The Relevance of Morality

Post Reply New Topic

Morality and its logical outgrowth, compassion, are necessary. As necessary for human life as oxygen and gravity. Morality, my fellow Aspies, is the reason we are all still here. We exist off the compassion and altruism of others. The compassion others have had for us is the reason we haven't perished. Any who would poo-poo this idea is an ingrate!

Could there be any kind of human society without morality? I doubt that very much. An immoral human is worse than any predatory animal, more frightening because of our ability to think and reason. Humans beings have become Planet Earth's supreme monster on account of cleverness & imagination.

Morality is of absolute relevance.

Yea but good luck trying to identify what morality is exactly...

Well, the majority of people are robots, and do not care to have compassion for others if having this compassion means questioning their paradigm/world view or their clique. People who have to always be right, about answers that were given to them, rather than discovered by them...
The ability to view oneself critically, and to view everything and everyone around them critically, and to develope one's mind, is paramount to having a since of morality. People who need a guide post to tell them how to act, be it religion, or PCness, etc. do not grasp morality. Rather than "slavery is wrong because your hurting innocent people" it becomes "slavery is wrong because my clique/doctrine says so".
History has well proven that this herd mentality seperates people from reality. Reality doesn't ever take sides, and when people label themselves and get involved in these battles between the cliques, they'll defend their clique or their doctrine no matter what.
Examples here, the bible was used as justification for slavery, inquisitions, witch trials, halucaust, crusades, etc. In many communist nations, PCness was "morality", an invention of marxism.
The majority try to consciously be moral, but theyr too controlled by their sub-conscious to have any real morality as far as the big picture is concerned. To most people now, with all the propaganda out there, common since seems like lunacy.
I say, if you wanna grasp morality, dig deep, follow nobody or nothing. Begin by asking why something is right or wrong, which begins with selfless compassion.

Meaning, people would have to try to put themselves in other peoples' shoes. But at the same time, realising that the other people also would have to put themselves in your shoes also helps.... So it pays to really look deep into the facts, non-biasedly.
If someone tells of a concern with an issue, don't call them names or badger them or get defensive because their point of view doesn't fit into your own paradigm. It would pay to admit that your paradigm might have flaws too. I mean this is why people don't get along, because they don't care to listen to or have compassion for anyone outside their little box. And what is good for one person's situation might be a nightmare for someone else's situation. So instead of fighting, I find compromise and communication, and compassion, to be a lot more effective.

Morality is a shaky and very individual concept and can be bent to fit personal agendas or world views. People do the atrocious and hide behind morality.

If people are really as nasty as you think, putting yourself in their shoes hardly seem the directions for kindness.

Exactly, Thank you SP, my sentiments exactly, and most people do this. Real morality is just general morality. Things that any sane person would agree on. But (especially with this ret*d left/right wing culture war) people will always try to bend the concept or morality, or deny contrary facts, to support their herd-mentality world view. And this is why our world is so full of negativity and strife, hunger and bloodshed and suffering.
Rather than look at themselves critically and admit that theyr not as perfect as they wanna think they are, people will just use human nature as an excuse to support their ignorance and carelessness towards one another. Nobody wants to compromise, or meet in the middle, because taking the mature adult route isn't "entertaining" enough to them. It's "funner" to point fingers and play this game of hypocracy. Hell human and civil rights are like poker chips between poker teams now.... And this is all seen as essential to being "normal"..... Yet, these same commoners, sheep, love to talk about how wrong the things done in the past were, but are so keen on being ignorant to these types of things STILL HAPPENING around them. Which proves to me that, for them, it's not so much about caring about right and wrong as it is being "hip" to social trends.
I mean segregation was wrong, but it still exists for people living on disability. And yet, because this is "more accepted", I guess disabled people are less human than black people or something Slavery still goes on, dictatorships are still developing and harming their people (and it's happening here, but I'm not concerned trying to prove something to a bunch of ret*d sheep who block out any information or evidence that doesn't fit with what they WANT to be true, and then who have the gall to ask for proof theyr never willing to accept, when merely reading a history book and watching them brag all in the media should be enough for common since to ring in). People are so locked into thinking that "all that bad stuff in history is in the past, it won't occur again in my lifetime". That is just sheer ignorance. Sheer blatant ignorance. Because rather people wanna admit it or not, theyr no more "special" or no more of a "universal teacher's pet" than the jew who died in the halucaust, the black man who died from being over-worked on a plantation, etc. Point here, get over yourselves sheeple, your not that special. The concurrent order of "civilization" and history won't stop for you and wait for you to die off before continuing. Victims throughout the ages always thought they were too damn special, just like people today think.... Anything in the name of conformity for the average idiot on the block. No wonder history keeps repeating itself. Brainwashed doesn't mean you think clean, it means you don't think hardly at all.
I think people are scared s**tless of responsibility. That's what I think is a big part of it here. That and theyr insecure about thinking for themselves, because they've always had some establishment to give them their "official opinions". People are afraid of being alone, of being alienated. Most people fear real freedom.

