• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Do you have a personal concept of right and wrong?

Do you believe in morality?

  • Total voters
    59
ALiberalModerate

ALiberalModerate

Pragmatist
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 23, 2005
Messages
32,438
Reaction score
22,669
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Moderate
A few of our posters seem to think that those who have certain ideologies are moral nihilists. For example, they believe that liberals are moral nihilists and thus liberals believe that nothing is either moral or immoral.

The definition of moral is below for purposes of this poll:

moral: Concerned with the principles of right and wrong behavior and the goodness or badness of human character.

So the question is, are you personally concerned with the principles of right and wrong behavior in regards to your own actions and the goodness or badness of your own character?
 
Everyone has morality, I don't think there is a human being no matter how psychotic or how vile they might be have some sense of morality. However I do believe morality is completely subjective to the person based on their upbringing, life experiences, teachings, and social pressure. Humanity just creates special snowflakes like that.
 
SouthernDemocrat said:
A few of our posters seem to think that those who have certain ideologies are moral nihilists. For example, they believe that liberals are moral nihilists and thus liberals believe that nothing is either moral or immoral.

The definition of moral is below for purposes of this poll:

moral: Concerned with the principles of right and wrong behavior and the goodness or badness of human character.

So the question is, are you personally concerned with the principles of right and wrong behavior in regards to your own actions and the goodness or badness of your own character?
Click to expand...

Quite. More than most. I'm an atheist, and also a nihilist.

People don't seem to understand what nihilism actually is. Just because I don't think there is a concept in the universe itself for morality does not mean that I don't think there is an ethical standard amongst the human species, and an ideal amongst its individual members. The fact that it is not some sort of "ultimate law" doesn't change anything about practical life, emotion, or empathy as we experience it.

People just freak out when they hear "nihilism" because they either don't understand it, or it denies them the ability to believe their lives are of some kind of ultimate importance to the universe. It's offensive to the fragile ego.

There is no contradiction between having ethics and being a nihilist.
 
Galatians 5:19-21

Now the works of the flesh are evident: sexual immorality, impurity, sensuality, idolatry, sorcery, enmity, strife, jealousy, fits of anger, rivalries, dissensions, divisions, envy, drunkenness, orgies, and things like these. I warn you, as I warned you before, that those who do such things will not inherit the kingdom of God.

Short list
 
SmokeAndMirrors said:
Quite. More than most. I'm an atheist, and also a nihilist.

People don't seem to understand what nihilism actually is. Just because I don't think there is a concept in the universe itself for morality does not mean that I don't think there is an ethical standard amongst the human species, and an ideal amongst its individual members. The fact that it is not some sort of "ultimate law" doesn't change anything about practical life, emotion, or empathy as we experience it.

People just freak out when they hear "nihilism" because they either don't understand it, or it denies them the ability to believe their lives are of some kind of ultimate importance to the universe. It's offensive to the fragile ego.

There is no contradiction between having ethics and being a nihilist.
Click to expand...

Its my understanding that moral nihilism means that nothing is either inherently moral or immoral. What you describe above looks to me more like a variant of moral relativism.
 
SouthernDemocrat said:
Its my understanding that moral nihilism means that nothing is either inherently moral or immoral. What you describe above looks to me more like a variant of moral relativism.
Click to expand...

Not exactly. Moral relativism allows morals to be "true" relative to whatever is judging them -- the culture, usually.

Nihilism denies that any moral judgment can ever be "true" -- something that is "true" only relatively is not actually "true." "True" implies "factual," and something cannot be factual, subjectively. In essence, all morals are constructed.

However, nihilism does not deny the utility of constructed morals, given the way humans are wired, and wired to each other. They just aren't "true" in an objective sense, i.e. in the context of the greater reality beyond the way humans see the world, or even how humans see individual situations.
 
SouthernDemocrat said:
A few of our posters seem to think that those who have certain ideologies are moral nihilists. For example, they believe that liberals are moral nihilists and thus liberals believe that nothing is either moral or immoral.

The definition of moral is below for purposes of this poll:

moral: Concerned with the principles of right and wrong behavior and the goodness or badness of human character.

So the question is, are you personally concerned with the principles of right and wrong behavior in regards to your own actions and the goodness or badness of your own character?
Click to expand...

I have a VERY STRONG sense of right and wrong and often do things to my personal disadvantage for the sake of that code.

The base of it is a combination of "do as little harm as possible" and "have a sense of honor, humility, and integrity"

I wouldn't feel complete as a person if i wasn't constantly pursing that.
 
Last edited:
SmokeAndMirrors said:
Quite. More than most. I'm an atheist, and also a nihilist.

People don't seem to understand what nihilism actually is. Just because I don't think there is a concept in the universe itself for morality does not mean that I don't think there is an ethical standard amongst the human species, and an ideal amongst its individual members. The fact that it is not some sort of "ultimate law" doesn't change anything about practical life, emotion, or empathy as we experience it.

People just freak out when they hear "nihilism" because they either don't understand it, or it denies them the ability to believe their lives are of some kind of ultimate importance to the universe. It's offensive to the fragile ego.

