Are we fooling ourselves with morals?

[Stonecloak]

I can see the benefits of being a moral human being, but it strikes me odd that people are barely if at all able to follow them. The very foundation of Capitalism doesn't give a rats behind about them. Is it just a coping mechanism to ease the brain of what we really are? As a delve further into things like this. I find society, at least in America seems to be extremely confused. Ignorant may be the word of what's really going on.

[Vea Lea]

i dont notice marriage falling apart record pace

[unfilteredJW]

I remember my first year of college.

[Stonecloak]

i dont notice marriage falling apart record pace

It's like 50 percent. That's insane.

[Jonnusthegreat]

i dont notice marriage falling apart record pace

Look at any statistic about marriage.

[Reeve]

Morals are just a set of rules that make it easier for human beings to live with one another. Reciprocal behavior.

[Vea Lea]

It's like 50 percent. That's insane.

its 25% here

[Grym]

What has marriage falling apart to do with morals?

If people find that they are not suited with each other, they divorce, there is nothing immoral about it.

[Vea Lea]

Look at any statistic about marriage.

i checked it is 25% here

[unfilteredJW]

It's immoral because you should remain unhappy and deal with it.

Did I do it right?

[AeneasBK]

Wasn't the 50% stat proved to be disingenuous, in that they took a snapshot of one year in which there were twice as many marriages as there were divorces, and extrapolated from that that 50% of all marriages end in divorce?

[Stonecloak]

Wasn't the 50% stat proved to be disingenuous, in that they took a snapshot of one year in which there were twice as many marriages as there were divorces, and extrapolated from that that 50% of all marriages end in divorce?

Yea im reading it now. Ok, this has less to do with marriage and more to do with morals in general. I figured marriage was a good example, but i guess not since statistics are all over the place.

I just edited it to remove the marriage part.

[AeneasBK]

Morals and empathy is what separates us from animals.

Morals, eh, that's open to interpretation, not all animals are scavengers for example. We defined morals sure; but its not impossible to see their semblance in the animal world too.

As for empathy, very wrong on that one, surely? Or am I misunderstanding

[Nadiru]

Secular morality is kinda specious, but secular people have ethics, things like deontology and the like, and these things are tantamount to morals in most cases.

[Stonecloak]

Morals and empathy is what separates us from animals.

I don't think empathy is the same thing as morals. Animals can show empathy too. Empathy seems necessary for the function of a race, rather then a code to live by. I don't think you can make somebody more empathetic then he/she naturally is, and that's my point. The people that claim they are the nice ones, and the bad ones are over there, are just as bad as the ones they are talking about. Maybe worse.

[AeneasBK]

I don't think you can make somebody more empathetic then he/she naturally does, and that's my point.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oxytocin

That may change...

[MerinPally]

Morals and empathy is what separates us from animals.

Morals are subjective, in the eyes of the chimps they might well be moral to each other. What is considered morally right varies even in humans and does even today across continents, let alone over the course of history. You don't even have to go far back in history, not even 100 years, to see some huge differences.

With regards to empathy, elephants, apes, rats and a few species of bird would like a word. Amongst many others.

If that's what separates us, then nothing separates us.

[Stonecloak]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oxytocin

That may change...

I mean it's fascinating, but "here take your daily pill or else" doesn't sound plausible on a global scale. If we can all agree we are nature and not outside of it. Perhaps we just think we can play we're outside of it, and tell our brains we're above animals, and above ourselves. Maybe animals look at us and say "wow those guys look confused."

[Grym]

Use an example from my Ethic class, the tutor love this example XD

If you have the cure for a disease, will you sell it cheap (everyone can afford) or sell it expensive (make you filthy rich)?

Assume you make it very expensive, Mr.A, whose wife is dying of the disease cannot afford the medicine, he sneaked into the factory to try to steal the medicine, is that right?

Let's say the guard, Mr.B, is a friend of Mr.A, saw the stealing, should he report Mr A?

Let's assume he did, now Mr A is being charged with the crime, if you are the Judge, will you punish him harshly? Let him off lightly, or not punish him at all?

Everyone's answer will differ at some point, what is moral in one person's eye may not be the same in another person's eyes. You can only follow what YOU think is morally right, because not everyone will agree with your morals.

[Stonecloak]

Use an example from my Ethic class, the tutor love this example XD

If you have the cure for a disease, will you sell it cheap (everyone can afford) or sell it expensive (make you filthy rich)?

Assume you make it very expensive, Mr.A, whose wife is dying of the disease cannot afford the medicine, he sneaked into the factory to try to steal the medicine, is that right?

Let's say the guard, Mr.B, is a friend of Mr.A, saw the stealing, should he report Mr A?

Let's assume he did, now Mr A is being charged with the crime, if you are the Judge, will you punish him harshly? Let him off lightly, or not punish him at all?

Everyone's answer will differ at some point, what is moral in one person's eye may not be the same in another person's eyes. You can only follow what YOU think is morally right, because not everyone will agree with your morals.

So then it's arbitrary at best. People are just fooling themselves into thinking side A, or B is the right one.