Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Mu · 03-12-2002, 10:33 PM

This is a serious real life problem i'm having right now. I've started thinking long and hard about why things are they way they are and if they should be that way.

I'm having trouble rationally making judgements on what is right and wrong. Its so confusing that i want to make no judgements at all, but that is impossible as even saying i'll make no judgements is a judgement in itself.

The only way i can function in normal life and go to school is to ride the subconcuis bullet and simply go by instinct (aka what feels right, its generally what my mom taught me to say thank you and excuse me and not hurt people and the like etc.)

I can't rationally justify some intrinsic value to happiness or life right now without knowing what is afterlife or what the "meaning" of life is. Hypothetically, if when we die everyone goes to heaven and its all cool, wouldn't death possibly be a good thing?

Being freethinkers here, what do you guys live by if your morality/ethic comes from yourself and not some book like the bible (oh i wish it was so simple that i could just follow a book that tells me what is right and wrong)

tronvillain · 03-12-2002, 11:52 PM

Essentially, I just do what I feel like in a rational manner. Happiness and life don't appear to have any intrinsic value - I just happen to enjoy them.

excreationist · 03-13-2002, 12:25 AM

Well I think humans are motivated by several fundamental emotions. These including seeking connectedness, seeking newness, seeking relief/relaxation, avoiding frustration and physical pain signals (like hunger). We also have some other pleasures/pains like the sucking instinct. (Also used for chewing/kissing)

I think a good framework for thinking about morality is Kohlberg's one.

Here's some links for you:
<a href="http://www.ccp.uchicago.edu/grad/Joseph_Craig/kohlberg.htm" target="_blank">Kohlberg's Six Stages of Moral Judgment</a>
<a href="http://www.geocities.com/Heartland/Ranch/2200/Kohlberg.htm" target="_blank">Kohlberg's Stages - Explained & Illustrated</a> (pop-up ads)

Basically I think that it is about "connectedness". In the lower stages, the person is self-centered, but in the high stages the person is nation-centered or even humanity-centered. So they are valuing a sense of connectedness over their other motivations. In a way it is still selfish though because they are acting that way to receive their "connectedness" pleasure.

I think Gandhi and Martin Luther King were at the highest stage (a lot of the time) - they sometimes broke the law (because they believed it was immoral) and even died for their causes.

Vorkosigan · 03-13-2002, 02:57 AM

I don't think MLK or Gandhi ever attained the highest stage, because there is no higher stage.

Is it that you can't figure out what is right and wrong -- and I very much doubt that, or you'd already be in jail for some random evil act, or is it that you can find any justification for your particular feelings of right and wrong?

Michael

excreationist · 03-13-2002, 06:09 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by turtonm:
I don't think MLK or Gandhi ever attained the highest stage, because there is no higher stage.

Do you mean you object to me talking about "higher" and "lower" stages? (i.e. implying one stage is better than another) BTW, I haven't read others say that Kohlberg talked about "higher" and "lower" stages - that was just my idea. They are called stages though because humans apparently go through every lower stage to get to their current stage.
When I mean the highest stage I mean Stage 6 - Universal Ethical Principles.

Eudaimonist · 03-13-2002, 05:09 PM

You could check these, SecretAgentNinja. Good luck in your search.

<a href="http://www.objectivistcenter.org/psource/products.asp?PSID=OPP-OA027W&CartID=44175313200265823" target="_blank">Viable Values: A Study of Life as the Root and Reward of Morality</a>

<a href="http://shop.barnesandnoble.com/booksearch/results.asp?WRD=Fellowship+of+Reason&userid=1BPIB3 44VJ" target="_blank">Fellowship of Reason</a>

[ March 13, 2002: Message edited by: Eudaimonia ]

luvluv · 03-13-2002, 06:36 PM

turt, is there a right and wrong?

Mageth · 03-13-2002, 07:31 PM

Where have I heard that question before?

echidna · 03-13-2002, 08:39 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by luvluv:
turt, is there a right and wrong?

Not meaning to tread on Michael's toes, but of course there�s right and wrong. But you were probably asking if there is a Right and Wrong.

