This site makes extensive use of JavaScript.
Please enable JavaScript in your browser.
Live
PTR
10.2.7
PTR
10.2.6
Beta
If There is No God... (debate)
Post Reply
Return to board index
Post by
TheMediator
If it is all just opinion, can I ignore it and do whatever I feel like?
If you don't care about anyone else or the consequences, sure, but just because you can steal without being punished doesn't mean that you should, consider what it costs the shop owner when you take without buying.
Post by
182246
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
Ghoso
can i please bring up the
super ego
once more? this is an internal force that provides your conscious with right and wrong and is in constant odds with your id. the ideas are influence subconsciously by what a person observes from others.
Only when person to person individual attitudes change that become visible among society, do the morals of said society shift.But for that to happen, 1 person has to start the trend, either it be a gentle push that could domino for 100's of years toward an act being unacceptable to acceptable, or a swift deliberate act that influences all that see it.
But if one person says murder is alright in a place with no government or God, depending on the collective super egos of society of course, doesn't make it okay; it would be considered "bad".
Post by
182246
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
TheMediator
People still believe in Freudian psychology?
I know, I was going to say something, but I didn't want to be a jerk. I mean Sigmund Freud was brilliant, but he didn't have all the facts and it was his best attempt to rationalize the mind. A lot of his theories are outdated.
Especially this one.
Post by
MyTie
If the super ego is internal, and it defines right from wrong, then if someone's super ego defines mass murder as right, then is it ok to mass murder? What is the counter definition of wrong? Popular opinion between mass egos?
Post by
Ghoso
well anything anyone says is going to be theory. but please, by all means say something that would counter my point rather than saying its bad.
If the super ego is internal, and it defines right from wrong, then if someone's super ego defines mass murder as right, then is it ok to mass murder? What is the counter definition of wrong? Popular opinion between mass egos?
no, because his super ego is out of tune with the rest of society, that would make him crazy by this definition, not justified
Post by
XxDeathxX
TC didn't start a debate here . . .
Post by
MyTie
If the super ego is internal, and it defines right from wrong, then if someone's super ego defines mass murder as right, then is it ok to mass murder? What is the counter definition of wrong? Popular opinion between mass egos?
no, because his super ego is out of tune with the rest of society, that would make him crazy by this definition
So it is POPULAR opinion that decides right from wrong within society? What about the opressed minorities in societies? Is slavery ok if most people believe it is? Is human scarafice? Genocide? ETC? What makes these things wrong, if most of society believe they are right? If it IS ok, then what is the purpose of the UN? Why do we fight what we believe are injustices, if we are the minority?
Post by
182246
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
MyTie
Why do we fight what we believe are injustices, if we are the minority?
Sociologists and anthropologists call it ethnocentrism.
That is what alignes your beliefs with others, but what makes it fundamentally right?
Post by
172996
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
blademeld
If it is all just opinion, can I ignore it and do whatever I feel like?
If you don't care about anyone else or the consequences, sure, but just because you can steal without being punished doesn't mean that you should, consider what it costs the shop owner when you take without buying.
That's the definition of a psychopath. A person who acts in his or her benefit without regard of welfare for others.
Post by
TheMediator
Its impossible to say what's absolutely right and absolutely wrong. Slavery was considered right for centuries and centuries, but today we say it was wrong. Nothing is purely right or wrong, just how you judge actions on certain moral scales. If someone could name a moral code that was always fair and right all the time and was always completely logical, I would be surprised, because no such code exists to my knowledge.
Post by
182246
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
blademeld
Nothing is purely right or wrong.
Values change. That is all.
Post by
MyTie
@Zaputo - I think you're missing the point. We aren't here to point out the history of governments, or the strength of current governments. We are discussing, in their absence, what makes right and wrong?
You keep saying "It won't happen, so we shouldn't talk about it". That is a lousy attitude. If you don't want to know the philosophy behind the ethics, then just leave the thread.
Post by
MyTie
That is what alignes your beliefs with others, but what makes it fundamentally right?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethnocentrism#Theoretical_underpinnings
It's not entirely understood, but then, most things aren't.
All this is explaining is that the highest authority makes the law.
In the abscence of authority what decides right and wrong? Also, what defined right and wrong for the authority, besides the opinions of men?
Post by
260787
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
MyTie
I agree with blademeld and TheMediator here. I think they've pretty much hit it dead on.
Me too. If there is nothing fundamentally different between right and wrong, besides what I am TOLD, and what my OPINION is, then I can do whatever I want, and furthermore, I
should
do whatever I want, because that is the definition of right, within my world.
Post Reply
You are not logged in. Please
log in
to post a reply or
register
if you don't already have an account.