A question of morality

[Quantum Quack]

~ Years ago it occurred to me that the most immoral thing an individual can do to another is force their own morality upon them.

It coud be argued successfuly, I feel, that this one behaviour which appears endemic though out the world currently and throughout history, has led to most of our major conflicts and nearly all of our minor ones.
It is most often for example the cause for domestic conflict especially in the parent/child relationship and certainly a cause for most international antagonisms.

There appears to be at least two major levels to this morality enforcement issue.

The first one could be seen as cultural and is demonstrated by religious/social groupings and government regulation. These groups provide significant influence upon it's population as they promote an "Abstract" or constructed form of morality with the view in the main to generate order, organisation and in a more underlying manner control and manipulation.
This level is the most commony experienced and is always a part of our social tapestry. Fashion, attitude, behaviour and other aspects are all modified to some extent by this level of morality.

The second level and in my view the most important level is the inner personal morality which all of us maintains in secret away from the gaze of our society and culture and only in part seen by our friends and more intimate companions.

It is the difference between the social morality and the inner morailty that generates the the conflict as one presumes to apply presure for change upon another with or with out their consent. [moral oppression]


Obviously ones inner morality is derived for ones own benefit however community or social cohesion is a significant part of this self benefit and needs to be always considerd as part of the individuals self interest.
[successful existentialism]

Care to discuss?

 

[birch]

i would say that there is a natural morality that all beings have and that stems from the instinct for survival.

other more convoluted ideas of morality that do not take into account this basic core of morality is missing the mark. people can fool others only for a time. for instance, if a religion said that those of another religion deserve death, what will happen is war or resistance because all life is trying to survive and/or eventually they realize they bleed red, have feelings, families etc.

when groups become separated, there tends to be an objectifying of others more easily outside that group or seeing them as nonentitys because you are not identifying with them so there is less empathy. it's becoming aware of what is the same and what is different and finding mutual ways to live or let live.

 

[Quantum Quack]

i would say that there is a natural morality that all beings have and that stems from the instinct for survival.

other more convoluted ideas of morality that do not take into account this basic core of morality is missing the mark. people can fool others only for a time. for instance, if a religion said that those of another religion deserve death, what will happen is war or resistance because all life is trying to survive and/or eventually they realize they bleed red, have feelings, families etc.

when groups become separated, there tends to be an objectifying of others more easily outside that group or seeing them as nonentitys because you are not identifying with them so there is less empathy. it's becoming aware of what is the same and what is different and finding mutual ways to live or let live.

I agree with the thrust of what you have written.
However I would extend it a little by adding that it is not merely an instinct for survival at stake but a general instinct to survive in a way that is successful partucularilly in a "sustainable" fashion.
For example: The morality of the Concentration camps during WW2 was and is seen by most as being abhorent yet many prisoners managed to survive. So survival and morality with out the necessry qualifier of "Success" may not be sufficient. For certainly we can survive under extreme oppression by someone elses morality [A. Hitler's in the example given]

Therefore morality I feel is more ultimately about "existential sustainable success" or the sustainable success of the individual and his/her community than just mere survival.
What do you think?

 

[wynn]

~ Years ago it occurred to me that the most immoral thing an individual can do to another is force their own morality upon them.

It can feel like that, yes. But one feels thus oppressed only if one's own moral sense is not developed.

It's naive to think one could remain morally ambivalent or undecided, without experiencing any adverse effects of this ambivalence or indecision.

 

[Quantum Quack]

It can feel like that, yes. But one feels thus oppressed only if one's own moral sense is not developed.

I am no sure how you have related to the snip you have quoted..
care to elaborate?

It's naive to think one could remain morally ambivalent or undecided, without experiencing any adverse effects of this ambivalence or indecision.

this is interesting...again care to elaborate?

 

[wynn]

If you feel oppressed by someone, this in turn indicates that there is some weakness in you or about you that makes you vulnerable to the other person.
If that weakness wouldn't be there, you would have fought off the other person long before any serious feeling of oppressedness would develop.

