass farmer, barely alive enslaved in ancient Greece or in serfdom in 19th century Russia? I'll take things the way they are, with the limits they impose on myself over any of that. Unless you want me to come shoot you, just so that you'll have the opportunity to shoot back.
[–] Jourdy288 0 points 1 point 1 point (+1|-0) ago
I try to live my life in a moral fashion- I show love and respect to others, I don't steal and do my best not to cause harm.
I don't feel inconvenienced by these things- even when they're difficult to abide by- because to me, they're an important part of a much bigger picture.
[–] SilverStar 0 points 2 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago
I don't think so.
I've always viewed morals as a tool to prevent you from doing things you regret, which are mistakes. Morals prevent you from making mistakes within a social setting.
I imagine most people don't steal simply because they view it as immoral, for example. Stealing from within your tribe would be a mistake, as you'd most likely face consequences. You have negative feelings when violating that moral code, as your brain is trying to keep you from making a mistake. The same way you get scared when you lean over a cliff or put your hand near a moving blade - negative feelings to keep you from making mistakes.
[–] newoldwave ago
Everyone has heard the saying "what goes around, comes around". I believe there is a universal law, outside human laws, where by when I do something good for someone else, then someone will do something good for me. Likewise if i should do something bad to someone, then sooner or later someone will do something bad to me. The Christian Bible stated it as the Golden Rule: "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you". It's not just some goody two shoes rule to live by, but stating the facts.
[–] newoldwave ago
I don't think faith enters into this. It simply is, whether one believes it or not.
[–] Sadistic_Bastard 0 points 5 points 5 points (+5|-0) ago
I'm confused, what do you mean?
[–] Reow [S] 0 points 4 points 4 points (+4|-0) ago
What I mean is this: Is there a higher purpose to morals, or are they a vain belief? Do they produce anything that is objectively good in this world, or is the harsh nihilistic truth that they are self-imposed shackles and flagellation?
[–] Sadistic_Bastard 0 points 2 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago
Thank you for the clarification! I believe that it depends entirely on the moral in question. Not killing? More than an inconvenience, because it's probably in our nature to protect our species and not just killing people left and right. That's supported by a lot (if not all) cultures having restrictions against it. Waiting until after marriage to have sex? Just an inconvenience.
[–] Calorie-Kin 0 points 1 point 1 point (+1|-0) ago (edited ago)
Oh yes, definitely. Societies agreed on certain morals because those were beneficial for them. If you think about like.. Murder for a second: murder doesn't benefit most societies, because the society's main goal is to stay alive. When you have people killing each other, it's bad for the tribe (because it reduces the number of people).
This can be applied to any and all morals in all civilizations. Lying is another one, a society that's built on lies is one that crumbles. No one trusts anyone, and no diplomacy can take place. So it's in the society's best interest to weed out the liars.
Many people have different views on this, but in my opinion true altruism doesn't really exist. Veganism, for example, isn't really done for some greater good. It's done because of the understanding that meat and dairy are harming the environment (your kids' kids and your society) and our bodies (yourself), as well as the animals around us (potential companions).
Donating to charity isn't a selfless act as-well, because deep down, it's rooted in human behavior. You're donating to those who need help because if you were in the same situation, you'd want people to donate to you. You could get cancer tomorrow, or get hit by a car, lose your house, whatever the cause.
Religious morals (like donating to a church/obeying the one true god/whatever) is a selfish act, it's an attempt to get a spot in heaven.
Morals are just there to keep societies intact. We made them up, and we're sticking to them because that's what we figured out works best over the span of thousands of years of developmental evolution.