Compassion isn't necessarily a logical outgrowth of morality, that is only a conception you get from living in a culture dominated by Christian values and derivations thereof(not saying that the Christians themselves are good at practicing these values either). If we lived in another culture, we would have a much different perspective as other cultures have put emphasis on other things given the number of them that have displayed absolute ruthlessness over time. As for compassion being the binding element of society? Well, I disagree, self-interest is enough to guide much of society. As Adam Smith pointed out: I mean, really, for every "compassionate" thing we can think of, there are also some very selfish reasons for doing so. A semi-recent article in the economist showed that charities are very often supported by mate finding tendencies, men donate money to show they can provide, women donate time to show that they are nice mates. I think that you are positing as the contrast to morality to be psychosis rather than self-interest.


Why not? That has been the goal of modern society for some time. An immoral human is better than any predatory animal. Animals are not smart enough to be reasoned with, an immoral human knows his interest and knows how to follow these interests. All that is necessary to keep immoral men in check is good mechanism design. Not only that, but to quote Adam Smith again, what make you think that people have really ever had strong morality: Frankly, an intelligent and amoral being recognizes the utility of other laborers and seeks to use them to maximize his own gain through division of labor, just making sure that there are mechanisms to keep them in check.

Not really.

Why is anything right or wrong? The thinkers that have truly dug deep seem to have found nothing. And following nobody or nothing seems like really a perfect path for self-interest. It is the herdish man who prostrates himself in front of others, the one who follows nobody or nothing would be the one to take what he wanted. Why not have roots of selfish indifference?


Who defines the sane vs the insane? I mean, really, the entire thing is defining what one group decides what is working and what isn't. Not only that, but what does psychology have to do with higher philosophical concepts? Wouldn't that be governed by something truly objective, like reason? And reason does not posit any good or evil.


Why? The world is a lot more peaceful now than ever. Not only that, but the improvement in our economic conditions is such that war would likely be more costly than beneficial and the improvements in our means of managing society have also improved to prevent massive catastrophe. Finally, if the great war happens then nobody would survive anyway, and that would assuredly prevent a lot of the catastrophes that you would think of.

The light cannot exist without the shadow, your "morality" would not exist without a differing opinion.

One true answer? Keep dreaming. We're human, and no matter how much you detest the fact, we need all of these things...the good, and the bad.

It's almost logical to say that the idea of "morality" has brought upon all the great evils currently troubled over today.