For example: Two persons are faced with a militant Christian proselytizer.
The first one laughs the proselytizer off, calls him names or simply ignores him, and later has no second thoughts or feelings of guilt about it.
The second person listens to the proselytizer, gets all worked up internally, anxious and confused, feels intensely oppressed.

The second one was caught unprepared, and anxiety is the result of it.

 

[birch]

I agree with the thrust of what you have written.
However I would extend it a little by adding that it is not merely an instinct for survival at stake but a general instinct to survive in a way that is successful partucularilly in a "sustainable" fashion.
For example: The morality of the Concentration camps during WW2 was and is seen by most as being abhorent yet many prisoners managed to survive. So survival and morality with out the necessry qualifier of "Success" may not be sufficient. For certainly we can survive under extreme oppression by someone elses morality [A. Hitler's in the example given]

Therefore morality I feel is more ultimately about "existential sustainable success" or the sustainable success of the individual and his/her community than just mere survival.
What do you think?

yes, that's what i meant. survival as in who you are but not compromised as being compromised lessens your identity and quality of life. i should have been more descriptive.

If you feel oppressed by someone, this in turn indicates that there is some weakness in you or about you that makes you vulnerable to the other person.

In some cases but unfortunately, this doesn't always even mean that the oppressor is right either. the weakness in the oppressed may be just a nonunderstanding of the other's nature, which leaves one open to manipulation and deception.

 

[Quantum Quack]

If you feel oppressed by someone, this in turn indicates that there is some weakness in you or about you that makes you vulnerable to the other person.
If that weakness wouldn't be there, you would have fought off the other person long before any serious feeling of oppressedness would develop.

no doubt this is true to the extent that every one is morally evolving all the time - even those who appear to be fixated with a mind set. In that when you acheive moral maturity the attempts to enforce morality upon you become less invasive.

For example: Two persons are faced with a militant Christian proselytizer.
The first one laughs the proselytizer off, calls him names or simply ignores him, and later has no second thoughts or feelings of guilt about it.
The second person listens to the proselytizer, gets all worked up internally, anxious and confused, feels intensely oppressed.

The second one was caught unprepared, and anxiety is the result of it.

Until the militant Christian proselytizer becomes your employer or your president or has an other wise profoud impact on your lifestyle and available choices. Suddenly no matter how prepared you are nor how morally mature you are you are now oppressed in that your actions are heavilly restricted and needs are no longer able to be met.

I am sure some of the Jews, Romani and other Nazi concentration camp victims [to refer to my earlier example] were quite morally mature yet suffer the gas chambers they did and witness and experience horrific crimes against humanity.

Did they feel oppressed ? I am sure that no matter what their moral development was or could possibly be, they certainly did...

thoughts?

 

[Quantum Quack]

The statement:
"Governement inspired laws should always be non-morally contrived and only designed to optimise social function and facilitation and inspire success of the individual and therefore the community by default"
thus the trend to secular Government to avoid over regulation and moral intrusion.
Laws directed on moral grounds such as laws regarding religion, sexual preference, relationships, domestic issues, I believe are slowly being removed from our legal systems [ here in Australia at least any way through law reform]

just thoughts...

 

[wynn]

Until the militant Christian proselytizer becomes your employer or your president or has an other wise profoud impact on your lifestyle and available choices. Suddenly no matter how prepared you are nor how morally mature you are you are now oppressed in that your actions are heavilly restricted and needs are no longer able to be met.

I am sure some of the Jews, Romani and other Nazi concentration camp victims [to refer to my earlier example] were quite morally mature yet suffer the gas chambers they did and witness and experience horrific crimes against humanity.

Did they feel oppressed ? I am sure that no matter what their moral development was or could possibly be, they certainly did...

An ideal moral system is one that provides a reasoning and course of action toward eternal and universal wellbeing even in the face of birth, aging, illness and death, in all their various forms.

 

[Quantum Quack]

An ideal moral system is one that provides a reasoning and course of action toward eternal and universal wellbeing even in the face of birth, aging, illness and death, in all their various forms.

and what ideal reasoning and course of action be do you think?

 

[wynn]

One toward eternal and universal wellbeing even in the face of birth, aging, illness and death, in all their various forms.