Dunno, but there�s not a lot of evidence �

herr kissekatt · 03-22-2002, 07:30 AM

I'd say that the best step is to start adhering to the "Pratchettesque" moral philosophy:

"Evil is treating other people as objects."
(Paraphrased)

03-12-2002, 10:33 PM	#1
Mu Junior Member Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: Mu Posts: 8	Need help creating a workable ethic/morality This is a serious real life problem i'm having right now. I've started thinking long and hard about why things are they way they are and if they should be that way. I'm having trouble rationally making judgements on what is right and wrong. Its so confusing that i want to make no judgements at all, but that is impossible as even saying i'll make no judgements is a judgement in itself. The only way i can function in normal life and go to school is to ride the subconcuis bullet and simply go by instinct (aka what feels right, its generally what my mom taught me to say thank you and excuse me and not hurt people and the like etc.) I can't rationally justify some intrinsic value to happiness or life right now without knowing what is afterlife or what the "meaning" of life is. Hypothetically, if when we die everyone goes to heaven and its all cool, wouldn't death possibly be a good thing? Being freethinkers here, what do you guys live by if your morality/ethic comes from yourself and not some book like the bible (oh i wish it was so simple that i could just follow a book that tells me what is right and wrong)

03-13-2002, 05:09 PM	#6
Eudaimonist Veteran Member Join Date: Aug 2000 Location: Sundsvall, Sweden Posts: 3,159	You could check these, SecretAgentNinja. Good luck in your search. <a href="http://www.objectivistcenter.org/psource/products.asp?PSID=OPP-OA027W&CartID=44175313200265823" target="_blank">Viable Values: A Study of Life as the Root and Reward of Morality</a> <a href="http://shop.barnesandnoble.com/booksearch/results.asp?WRD=Fellowship+of+Reason&userid=1BPIB3 44VJ" target="_blank">Fellowship of Reason</a> [ March 13, 2002: Message edited by: Eudaimonia ]</p>

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

03-12-2002, 11:52 PM	#2
tronvillain Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2000 Location: Alberta, Canada Posts: 5,658	Essentially, I just do what I feel like in a rational manner. Happiness and life don't appear to have any intrinsic value - I just happen to enjoy them.

03-13-2002, 12:25 AM	#3
excreationist Veteran Member Join Date: Aug 2000 Location: Australia Posts: 4,886	Well I think humans are motivated by several fundamental emotions. These including seeking connectedness, seeking newness, seeking relief/relaxation, avoiding frustration and physical pain signals (like hunger). We also have some other pleasures/pains like the sucking instinct. (Also used for chewing/kissing) I think a good framework for thinking about morality is Kohlberg's one. Here's some links for you: <a href="http://www.ccp.uchicago.edu/grad/Joseph_Craig/kohlberg.htm" target="_blank">Kohlberg's Six Stages of Moral Judgment</a> <a href="http://www.geocities.com/Heartland/Ranch/2200/Kohlberg.htm" target="_blank">Kohlberg's Stages - Explained & Illustrated</a> (pop-up ads) Basically I think that it is about "connectedness". In the lower stages, the person is self-centered, but in the high stages the person is nation-centered or even humanity-centered. So they are valuing a sense of connectedness over their other motivations. In a way it is still selfish though because they are acting that way to receive their "connectedness" pleasure. I think Gandhi and Martin Luther King were at the highest stage (a lot of the time) - they sometimes broke the law (because they believed it was immoral) and even died for their causes.

03-13-2002, 02:57 AM	#4
Vorkosigan Contributor Join Date: Jan 2001 Location: Barrayar Posts: 11,866	I don't think MLK or Gandhi ever attained the highest stage, because there is no higher stage. Is it that you can't figure out what is right and wrong -- and I very much doubt that, or you'd already be in jail for some random evil act, or is it that you can find any justification for your particular feelings of right and wrong? Michael

03-13-2002, 06:36 PM	#7
luvluv Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: Planet Lovetron Posts: 3,919	turt, is there a right and wrong?

03-13-2002, 07:31 PM	#8
Mageth Contributor Join Date: Jul 2001 Location: Deep in the heart of mother-lovin' Texas Posts: 29,689	Where have I heard that question before?

03-22-2002, 07:30 AM	#10
herr kissekatt New Member Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: Sweden Posts: 1	I'd say that the best step is to start adhering to the "Pratchettesque" moral philosophy: "Evil is treating other people as objects." (Paraphrased)

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.