Welcome to our site!

Main Menu

A Morality Question

Started by josephpalazzo, July 26, 2014, 04:48:05 PM

Previous topic - Next topic


The definition of morality is as firm and solid as a puff of smoke in a windstorm.
A humans desire to live is exceeded only by their willingness to die for another. Even god cannot equal this magnificent sacrifice. No god has the right to judge them.-first tenant of the Panotheust


Quote from: josephpalazzo on July 26, 2014, 04:48:05 PM
Can someone who is moral use a tactic that would be considered immoral to correct an immoral act?

That question implies that morality is black and white and I don't think that's the case. I think morality is many shades of grey because life is many shades of grey. This is the thing many whole proclaim their moral superiority tend to miss. Often there is no right answer and no objectively best answer. It's a series of subjective choices which say less about right and wrong than about you as a person. Which is why moral quandaries can be very interesting.

So the answer is, it depends. Will I get a BJ out of it?


Quote from: aitm on July 27, 2014, 04:10:00 PM
The definition of morality is as firm and solid as a puff of smoke in a windstorm.

We still have to make our laws according to that "puff of smoke in a windstorm".


Quote from: the_antithesis on July 27, 2014, 04:21:58 PM

So the answer is, it depends. Will I get a BJ out of it?

A categorical "NO". :evil:


If brain washing doesn't work, whether it is moral, or not, is irrelevant. Who's morals are we talking about? Does morality depend on society, religion, philosophy, or emotions? Do we have a built in moral code from evolution? My puppies without being taught feel shame or guilt when they hurt each other. Is morality based on our finer instincts and emotion, or logic. I base my moral code on whether I do physical, or emotional, harm or not. But yet if hurting a child with a needle hurts him to save his life is it harmful, if a religious nut uses extreme punishment to correct a child's behavior, is it immoral? Who decides what is hurtful and immoral. Some primitive societies see nothing wrong with all the men of a village having intercourse with a girl that reaches puberty with no harm done. Does what we teach as immoral determine what is right or wrong, and this teaching itself causes harm? I think our basic higher feelings (not irrational emotions) and intelligence determine what is right or wrong, or our moral compass, not religion or philosophy. Then there is the problem with sadomasochist, is it good or bad if they hurt each other?  :eek:  :think: :popcorn: Solitary
There is nothing more frightful than ignorance in action.

Contemporary Protestant

is this what you're talking about

I would say the end does not justify the means