AG, your a textbook psychopath. You don't grasp empathy, in your world everything is about you. You openly glorify ignorance, ego, elitsm, selfishness, where will that lead you? Where will this lead society? To keep making the same mistakes over and over again? Where will denying yourself more perspective ever help you? We sure enough do not live in a "peaceful society". Every week we loose probably another few hundred men in Iraq, that also isn't including their death tolls by us. The military industrial complex is forever pooring millions of dollars into developing an international military/economic force when we should be using this technology to cure illnesses.
But if you can't figure out why it's wrong to screw over or oppress innocent people to satisfy your ego, and you constantly talk about how you think empathy is an irrational concept.... And are totally centered on yourself and screw everyone else... That is the trademark of a psychopath. According to the psychopathic mind, hunger, slavery, war, diseases, etc. aren't even an issue. If it benefits you, then you'd probably think it's a good thing. That is psychopathy.
I find it pointless to argue with psychopaths, because psychopaths are absolute master at manipulating facts to support their own stand on things, no matter how immoral. A psychopath can legitimize the halucaust. It doesn't mean it's right though. In my time here, I've listened to you legitimize slavery, beating your dog as a hobby, s**t that a normal person would never consider rational or sane. Because non-psychopaths have something called empathy. I've even heard you make the statement that Hitler wasn't crazy or evil...
And, you fail to realise how this would backfire on you. You alienate enough people, but then one day comes where you need help and nobody wants to help you. If our system, er actually it is, so since our system is ran by people like you, eventually they'll cave in due to their own corruption... Everyone wants to rule the world, but what happens when absolute power is obtained by the ruling class, and then they end up fighting with one another for even more greed. And that little system will fall like a house of cards because the psychopaths won't be able to trust one another.

Prosperity. Prosperity. Nah, that'd go against our interests, and if it didn't then they weren't mistakes in the first place. I don't understand the last part as I never spoke of being stupid for its own sake.


Sure we do. Ok? That is not disproof given the number of historically military based societies where such losses would not be surprising at all. The MIC(abbreviating) is pouring billions each year, but generally a decreasing amount as a percentage of our GDP ever since the Cold War.

Who said I thought that empathy was an irrational concept? Empathy has its uses. Psychopathy actually relates to a psychological disorder that is also marked by a lack of impulse control, I have never shown a sign of seeking a lack of impulse control.

But grandstanding is better? If a psychopath is successful at legitimizing the holocaust then doesn't that mean it IS right? If legitimization is successful then to our best knowledge it is right. If it is legitimization is unsuccessful then it is wrong according to the best of our knowledge. Are you positing knowledge beyond valid epistemological methods? And if so, what proves these methods?

True,but in all those cases it is false morality. A mask behind which Evil hides.

Dude (I should have quoted this, i meant it to be a response to AG)...... Morality is a conscious concept based on compassion. You yourself have stated numerous times that you disagree with compassion. Well compassion is just another word for empathy. There is something considered general morality, it's a pretty universal concept that rape and murder are wrong, or that selfishness, ego, hatred, greed, etc. are negative characteristics.
There is a reason people generally see those things as being negative, beyond conforming to society. People have compassion, empathy. People consciously will try to defend positive methods of behavior while being totally over-run by their sub-conscious and doing the opposite. So they wanna do good, consciously, but theyr slaves to their sub-conscious, which doesn't care about doing good. This to me shows me how many people are slaves to their zombie mind, and when shown this, even in a nice, polite way, they can become defensive.
And people use human nature as a crutch lean on, all the while totally ignoring that any redeeming good qualities exist in humanity. Selfishness is counter-productive to the survival of the group because it creates excessive conflict. I understand most people are gonna be a little bit selfish, but not to the extent people let it get to. Nobody wants to compromise, nobody wants to make an effort to co-exist, everyone is just too "entertained" pointing hypocritical fingers at one another. Nobody even tries to look at things from someone else's perspective..... Well accept the PC nazi's, but theyr just as biased against whites/males, because they've been indoctrinated with so much fear and guilt about things that happened over 200 yrs ago that they insist on beating themselves up and denying themselves an equal perspective. But still, even they are not keen on looking at someone else's perspective, because their perspective is under the label "liberal".

Ok, so by this concept you might as well be saying "f**k the starving people in Ethiopia, if they were living a better life then I would be miserable". I never grasped that argument, I've heard it before. "problems make life more interesting" or such crud. That seems to be the excuse not to give a damn about someone else's well being. It's a sugar-coated excuse to be lazy minded, selfish, and apathetic.
Once again, that goes back to how people seem to view human rights like poker chips in a card game. If innocent people are being harmed, it's wrong, period. Even if it's not as "entertaining" to the more lucky people in the world. I understand that the bad will never be fully gone, but it doesn't mean we should turn a blind eye to the world's problems, it doesn't mean we should turn our backs on people who need help.

Have you found the answer to true morality then, to make that assumption?

You haven't defined it in your original post.

I still think it's a very individual construct.