What is "Right" or "Wrong"?
- Thread starter Lord_Phoenix
- Start date
Woody,
Well no that is not a good rule. It promotes unsolicited actions that others might not appreciate. It goes to the problem of what is considerd good for one person may not be good for another. The rule is seen as good for Christians but then that is simple Christian arrogance.
Well no that is not a good rule. It promotes unsolicited actions that others might not appreciate. It goes to the problem of what is considerd good for one person may not be good for another. The rule is seen as good for Christians but then that is simple Christian arrogance.
Lord Pheonix,
The definitions of good and bad often appear to depend on individual value systems and creating a universal definition that all would accept is problematic, however, I think one does exist. Whether everyone can understand the implications and issues is another matter.
Ultimately bad things detract from life, survival, and happiness while good things promote life, survival and happiness. In a religious setting such morality is defined as a set of rules to be followed so that the participant will allegedly achieve ultimate survival and happiness for eternity and if disobeyed will be punished by eternal pain or non-existence.
In a rational setting and usually secular, good is anything that promotes long life, health and happiness. These things are often enhanced by companionship, loving others which usually results in returned love, and mutual cooperation which often results in greater achievement than possible thought individual actions alone. It is not difficult to see that in most cases selfish actions do not result in optimum survival and happiness.
Also, I do not believe that true altruism exists. Every individual is always looking for happiness although sometimes people enjoy being miserable. So even though a supposed charitable action, at some cost to the donor, may appear altruistic such an action usually makes the donor happier and hence nullifies the apparent altruistic classification.
Hope that helps
Cris
The definitions of good and bad often appear to depend on individual value systems and creating a universal definition that all would accept is problematic, however, I think one does exist. Whether everyone can understand the implications and issues is another matter.
Ultimately bad things detract from life, survival, and happiness while good things promote life, survival and happiness. In a religious setting such morality is defined as a set of rules to be followed so that the participant will allegedly achieve ultimate survival and happiness for eternity and if disobeyed will be punished by eternal pain or non-existence.
In a rational setting and usually secular, good is anything that promotes long life, health and happiness. These things are often enhanced by companionship, loving others which usually results in returned love, and mutual cooperation which often results in greater achievement than possible thought individual actions alone. It is not difficult to see that in most cases selfish actions do not result in optimum survival and happiness.
Also, I do not believe that true altruism exists. Every individual is always looking for happiness although sometimes people enjoy being miserable. So even though a supposed charitable action, at some cost to the donor, may appear altruistic such an action usually makes the donor happier and hence nullifies the apparent altruistic classification.
Hope that helps
Cris
Woody said:
Different people may want different things done unto them. Some guys wouldn't mind being slapped in the ass by a hot girl (or guy, if so orientated). In fact, quite a few would welcome that. But that doesn't mean those guys can turn around and go slapping 'em in the ass.
In addition, the rule can be reversed. Something I'd always liked to do in my early elementary school years. "Well they did it to me, so that means I can do it to them, kuz they're treating me like they want me to treat them!", I'd say.
No, I think I have a better guideline for what's ethical and what isn't: If it harm none, do as thou wilt.
Cris,
You're odviously not a salesman. What is wrong with putting yourself in the other man's shoes? This communication skill is called "savvy." It works.
The golden rule is a secularized version of "Loving your neighbor as yourself". The golden rule assumes you are a decent person to start with, and it odviously does not apply to a sado-masochist.
If a person can only think in terms of "self" they should not get married. Is anyone on this forum married besides me?
You're odviously not a salesman. What is wrong with putting yourself in the other man's shoes? This communication skill is called "savvy." It works.
The golden rule is a secularized version of "Loving your neighbor as yourself". The golden rule assumes you are a decent person to start with, and it odviously does not apply to a sado-masochist.
If a person can only think in terms of "self" they should not get married. Is anyone on this forum married besides me?
