This no good or evil

Just morality

Originally posted by Vladamir no1
Just morality

No good or evil, just morality, don't you mean personal taste?
Kelly

Originally posted by Vladamir no1
Just morality

there is no morality there is wtf you want to do and what you dont want to do.

Is it possible that knowing both good and evil at the same time has a cancelling effect? The end resulting in death or the inability to sustain life.

Originally posted by KellyJay
No good or evil, just morality, don't you mean personal taste?
Kelly

Your personal taste is superimposed 'by' and infused 'with' a morality that embodies you in a totality that you are hardly aware of.

Originally posted by Vladamir no1
Your personal taste is superimposed 'by' and infused 'with' a morality that embodies you in a totality that you are hardly aware of.

I have a question regarding your latest comment: assuming that you are defining "morality" as a moral doctrine or system, do you believe that this system is created by you/society, or do you believe that the system transcends humanity itself?

Also, to bring the debate down to cases (please forgive me if this sounds offensive, but I can think of no better concrete example): If I presented to you a live human baby and chopped that baby into bits, would you say that I had done something evil?

Regards,
R

Originally posted by Ristar
I have a question regarding your latest comment: assuming that you are defining "morality" as a moral doctrine or system, do you believe that this system is created by you/society, or do you believe that the system transcends humanity itself?

Also, to bring the debate down to cases (please forgive me if this sounds offensive, but I can think of no better c ...[text shortened]... and chopped that baby into bits, would you say that I had done something evil?

Regards,
R

good example. chopping a baby in pieces cannot be a matter of morality because society doesn't need to think whether or not it is evil because it obviously is. so in conclusion there is evil that doesn't depend on moral standards. so it can be argued that, by opposition, there is also good that doesn't depend on moral standards.

in conclusion, there is good and evil. morality comes second as a mean to discern between the two.

Originally posted by Ristar
I have a question regarding your latest comment: assuming that you are defining "morality" as a moral doctrine or system, do you believe that this system is created by you/society, or do you believe that the system transcends humanity itself?

Also, to bring the debate down to cases (please forgive me if this sounds offensive, but I can think of no better c ...[text shortened]... and chopped that baby into bits, would you say that I had done something evil?

Regards,
R

With respect to your baby example, I wouldn't call it evil, since evil is a completely meaningless term.
I would call it wrong.

Originally posted by amannion
With respect to your baby example, I wouldn't call it evil, since evil is a completely meaningless term.
I would call it wrong.

And why would you call it wrong?

Could it possibly be because it is something evil to do?

Originally posted by xpoferens
And why would you call it wrong?

Could it possibly be because it is something evil to do?

It's wrong because its wrong.
We have a moral framework that includes the notion of raising and protecting our children. This extends more generally to children and makes an act such as chopping one up morally repugnant.
It's no more 'evil' than turning a computer on is 'evil' or walking inthe park is 'evil'. Evil is a meaningless term.

Originally posted by amannion
It's wrong because its wrong.
We have a moral framework that includes the notion of raising and protecting our children. This extends more generally to children and makes an act such as chopping one up morally repugnant.
It's no more 'evil' than turning a computer on is 'evil' or walking inthe park is 'evil'. Evil is a meaningless term.

Honestly amannion, I don't think you can dissociate evil from wrong.

All evil is wrong, but not all wrong is inherently evil.

Originally posted by xpoferens
Honestly amannion, I don't think you can dissociate evil from wrong.

All evil is wrong, but not all wrong is inherently evil.

What I'm saying is that nothing is evil.
Evil is a meaningless concept.
There are actions that are wrong or bad.
You might call some or all of these evil - which doesn't stop them from being bad or wrong - but I would say that calling something evil means nothing.

Originally posted by amannion
What I'm saying is that [b]nothing is evil.
Evil is a meaningless concept.
There are actions that are wrong or bad.
You might call some or all of these evil - which doesn't stop them from being bad or wrong - but I would say that calling something evil means nothing.[/b]

If evil does not exist, why does "wrong" or "bad" have to exist?

Originally posted by xpoferens
If evil does not exist, why does "wrong" or "bad" have to exist?

Because we live by certain moral and ethical standards.
We choose to accept that chopping up babies is wrong - that makes it wrong.
You could imagine a hypothetical society that accepted that chopping up babies was okay - that would make it okay. (Although I can't imagine such a society lasting very long.)

Wrong and bad don't 'have' to exist.
They exist because we determine, amongst ourselves, that some things will be wrong and bad.

Evil doesn't fit into such a schema.

Originally posted by amannion
Because we live by certain moral and ethical standards.
We choose to accept that chopping up babies is wrong - that makes it wrong.
You could imagine a hypothetical society that accepted that chopping up babies was okay - that would make it okay. (Although I can't imagine such a society lasting very long.)

Wrong and bad don't 'have' to exist.
They exi ...[text shortened]... ourselves, that some things will be wrong and bad.

Evil doesn't fit into such a schema.

Perhaps a rephrasing of the question is in order:

If I murdered this baby in the manner I have described, how would you feel? Would you be appalled or would you take it in stride?