Who decides societal morality?

[radcen]

Who decides societal morality?

This question is prompted by another thread regarding capital punishment. There has been a lot of talk regarding people living within what's moral in society. (Yes, Tigger plays a big part in the inspiration for this question.) So, it got me thinking... while I do agree that society should have some level of a moral bar, where is that bar? Who decides? How is it decided?

Is it a set measure that exists whether people like it or not? Is it a "majority rules" kind of thing... which would make morality a moving target of sorts as times change?

Note: This question pertains to how we set the bar, not what the bar is.

 

[longview]

In order to measure anything, you must first have some sort of reference standard.
In the world of morality, Religion (not just Christianity) occupies what could be
called a control group.
Most of our most fundamental concepts of right and wrong come from the 10 commandments,
or similar concepts set down by the other Religions.
Basically treat others like you would like to be treated, (exclusive of masochist:mrgreen

 

[Sherman123]

By definition the people in society.

 

[Fisher]

do people choose their own morality?

 

[Canell]

The "elite", generally speaking. eace

If they say gay marriage is OK, it's OK. If they say serial monogamy is OK, it's OK. If they say smoking weed is bad, so it is, etc. etc.

 

[Sherman123]

The "elite", generally speaking. eace

If they say gay marriage is OK, it's OK. If they say serial monogamy is OK, it's OK. If they say spoking weed is bad, so it is, etc. etc.

You cannot possibly believe that.

 

[Dooble]

Who decides societal morality?

Apparently it's the Left, right now.

 

[Canell]

You cannot possibly believe that.

And why not?
What's your story?

 

[ThePlayDrive]

Whichever group has the greatest influence over power structures (government, media, et al.) in any given society.

It is definitely not everyone in a society who determines societal morality.

 

[ThePlayDrive]

By definition the people in society.

Which people? It's definitely not all people.

 

[Sherman123]

And why not?
What's your story?

The process of a society shifting it's view on an issue is a highly organic one that has its origins in a variety of things. Our countries evolving views on gay rights and gay marriage took decades and while high profile supporters played a role in bringing publicity to the issue it has been the changing views of millions that have made it a political movement. Broad contours we can identify are an increasing social libertarian perspectives in a new generation, effective advocacy from the gay rights movement, etc.

 

[Sherman123]

Which people? It's definitely not all people.

Assuming you live in a democracy then yes it is generally all the people. Popular will and consensus will usually drive political, cultural, and social trends. The turning tide on drug decriminalization, gay marriage, etc are evidence of this.

 

[Taylor]

Whichever group has the greatest influence over power structures (government, media, et al.) in any given society.

It is definitely not everyone in a society who determines societal morality.

I'd agree and disagree - everyone has voice, but some are much, much louder than others.

 

[radcen]

Whichever group has the greatest influence over power structures (government, media, et al.) in any given society.

It is definitely not everyone in a society who determines societal morality.

Is that the choosing of societal morality, or is that the enforcing of one's own morality on society?

 

[Canell]

The process of a society shifting it's view on an issue is a highly organic one that has its origins in a variety of things.

Well, I happen to think it's more of a GMO case. Like that Monsanto story.
Social engineering, if you will.

 

[Sherman123]

Well, I happen to think it's more of a GMO case. Like that Monsanto story.
Social engineering, if you will.

I'm not sure I follow.

 

[Rainman05]

A long time ago, it was more acceptable for people to litter the streets. Now, if you throw a can on the street, you are looked at with disgust by other people and rightfully so.

This is an example of how morals changed. Who changed them? Society, on all levels worked to change this. From a vocal minority to the public consciousness the anti-street litter movement impacted more and more people switching our perception of right behavior and etiquette.

 

[Canell]

I'm not sure I follow.

Never heard of "social engineering"? Come on. :lol:

 

[radcen]

A long time ago, it was more acceptable for people to litter the streets. Now, if you throw a can on the street, you are looked at with disgust by other people and rightfully so.

This is an example of how morals changed. Who changed them? Society, on all levels worked to change this. From a vocal minority to the public consciousness the anti-street litter movement impacted more and more people switching our perception of right behavior and etiquette.

Interesting analogy. I think smoking would be a good analogy, also.

 

[Quik]

Who decides societal morality?

Who does? The government. Who should? The people.

 

[digsbe]

Society as a whole dictates it and I think it changes as the needs, desires, and maturity level of society changes. During wartime or times of trouble society may suggest a stronger sense of "morals" with more discipline. In times of prosperity or less strife I think society pushes for more lax "morals" and is more permissible of what would be previously considered improper behaviors. I also think as maturity and work ethic degrade morals tend to go down as well.

 

[ThePlayDrive]

Assuming you live in a democracy then yes it is generally all the people. Popular will and consensus will usually drive political, cultural, and social trends. The turning tide on drug decriminalization, gay marriage, etc are evidence of this.

No, the existence of a democracy only guarantees that the people elect their political leaders and make other legal decisions. It does not mean that "all people" determine societal morality. Hell, it doesn't even mean that "all people" determine elected officials. The fact that some people in society think SSM is moral while others do not actually demonstrates that no everybody determines societal morality as there are different moral perspectives within society.

So again, which people?

 

[ThePlayDrive]

I'd agree and disagree - everyone has voice, but some are much, much louder than others.

While I agree that some are much louder than others, I wouldn't necessarily say that loudness is what enables someone to determine societal morality. I would say that influence does. After all, people can be very loud and lose to battle over societal morality - just look at all the loud people who opposed interracial marriage.

 

[ThePlayDrive]

Is that the choosing of societal morality, or is that the enforcing of one's own morality on society?

It's both. They aren't mutually exclusive. In fact, the former requires the latter.

 

[Taylor]

While I agree that some are much louder than others, I wouldn't necessarily say that loudness is what enables someone to determine societal morality. I would say that influence does. After all, people can be very loud and lose to battle over societal morality - just look at all the loud people who opposed interracial marriage.

That's why I think it comes down to everyone playing a role. Yes, ultimately what you say has to resonate with people - that might not happen if you're very loud, but definitely won't if you're not heard at all.

Because of the internet, this is probably much less of an issue than it once was - I mean there was a time not too long ago when you practically had to write a book.