Last edited:
Say you have a plant on your window sill. In order for it to thrive, it needs to be in the right place for its nature--ie., it might need lots of light, or may prefer a bit more shade, or both. and for sure it needs watering. too much and you could rot the roots, too little--like with an Azalea--and the roots dry out and it will die. ALL plnats will die out if you don't water them though of course
it also will love you feed it regularly.
so that is good isn't it?
oh yeah, and also having a really nice attitude towards it--for it is a living organism--is also good too.
same with a pet. same with a child. say your child's being bullied in school. do you agree with it? if not what action do you take? how much do your love your child?
i personally would take her out of the school and find other means of educating him. but that takes guts. it means defying the very same system that DEMANDs you child be indoctrinated in that system. so, are you being 'good' cow towing TO that system? or is that wrong?
it also will love you feed it regularly.
so that is good isn't it?
oh yeah, and also having a really nice attitude towards it--for it is a living organism--is also good too.
same with a pet. same with a child. say your child's being bullied in school. do you agree with it? if not what action do you take? how much do your love your child?
i personally would take her out of the school and find other means of educating him. but that takes guts. it means defying the very same system that DEMANDs you child be indoctrinated in that system. so, are you being 'good' cow towing TO that system? or is that wrong?
Woody said:
You do not know what my preferences are. For example you're a jazz player and you play by my restaurant table in all your best wishes, I hate jazz, I'm alergic to it and I get seizures from it. It would be torture for me and if I follow your rule I would return torture to you by stabbing my fork in your ass (if I'm annoyed enough).
Lord_Phoenix said:
These are subjective words and there are some definition options available.
Right - Actions interpreted as 'correct' when applied against personal
behavioral preferences (these preferences change constantly and
are influenced by any number of factors).
Wrong - Actions interpreted as 'incorrect' when applied against personal
behavioral preferences (these preferences change constantly and
are influenced by any number of factors).
Right - Achieving an expected result through action.
Wrong - Achieving an unexpected result through action.
Avatar,
You keep thinking in terms of "self." In this example, wouldn't you like me to ask before I start blasting away? If I were you, I certainly would, any other reasonable and thoughtful person would. Only a selfish person assumes everyone is just like them, and this is presumptuous, hence rude.
The golden rule says to treat others as you would have them treat you, it doesn't say to assume everyone is just like you and then act -- would you like someone else to treat you that way? (I am applying the golden rule - hint hint)
You keep thinking in terms of "self." In this example, wouldn't you like me to ask before I start blasting away? If I were you, I certainly would, any other reasonable and thoughtful person would. Only a selfish person assumes everyone is just like them, and this is presumptuous, hence rude.
The golden rule says to treat others as you would have them treat you, it doesn't say to assume everyone is just like you and then act -- would you like someone else to treat you that way? (I am applying the golden rule - hint hint)
No set of values is universal. Every individual has a different set no matter what religion they follow or how they were raised. Society places a set of rules over individuals with consequences if they are broken. Depending on where you live, you must adapt to these rules even if against your values or what you consider right or wrong simply because of the consequences.
For example, where I live, we do not eat human beings. We consider that "wrong." In some other cultures, maybe even presently, humans eat others human beings. To them, that is part of their way of living and is "right." We cannot judge what is right or wrong for others. The best we can do is be true to ourselves while following the laws of the society in which we live. In most cases, these protect ourselves as well as others.
For example, where I live, we do not eat human beings. We consider that "wrong." In some other cultures, maybe even presently, humans eat others human beings. To them, that is part of their way of living and is "right." We cannot judge what is right or wrong for others. The best we can do is be true to ourselves while following the laws of the society in which we live. In most cases, these protect ourselves as well as others.
alright DIESAL....forget cannabilism for a moment. that, as far as i am aware is quite rare(?)...take female circumcision, which is really female mutilation. what do you fee about THAt being right?
i have read some myths for some countries that do it to baies, young girls and women. the myths--written by men of fukin course!--justify it through pretending to be holy (same as our patriarchal myths pretend)
so that gives it the 'right' seal of apporval right?
now it is alright saying that that is right for them. but Is it right? i say it most definately aint. mutilating another person so they can never experience the fullest natrual means of sensual arousal in sex is NOT RIGHT! whether it is here, there, or in Timbuktoo!
i have read some myths for some countries that do it to baies, young girls and women. the myths--written by men of fukin course!--justify it through pretending to be holy (same as our patriarchal myths pretend)
so that gives it the 'right' seal of apporval right?
now it is alright saying that that is right for them. but Is it right? i say it most definately aint. mutilating another person so they can never experience the fullest natrual means of sensual arousal in sex is NOT RIGHT! whether it is here, there, or in Timbuktoo!