There is no contradiction between having ethics and being a nihilist.
Click to expand...

That is a bit argumentative. To be a nihilist means to be the ultimate skeptic, which also means to question life as having any objective meaning, any defined purpose, or have any intrinsic value at all. By extension to engage in that level of skepticism also means to question any and all sources of ethics including self derived ethics. The reason is to be the ultimate skeptic often means to question all that humanity comes up with as standards for social behavior (or control) regardless of source. That does not mean that rejection of systems of belief (theism) equates in itself to nihilism, but it does mean that having an ethical standard and being a nihilist are opposing forces. Why would you suggest having an ethical standard, no matter the source, if nihilism is all about rejection of life having objective meaning?
 
Who ever voted NO should probably go into politics ;)
 
Quag said:
Who ever voted NO should probably go into politics ;)
Click to expand...

I thought about it just to make things interesting with the whole idea of source for personal concept of right and wrong, but we would see so many DP heads explode in anger over the idea that the entire thread would probably end up in The Sewer.
 
US Conservative said:
Its real.
Click to expand...

Based on what? You can't just say something. If you want to be taken seriously when making a blanket statement about an entire group of people, then you need to back it up. If its your contention that many if not most liberals are moral nihilists, then you need to define what you mean by a moral nihilist and provide some evidence to back up your contention.
 
If morality is truly subjective then it doesn't exist in any meaningful way and you probably shouldn't use it for anything.
 
WCH said:
Galatians 5:19-21

Now the works of the flesh are evident: sexual immorality, impurity, sensuality, idolatry, sorcery, enmity, strife, jealousy, fits of anger, rivalries, dissensions, divisions, envy, drunkenness, orgies, and things like these. I warn you, as I warned you before, that those who do such things will not inherit the kingdom of God.

Short list
Click to expand...




I dunno, Drunken orgies can feel quite heavenly.....
 
Henrin said:
If morality is truly subjective then it doesn't exist in any meaningful way and you probably shouldn't use it for anything.
Click to expand...

What is objective morality and how do you measure it objectively?
 
Quag said:
What is objective morality and how do you measure it objectively?
Click to expand...

Please review how I voted in the poll. The point I was making is that if morality has no objective basis then it is an entirely worthless and serves no purpose whatsoever.
 
Quag said:
How so?
Click to expand...

How do I answer a question like that? I don't believe in morality, so exactly how am I supposed to answer a question concerning objective morality? In any event, for morality to have any usefulness it would have to be objective or otherwise any action towards reaching those ends is undoubtedly unjustified.
 
Henrin said:
How do I answer a question like that? I don't believe in morality, so exactly how am I supposed to answer a question concerning objective morality? In any event, for morality to have any usefulness it would have to be objective or otherwise any action towards reaching those ends is undoubtedly unjustified.
Click to expand...

Ok if you don't believe in morality (you should be a politician) then explain why if morality is subjective then it doesn't exist in any meaningful way.
 
OrphanSlug said:
That is a bit argumentative. To be a nihilist means to be the ultimate skeptic, which also means to question life as having any objective meaning, any defined purpose, or have any intrinsic value at all. By extension to engage in that level of skepticism also means to question any and all sources of ethics including self derived ethics. The reason is to be the ultimate skeptic often means to question all that humanity comes up with as standards for social behavior (or control) regardless of source. That does not mean that rejection of systems of belief (theism) equates in itself to nihilism, but it does mean that having an ethical standard and being a nihilist are opposing forces. Why would you suggest having an ethical standard, no matter the source, if nihilism is all about rejection of life having objective meaning?
Click to expand...

No, they aren't. Whether the universe itself cares has nothing to do with whether I do. What difference does it make to me, here on earth living my life, whether I have intrinsic value or meaning to the universe? None whatsoever.

It doesn't need to have objective meaning. What's wrong with my constructs, if I feel they make life here on earth better, according to the wiring of humans? Nothing. Nothing in nihilism says I can't build all the constructs I want, nor does it contradict with my position that they have no objective truth to them.

Does the universe acknowledge any of it as "correct"? Not as far as I can tell. There's nothing objective about it.

And who cares?

What difference does that make to how I live my life? None.

Whether the universe cares or not, whether there is any truly objective meaning or not, that doesn't change my need to navigate my life, and it doesn't change my nature as an empathetic creature.

I am not so insecure that I need to believe that me or my decisions are of intrinsic meaning to the universe in order to make my life seem worth living, and worth living well.
 
Quag said:
Ok if you don't believe in morality (you should be a politician) then explain why if morality is subjective then it doesn't exist in any meaningful way.
Click to expand...

If morality exists and it is subjective in nature then all moral determinations of what is right and wrong have no importance outside of the person that has made those determinations. Why should I care if you find my action to be morally repugnant and why should you care if I find your action to be morally repugnant? I see no reason for either of us to care what the other finds to be morally offensive if morality is nothing more than opinion. It is completely worthless in debate and completely worthless as any sort of way to determine anything

If morality is nothing but opinion then there is no such thing as anything being moral or immoral and thus the entirely concept is completely useless.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom