• 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
I am just demonstrating that most people have morals and a conscience. I don't think there is any correlation at all between political ideology (excluding extremists) and personal sense of morality and conscience. By and large, most people are good and decent people regardless of their politics.

I'd argue that most people are, at the very least, mostly harmless, and willing to "go with the flow" and "play nice" so long as it works to their benefit. That much is simple human nature. Whether they are "good" or not really depends on the person in question and their actions.

I do agree, however, that political leaning has little to do with it one way or the other.
 
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.

For a nihilist.... isn't the best thing for them is to promote communal morality and you give off the same perception of said morality... but then you take advantage of the moral when you can without being caught.

That's whats most rational, be in support of said rules and rights, but only follow them when convenient for yourself
 
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

Did someone say drunken sorcery?
 
Do you believe in morality?
No, I don't believe morality exists, I know morality exists. Morality is any self-imposed rule, and people impose all kinds of rules on themselves all the time.

Do you have a personal concept of right and wrong?
Shades of grey.

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?
I don't judge my actions on the right/wrong dynamic, so no. I judge my actions on risk/reward.
 
That is an issue of conscience though. Most people do the right thing because of their conscience, that is unless they can rationalize it somehow and humans are great at rationalization.

Most people then have a moral compass its called your conscience. Seriously you dont need to invoke religious beliefs or anything, to know that killing everybody in McDonalds is wrong.
If people did not have a moral compass built into their brains then there would be no such thing as civilization, because humans would have never evolved that far because we would have killed off the last human just because we were bored.
 
Most people then have a moral compass its called your conscience. Seriously you dont need to invoke religious beliefs or anything, to know that killing everybody in McDonalds is wrong.
That would depend on who is in the McDonnalds.
 
For a nihilist.... isn't the best thing for them is to promote communal morality and you give off the same perception of said morality... but then you take advantage of the moral when you can without being caught.

That's whats most rational, be in support of said rules and rights, but only follow them when convenient for yourself

Are you asking what most of them believe...? Because no, that's certainly not it.

No matter how many times the frightened absolutists scream that everyone else is a sociopath, it still isn't going to make it true. Sorry, dude. We're just as human, and just as likely to be honest and compassionate people as everyone else. I do apologise -- I know how hard it makes it for you to think in black and white. :shrug:

Hell, if anything, without having our morality reduced to some kind of punisher god or egotistical need to believe our judgmentals are absolute for our own sense of security, relativists and nihilists tend to be a lot more concerned with morality in my experience, especially their own.

But I will say I am quite openly anti-"law and order" absolutism. People who base their morality and compassion on nothing but law are just sheep, willing to sacrifice the well-being of others for simple obedience and a personal sense of superiority. I openly support defiance of cruel and anti-human dignity laws, and civil disobediance as a valid path to take towards a more humane society.
 
Last edited:
Looks like we have a lot of anonymous NO votes.
 
Everybody knows right from wrong. The trick is to convince yourself that others are not as important as you are. That is really the crux of faith in a higher power. Understanding that you are not the pinnacle of your existence and that you will be judged for what you have done gives you the perspective that the person next to you (or anywhere else) is as real as you are. Once you convince yourself that there is no higher power and that the only real player in your story is you, that everyone and everything else are just extras in your own movie, you give yourself permission to act in ways you would not want others to act toward you. Not to say that all nihilists are selfish and evil, but if you want to be convincing yourself that you alone are in the spotlight is a good place to start.
 
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

What if the 'kingdom of god' turns out to be a box in a small bit of ground and no thing more? It seems a perversion of greed to claim that behaving a certain way and not having earthy delights will have you slathered in 'heavenly' ones where streets are paved with gold and there is some 'higher' reward...

Sounds like a bribe to me...

I've met good folks who are not christian or accepted in quite a few houses of Gawd.... mostly gay folks... but they have a rather well developed sense of right and wrong.

Courts show routinely people who are not christian show a sense of right and wrong by their actions after a crime.

(but it also shows many so-called christians commit the same crimes so go figure)
 
What if the 'kingdom of god' turns out to be a box in a small bit of ground and no thing more? It seems a perversion of greed to claim that behaving a certain way and not having earthy delights will have you slathered in 'heavenly' ones where streets are paved with gold and there is some 'higher' reward...

Sounds like a bribe to me...

I've met good folks who are not christian or accepted in quite a few houses of Gawd.... mostly gay folks... but they have a rather well developed sense of right and wrong.

Courts show routinely people who are not christian show a sense of right and wrong by their actions after a crime.

(but it also shows many so-called Christians commit the same crimes so go figure)

It's a guide to salvation and life in general. Each of those sins have been demonstrated to cause chaos and mayhem in people's lives. No one can completely fulfill all the wishes/commandment of God but, trying to eliminate as many sins as possible can lead to a betterment of your life and those around you.
 
Are you asking what most of them believe...? Because no, that's certainly not it.

No matter how many times the frightened absolutists scream that everyone else is a sociopath, it still isn't going to make it true. Sorry, dude. We're just as human, and just as likely to be honest and compassionate people as everyone else. I do apologise -- I know how hard it makes it for you to think in black and white. :shrug:

Hell, if anything, without having our morality reduced to some kind of punisher god or egotistical need to believe our judgmentals are absolute for our own sense of security, relativists and nihilists tend to be a lot more concerned with morality in my experience, especially their own.

But I will say I am quite openly anti-"law and order" absolutism. People who base their morality and compassion on nothing but law are just sheep, willing to sacrifice the well-being of others for simple obedience and a personal sense of superiority. I openly support defiance of cruel and anti-human dignity laws, and civil disobediance as a valid path to take towards a more humane society.

I'm just saying it's the most logical thing.... is to do what you want, while promoting a moral code outwardly agreed on others.

if its what you want to follow or be compassionate or whatever, that's great, that's what you want... regardless you live by a different standard by design.
 
I'm just saying it's the most logical thing.... is to do what you want, while promoting a moral code outwardly agreed on others.

if its what you want to follow or be compassionate or whatever, that's great, that's what you want... regardless you live by a different standard by design.

Not really. At least not if you're including human psychology in the mix, which is sort of the whole point. It's beneficial to everyone, including the individual for experiences and actions to be positive. Our ethics are, or should be, driven by our cooperative nature.

Incidentally, this is why absolutism goes wrong so often. It denies our nature in favor of some sort of parental punisher or validation by the universe itself, freezing people in toddler-level morality of reward and punishment, and little else.

How do I "live by a different standard," exactly? It's what I do or it isn't, isn't it? That sentence makes zero sense.
 
How a link to a web page showing that “The median net worth of a member of Congress was $1,029,505 in 2013 “WHICH INCLUDES DEMS AS WELL A REPS is hardly proof of anything but they didn’t take a vow of poverty.:lol:

Peruse the incomes of the legislators and you find that all of them are filthy rich - and that over all, democrats have about 30% greater wealth than Republican in the two houses.

Now see, I thought for sure some clever communist would do the math and come back with "HEY, the Republicans in congress have more money," ignoring the Senate side that pushes the dims so far ahead.

But I guess "clever" and "democrat" just don't go together. :dunno:
 
Not really. At least not if you're including human psychology in the mix, which is sort of the whole point. It's beneficial to everyone, including the individual for experiences and actions to be positive. Our ethics are, or should be, driven by our cooperative nature.

Incidentally, this is why absolutism goes wrong so often. It denies our nature in favor of some sort of parental punisher or validation by the universe itself, freezing people in toddler-level morality of reward and punishment, and little else.

How do I "live by a different standard," exactly? It's what I do or it isn't, isn't it? That sentence makes zero sense.

If nihilism is true, then human psychology, physiology, and even biology are ultimately irrelevant. They are all simply incidental accidents, and can therefore be ignored.

Logically speaking, Celt's absolutely right. All that would really matter in a nihilistic framework is taking what you could for yourself, when feasible to do so.

i.e. Objectivism, with regard for the "common good" only where it intersects with one's own rational self-interest.

Unfortunately, yes. That does inevitably tend to result in quite a bit of self-serving "dick bag" behavior for most people.

Not everyone gets off on gooey altruistic "feelings" for their own sake in the same way you do, you know. Some of us require our rewards to be a bit more tangible.

For that exact reason, in lieu of any set moral code compelling altruistic behavior, not everyone's going to "play nice" just 'cuz. Frankly, they'd be fools to do so anyway, as there's not a terrible amount of benefit to it.
 
Last edited:
If nihilism is true, then human psychology, physiology, and even biology are ultimately irrelevant. They are all simply incidental accidents, and can therefore be ignored.

Logically speaking, Celt's absolutely right. All that would really matter in a nihilistic framework is taking what you could for yourself, when feasible to do so.

i.e. Objectivism, with interest in the "common good" only where it intersects with one's own rational self-interest.

Unfortunately, yes. That does inevitably tend to result in quite a bit of self-serving "dick bag" behavior for most people.

Not everyone gets off on gooey altruistic "feelings" for their own sake in the same way you do, you know. Some of us require our rewards to be a bit more tangible.

For that exact reason, in lieu of any set moral code compelling altruistic behavior, not everyone's going to "play nice" just 'cuz. Frankly, they'd be fools to do so anyway, as there's not a terrible amount of benefit to it.

Well, to the universe, sure. But not to us. It doesn't matter to us, living our lives here, with our minds being wired how they are, what's true of the universe as a whole. It doesn't change our experiences, or our needs as social creatures.

Recognizing that our concerns probably aren't the central focus of the entire universe doesn't turn people into "dick bags" unless you're already a sociopath to begin with, or a toddler. Nearly all secular people are relativists or nihilists to some degree, whether they know it or not, and yet secular-dominant places are the best on earth.

But even for those with rather muted senses of empathy, there are still quite obvious rewards: being successful in society, which is hard when you're a dickbag unless you simultaniously have a very high IQ. And those kinds of people aren't gullible enough to buy into the "punisher" narrative to begin with, so there's probably no convincing them anyway.
 
Well, to the universe, sure. But not to us. It doesn't matter to us, living our lives here, with our minds being wired how they are, what's true of the universe as a whole. It doesn't change our experiences, or our needs as social creatures.

"Wiring" can be changed. Frankly, within a nihilistic framework, it probably should be changed.

Honestly, if nihilism truly is the way of the world, then our empathy is ultimately more of a hindrance than a benefit. We should all consider ourselves fortunate to be born as socially-functional sociopaths.

I mean... Just think of how many problems could be solved that way!

Troubled by an endemic underclass of citizens draining public resources? Well, why not simply purge them?

Hell! Do the environment a favor and grind them up into food and commercial products for everyone else while you're at it!

The same goes for the elderly, the sick, and most others. They aren't really a benefit to you, me, or society in general, after all. :shrug:

Recognizing that our concerns probably aren't the central focus of the entire universe doesn't turn people into "dick bags" unless you're already a sociopath to begin with, or a toddler. Nearly all secular people are relativists or nihilists to some degree, whether they know it or not, and yet secular-dominant places are the best on earth.

That has little to do with the people actually living there, however, or any supposedly "superior" sense of morality found therein.

To the contrary, the modern West is more livable because it is more advanced, and therefore has more resources to spread around. It simply happens to be the case that fat, happy, and well entertained human beings are less likely to resort to violence or predatory behavior than those who live in want.

Frankly, even then, this is hardly absolute. I'd actually argue that the average well-to-do person living in today's "Liberated" society is probably considerably more inter-personally unpleasant, self-serving, and "amoral" than those living a few generations ago. It simply matters less.

But even for those with rather muted senses of empathy, there are still quite obvious rewards: being successful in society, which is hard when you're a dickbag unless you simultaniously have a very high IQ.

That depends on how you define "dick bag behavior" in the first place. Obviously, running around insulting everyone you see would be counter-productive.

However, actions like snubbing the homeless, telling a person in need to "**** off," or deliberately going out of one's way to work a social system in such a way as to gain status and power at someone else's expense not only tend to be "socially acceptable," but are often effective means of getting ahead in life.
 
Last edited:
"Wiring" can be changed. Frankly, within a nihilistic framework, it probably should be changed.

Honestly, if nihilism truly is the way of the world, then our empathy is ultimately more of a hindrance than a benefit. We should all consider ourselves fortunate to be born as socially-functional sociopaths.

I mean... Just think of how many problems could be solved that way!

Troubled by an endemic underclass of citizens draining public resources? Well, why not simply purge them?

Hell! Do the environment a favor and grind them up into food and commercial products for everyone else while you're at it!

The same goes for the elderly, the sick, and most others. They aren't really a benefit to you, me, or society in general, after all. :shrug:

That has little to do with the people actually living there, however, or any supposedly "superior" sense of morality found therein.

To the contrary, the modern West is more livable because it is more advanced, and therefore has more resources to spread around. It simply happens to be the case that fat, happy, and well entertained human beings are less likely to resort to violence or predatory behavior than those who live in want.

Frankly, even then, this is hardly absolute. I'd actually argue that the average well-to-do person living in today's "Liberated" society is probably considerably more inter-personally unpleasant, self-serving, and "amoral" than those living a few generations ago. It simply matters less.

That depends on how you define "dick bag behavior" in the first place. Obviously, running around insulting everyone you see would be counter-productive.

However, snubbing the homeless, telling a person in need to "**** off," or deliberately going out of one's way to work a social system in such a way as to get ahead at someone else's expense not only tends to be "socially acceptable," but are often effective means of getting ahead in life.

That makes less than zero sense. Why is it "preferable" to choose sociopathy when the universe itself has no position? If the universe has no position, there is no "preferable" path in the universe's eyes. It doesn't care.

What cares is the individual, and the hive mind. What it cares about is not objectively "true," but that changes nothing whatsoever about their experience, and interactions with one another.

And no, that wiring can't be changed. People can bury it, and sometimes do (usually after abuse), but it invariably results in psychological problems, and sometimes even health problems. Babies will simply die without social stimulus.

I guess if you have faulty wiring, that kind of makes sense if I turn upside down a bit? But I find kindness of benefit to all, personally. Especially to the least of us. Lots of people do.

So you just contradicted your own argument in a single sentence, and to do so, you used the example of the culture of the straggling problem child of the developed world... which also happens to be the most absolutist? Geez, you do a better job taking yourself apart than I ever could. :lol:

Since I can't seem to get you to understand the concept of cosmic neutrality, I have a feeling this is yet another logic wormhole with Gath.
 
That makes less than zero sense. Why is it "preferable" to choose sociopathy when the universe itself has no position? If the universe has no position, there is no "preferable" path in the universe's eyes. It doesn't care.

It is "preferable" from the perspective of tangible utilitarian benefit. Again, in a world devoid of empathy, we would be capable of addressing quite a few issues which our present moral qualms prevent us from doing so today.

And no, that wiring can't be changed.

Genetic Engineering

:2wave:

These kinds of questions are going to be a real issue sooner than you might think. :lol:

Again, this begs the question: From a "nihilistic" standpoint, if one could build a race of Sociopathic Neitzschean supermen, what would necessarily be "wrong" with doing so?

I guess if you have faulty wiring, that kind of makes sense? But I find kindness of benefit to all, personally. Especially to the least of us. Lots of people do.

Okay. That's nice, and all. However, there's really no reason why anyone should feel an obligation to do so from a nihilistic standpoint. That's the point you seem to be missing.

You're basically relying on the "honor system" here. lol

So you just contradicted your own argument in a single sentence, and to do so used the example of the culture of the straggling problem child of the developed world... which also happens to be the most absolutist? Geez, you do a better job taking yourself apart than I ever could.

What are you talking about?
 
Last edited:



Just because something is real to you doesn't mean that it's real to other people. :roll:

Lots of people claim to see flying saucers but I haven't seen one yet.

I'm not saying that they don't exist, just that I haven't seen any.
 
Last edited:
Well the human capacity for rationalization knows no bounds.
... agreed.... which further muddies the waters in regards to morality.

morality is kinda useless to discuss... it's extremely complex and no one can agree on any the particulars..... we've basically rendered it useless as a concept through our dissections.

it's like this thing we all pretend to believe in, but none of us agree on any of it.. and it changes from 1 second to the next, often on the same exact subject matter.... hell, we can't even agree with ourselves, internally.:lol:
 
Yes obviously some morals are subjective. However, humanity pretty much universally considers lying, stealing, and murder to be immoral.

Actually, this isn't completely true. All those things are actually quite subjective in themselves. Lying is not always considered wrong. Look at movies. Acting is a form of lying. Santa Claus, a lie. There are lies that are considered "fine" or "okay" in almost every (if not every) culture on the planet. Murder is the same way. It is unlawful killing. But then that means it depends on what is against the law. And which laws it goes against, which change with cultures and beliefs. Stealing depends on ownership which isn't always viewed the same to everyone. Do we really own the land? How much? Can we own words? Some would say yes others no to these things.
 
Back
Top Bottom