tommyc

Hi everyone,

This is a slight branch from media-1 arguments on the thread about the woman leaving her kids in hew car while she has hew hair done, and leaving them to bake to death.

He made a point about half way through the thread

I don't believe anyone answered his question directly, so Im going to do so.

I am an atheist, and I do not believe in an objective moral code. The reason I do anything is because it makes me feel good, or at least I believe it will make me feel good. Thats not to say that I think it will have an immediate positive affect, but as a net gain, each action I make will make me happier. Some exceptions are situations when I don't have time to make an informed decision, but in those circumstances I just choose a path "randomly". Also there could be an argument that a massochist does things which harm him. But in his case that would be seen as a good thing. I think this feeling of only doing things that at least benefit myself is perfectly acceptable. It happens to be that I am happy to see other people happy. I think this applies to most people, and therefore we get a society that appears to have a moral code, because people generally carry out actionsthat are for the common good.

So to answer media-1's question, yes I do get "morally" angry only because of the way certain events affect me emotionally.

------

I hope that is clear, and my grammar isn't too appaling, I would appreaciate is anyone knows of any formal documents that adhere to this philosophy, and whether anyone shares my opinion.

cheers
Tom

dk

So why do people get depressed, to feel good?

MadMordigan

Because we are too shit stupid to figure out better ways to be happy. In other words, we make mistakes.

One of the last sane

People get depressed because their brain serotonin levels get too low. That's why the SSRI's work as antidepressants. Better living through chemistry.

tronvillain

Well, is the decrease in serotonin levels spontaneous or the result of lower level biological dysfunction, or is there a mental explanation? Perhaps both. Anyway, I only do things because they make me feel good (or at least less bad), though in many cases there might have been a decision that would have made me feel even better. *shrugs&

AtlanticCitySlave

There is no evidence serotonin levels are low in people who are depressed. In fact, there is no evidence, period, that anyone with any type of "mental illness" has a "chemical imbalance". The only types of chemical imbalances that can be detected are those caused by the drugs themselves. Considering the side effects of most psychiatric drugs, the placebo effects, and other considerations, it is extremely controversial whether they work at all. A new article has recently been published showing St. John's Wort has no effect on depression. And, social approaches to treating depression, schizophrenia, etc., have been more fruitful than any psychiatric medication. Let's not forget, psychiatric drugs are driven by corporations (pharmeceutical companies) who wish to see their drugs bought (billion dollar business). The FDA doesn't test these drugs for their usefulness for too long (Prozac studies were only done for around six weeks).
The idea of "chemical imbalances" and "sertonin levels are low" nonsense is the result of biopsychiatry trying to make a name for itself, and one that has failed, at least intellectually, although socially it has amassed billions of dollars in profits by convincing us we have "chemical imbalances" rather than some things in our lives we need to change. The major figure right now against psychiatric drugs is Breggin, and I would suggest anyone interested read his work, as well as the many references he makes to studies.

tommyc

I had an argument with a friend many years ago, in which he claimed that people did things for charity to make other people feel better. I claimed that although that is true, the only reason people do things is because of the emotional benefit to themselves. I suppose someone could be mentally unstable, and just take random decisions, or decisions that are harmful to themselves, but that's more an area for mental health.

Jamie_L

People do things to make themselves feel better. Quite often, making other people feel better makes the person in question feel better. That's called "empathy". The thing is, what makes us "feel better" has a lot to do with how we are raised - people are programmed at a very early age with a core set of instinctive moral values. As adults, we can choose to change those values, but typically, this "sense of right and wrong" stays with us, and is the underlying factor that determines what moral actions make us "feel good" and "feel bad".

This gets to that great situational ethics question about killing someone to take their money if you KNOW you'll never get caught. Why do most people say no? Because it would make them "feel bad" to kill someone. Why? Because that's the way they have been emotionally programmed.

Jamie

tommyc

Generally no, but then it would depend on who the person was, and how much money they had.

tommyc

Then again, I don't know if I could kill anyone in any situation. Probably not, unless my life was in danger.