Right and wrong.... what's the difference?

There's always a discussion about right and wrong nomatter where you go. As soon as somebody steps out of line, somebody else is quick to say, "That was wrong", but I ask you, what makes actions right or wrong? It'd seem to me that it is nothing more than a matter of opinion, but what if you don't feel right or wrong? More to the truth, what if you don't believe in the concept of right and wrong? I don't. I believe things happen.

Ie. Somebody kills my mother: Yes, I'm going to be pissed. Yes, I will probably seek revenge, but no, I will not feel they were in the wrong. I will feel they made a decision that I didn't care for. Thousands of years ago, the inhabitants of earth started to formulate ideas on what THEY believed to be right or wrong. Much of this, I think, is based on religion, but why then do we follow these thoughts of morality when they were not thoughts we had of our own will. They are thoughts that were impressed upon us by no choice of our own. Thousands of years ago people also didn't bathe every day, yet today it is considered 'dirty' if you don't bathe regularly. We change values and opinions every day of every year, yet we stick by this assumption that we are in the position to determine whether another persons actions were right or wrong. I think this is one of the key flaws in human civilization is our need to give ourself the right to judge other people at whim.

 

that is why i stay in my own little world and turn my brain off, and actually, never listen when peolpe talk

 

Me too for the most part, but yesterday I heard the words "that was wrong" or "You were wrong for that" A LOT. And it got me thinking that I don't buy into this right and wrong bullshit. I simply believe in events happening; I will no longer view an event as any specific adjective. It's simply the path life went.

 

I say probably Webster's Dictionary...

 

i totally agree with you. To be in the right, i believe is nothing more than a personal ego booster, when in reality beauty is in the eye of the beholder, so what is wrong to you could be considered right to someone else. Like the example you gave about murder, ie: capital punistment, iraq, ect... Our government kills people all the time but they consider it just therefor right to do so. I think the only rule that should and could keep the world from falling apart is to treat people like you want to be treated.

 

I prefer, "He who has the gold, makes the rule" and, "Do to others before they do it to you" :X

 

I'm with you guys but.

I think its all about how we relay.. when you say 'he's done something wrong'.. you might be relaying to some education, culture or whatever.

Eg.
- He shoot himself
- That was so wrong

Which is wrong.

Am I right?!

 

I'm not sure what you're trying to say, but I think I get it. As far as the suicide example, I wouldn't even consider that wrong. Now education wise, if somebody adds 2 and 2 and gets 6, yes it is wrong. I can understand FACT BASED wrong/right, but as far as emotions and opinions determing what right and wrong is, I don't buy it. Just like good/bad. Somebody we agree with and relate to is 'good', while somebody we don't understand or don't agree with is 'bad'. It's all selfish, self righteous bullshit.

 

Just wait 'till you have kids, Adam. It will all be clear then.

 

I do not understand what you are trying to argue here. Are you arguing that right and wrong do not exist, or that right and wrong should not be considered because they are relative?

 

somebody we don't understand is 'bad'.. that is Wrong imo, you see?! For me somebody we don't understand is not bad.. its just somebody we don't understand.

In religions, for example, sex before marriage is a 'wrong' thing, but its a wrong thing only for religious ppl.

these kinda things depends on everyone's personality and education and culture..
What an american may consider wrong might be 'not wrong' for a Japanese..

I don't know..

 

That they do not exist. For them to be relative to anything they must first be factual, or atleast fact based, and they are not(atleast in the manner in which I'm speaking).


As for kids. I will raise my kids with that same belief. I will find another way to explain to them why they should do the things they need to do, but I will not press upon my children religion nor the sentiment of 'right and wrong'. My children, will be taught to follow the rules set by society, because they cannot live as a functional part of society otherwise, but they will also be taught to be individualistic and to think what they want despite these guidelines we all are born into.

 

On what basis do you claim that?

In other words, how do you know that right and wrong aren’t factual?

 

I get it now, but to me I don't see the thought of "somebody we don't understand is bad" as wrong. I see it as something I do not understand. Things just happen to be. They just happen to....well, happen. Why do we, as humans, take it upon ourselvs to use our background(education, religion etc) to determine the morality or correctness of the actions and thoughts of others?

 

Because we like to judge..

 

I claim that on the basis that religious people FEEL that murder is immoral. Murderers FEEL that murder is perfectly ok given the right circumstances. Nobody can whip out an equation that will prove w/o a doubt it is wrong to kill somebody. And if it is wrong to kill somebody, shouldn't it be wrong under all circumstances? I kill a man over $20 and I'm a murderer, a soldier kills a man over something that had nothing to do w/ him at all and he's a 'veteran' or 'war hero'. Facts are solid. They don't change. Water is wet. Always. Without fail. Water doesn't become dry because you're in a different enviroment or different circumstances occur. If you have water, you have wet. Period.

 

but not to be judged. I agree w/ you 100%.

 

For something to be considered factual it must be constant? It must be constant and it must not change?

Are there not constants throughout the history of human civilization that we can observe and conclude as facts? Such as the respect for life which inevitably and reasonably leads to the proscription of murder ?

 

Respect for life is also not a fact, nor a constant. Obviously murderers have no respect for life. Respect for life comes from those who value living. I do not. I appreciate being alive, but I do not value life itself, nor do I think that because I'm alive I need to worry about death and what happens after. Life is meant to come to an end at one point or another, everybodys does. When somebody dies people say "It was his time", or "That's how God wanted it". Well if you truly believe it was his time to die, why does it matter that it was my hand that took his life? There is no consistency, nor fact, to that argument.