I notice that many people speak very moralistically at times, but when I ask them to explain their morals, so far in my experience, they almost never do. I'm familiar with the Christian concept of faith, and find that to be an unacceptable answer, but often that is as far as the answer goes. My intention here is not to try not to actually speak against faith, but just to expose it. So when people's morals rely on faith, then all I wish to do is determine that and make that clear to them if they deny it.. Otherwise, I'd like to listen to people's explanations. As a suggestion, to start, people might simply state something that they consider moral or immoral and explain why.
I don't belive in morals I believe people label the good and the bad when what is being labeled is always neutral Is killing a person bad? If it were, we wouldn't have been killing people as a species for thousands of years
thou shalt not kill That is my moral, and i don't...not even stink bugs that fly around me at times like little helicopters....or spiders, which i help back outside..... but I have been known to kill the damn mosquitoes and ticks......little vampires that only make other life sick..... Other than that...my moral is live and let live.....
Although I am deeply concerned with morality I fear that at the end of the day to say that something is wrong is merely to say that the observer finds it distasteful. I am not literally a utilitarian but I tend to believe that the rightness or wrongess of an action is identical to the joy or suffering that results. I am aware that my actions effect others. I am aware that suffering is unenjoyable. Therefor I attempt to refrain from things that cause innocent beings to suffer. That is essentially the whole of my morality, though again I do not think that this type of rightness or wrongess is engrained in the universe. I do wholeheartedly believe that for Christians the question of morality is just as difficult if not more difficult than it is for atheists. The reason being that morality for Christians or for athiests is subject to precisely the same problems, but Christianity brings even more complications to which the athiest is not subjected.
No, i can't explain it or why...but that is the way i just am. As a little girl of about 3, I screamed and cried until my grandparents and parents threw back the big fish they caught to safety. It is just the way I am and have always been...i screamed and cried then, too, when my grandfatherwas cutting down a tree...no explanation for it.... it was not a moral I decided to adopt in my brain......I just cannot kill something that is not hurting me. i guess that is the fabric of my being and not a moral.....if I think about it.
I would suggest reading Lila: An Inquiry into Morals by Robert Pirsig, as this is a complicated subject. I believe there is a pdf version somewhere. Pirsig maintains that morals are a result of the direct experience of quality, which is the driving force of the Universe. He identifies two types of quality, Dynamic Quality and Static Quality. Dynamic Quality is always directly experienced before categorization. Static Quality is every experience that is defined after the initial Dynamic event. Static Quality experiences can then be shared with other human beings and societies. These Static Quality experiences are then organized into morals by humans and societies. He identifies four types and levels of morals: Inorganic patterns: non living Biological patterns: living Social patterns: behaviors, habits, rituals, institutions and Intellectual patterns: ideas and concepts For example, it is not morally right to kill a mosquito unless that mosquito is carrying a disease that would kill a human being, as as human being has a higher moral value than a mosquito because a human being can operate in the realm of intellectual patterns whereas a mosquito can not. As intellectual patterns are a higher level of evolution they have precedence morally over biological patterns.
No, i would never hurt anyone intentionally.......as in sometimes life happens and people unintentionally get hurt with break ups and things......and if someone is trying to hurt me with words...I sometimes will bark back with hurtful words.......other times, i may ignore, but other times....when I have had it, I will bark. I would never hurt anyone physicially.....unless they were beating me up, then I will defend myself.
I think of myself as a free spirit. To justify my way of life or to reason why and what I'm doing, as far as I'm concerned is completely against who I am. I don't feel like I should have to justify anything to any real extent... As usual, if you've got a problem with this... That's your burden to live with.
I am a free spirit and thinker, as well......but I would never go out of my way to hurt someone....never. Not justifying at all...stating.
My morals are those which I try to live my life by. The main one is do no harm. I think some of it is based on the way I was raised and those that have changed from my parents morals have done so due to living my own life and experiences. If I attempt to do good and do no harm when I can not do anything else, I can live with that.
Do as little harm as possible. Treat others with kindness whenever feasible. I think a lot of other rules are relative, or unnecessary. I'm also a fan of "The Golden Rule", which although associated with Christianity, is far from exclusive to that faith. It branches across societies and cultures, ancient and modern.
I try to not cause harm for things. Being part of a social species, I've learned that causing unnecessary harm likely brings about unwanted results, in one way or another. I think most animals don't try to cause unnecessary harm though, whether they are social animals or not. Usually most animals only cause harm while trying to increase their odds of survival. Sad thing is, most humans have a skewed belief about what they really need for survival, and figuring it all out can be a mess.