You missed the entire point of what I have written. There are lots of things that happen in the world that you or I may not think are right. That does not mean that this a full consensus and falls into the "wrong" category. To declare what others do as wrong just because they differ from your views is giving yourself a "god" status. We can honestly only judge our own actions as they coincide or conflict with our own values. Again, we follow set rules in our society so that we may be protected from others values and actions that can be harmful to us. These women are being harmed and it is "wrong" to me, I just wish there was laws to protect them. If you do something that you believe is wrong, then that is "wrong"
Ithopal,
You've odviously never tried it. The wisest people I know have used it, and they became leaders. Ithopal, are you leading anyone (please don't take this wrong just be honest with yourself)?
If you don't use the golden rule, then forget marriage, because it won't work for you.
I'll repeat since it didn't register the first time:
The golden rule is an elementary social skill that people learn as they grow up, regardless of the bible. Everybody starts out as a self-centered child, but they learn social skills. If they want to get along in this world, they must consider the thoughts and feelings of others. Some people grow up and they remain self-centered, and miss out on life. It's a lonely world when all you ever think about is yourself. I've been there and done that, so I don't speak out of ignorance.
Geez, don't you ever give your ladyfriend some flowers or something?
You've odviously never tried it. The wisest people I know have used it, and they became leaders. Ithopal, are you leading anyone (please don't take this wrong just be honest with yourself)?
If you don't use the golden rule, then forget marriage, because it won't work for you.
I'll repeat since it didn't register the first time:
The golden rule is an elementary social skill that people learn as they grow up, regardless of the bible. Everybody starts out as a self-centered child, but they learn social skills. If they want to get along in this world, they must consider the thoughts and feelings of others. Some people grow up and they remain self-centered, and miss out on life. It's a lonely world when all you ever think about is yourself. I've been there and done that, so I don't speak out of ignorance.
Geez, don't you ever give your ladyfriend some flowers or something?
Last edited:
Duendy,
This discussion is not meant to be typing all of the things that you think are wrong. I was a discussion on the very concept of right and wrong. Although I am sure it would be fascinating to hear about every problem you see in the world, it does not follow the discussion and would not be in the religious forum anyways. I was speaking in a broader sense of the ideas. You simply prove my point by trying to force your views and values on myself and others here. You have to be clear headed when you have discussions instead of "flying off the handle." Debating and arguing are commonly seen as different. Let try debating the subject.
This discussion is not meant to be typing all of the things that you think are wrong. I was a discussion on the very concept of right and wrong. Although I am sure it would be fascinating to hear about every problem you see in the world, it does not follow the discussion and would not be in the religious forum anyways. I was speaking in a broader sense of the ideas. You simply prove my point by trying to force your views and values on myself and others here. You have to be clear headed when you have discussions instead of "flying off the handle." Debating and arguing are commonly seen as different. Let try debating the subject.
Diesel said:
d___errr wait a minuet. is this a FIRST? am i being patronized by a TWELVE year old?!
forgive me if i'mm wrong but were you not 12 yesterday?....
anyway as i await your reply. look sonny jim 12 or 69, do not patronize me., and condescendingly tellme how to debate or what to say and think. OK?
if you would just listen and absorb, you may learn. i am not here to intellectualize and wallow in raltivism. i am say that there Is a right and wrong about fundamental things like himan rights and freedoms. got it? i am not on about it is wrong to eat syshi and right to eat fish and chips, etc. we, or i am talking about something deeper than that. but i can see i am not getting far with you kid