Right or Wrong?

[UNIquelyCanadian]

~Cameron

[maestro8]

It's simple. I'm right. You're wrong. What was the issue again?

[dudewithasock]

This has always been a tough one, and will always be a tough one.

If it's inborn, then that means murderers could just call their horrible behavior "right" and it would all be good (which it isn't).

If it was majority opinion, then that obviously limits certain freedoms.

If it's revealed after you do the act, then that's really kind of pointless, because why would you need to know after you did it?

I'd have to stick with indecisive choice for this one.

I also like Maestro's option, but it's not in the poll. :P

[harper]

I thought it was right and left. Oh, sorry, same thing.

[phil]

The evidence compels me to vote for the first option. I am always wrong; she is always right.

Phil

[andrew_carter]

None of those options really suited me. I guess I'm swaying more to the first option in that it's a very subjective thing, but I don't think "It is innate" really does it for me because a person can so easily change the sets of morals they live by and in doing so change what they consider right or wrong. I go with the gut feeling for deciding what's right and wrong but make sure I don't try to force my opinions on other people.

That's actually why although I myself am a Christian, I have some real issues with the way a lot of Christians seem to assume they're right without question and try to convert others to their belief systems...and why I generally like to keep the whole religious side of me private for fear that people will assume I act the same way. But that's only slightly related to the thread and I don't want to get into this discussion in someone else's thread. Please direct all religious comments towards one of the many religion threads.

Andrew

[boo radley]

being able to tell the difference certainly isn't something everyone is born with. majority opinion often favors what's right, but is easily manipulated. it's not revealed supernaturally or anything like that. it's a combination of all three. there are certain universal truths like the idea that murdering someone out of anger is wrong, and nearly everyone naturally knows that it is wrong. if someone has to sacrifice their baby in order to save more people, they did the right thing no matter what majority opinion might be. there are other times when right and wrong depends on the situation and how other people might be affected. if a town makes a pledge not to dump toxic stuff in a certain area because they suspect it might contaminate their drinking water, then it would be wrong to dump toxic things in that area even if the person is sure nothing will get into the drinking water. or maybe it's revealed... who knows.

[andrew_carter]

Originally Posted by boo radley

if someone has to sacrifice their baby in order to save more people, they did the right thing no matter what majority opinion might be.

This is a good example I think (although this is just my belief and I accept that yours may differ ) of assuming that your beliefs are more correct than those of others. The vast, vast majority of people here at unicyclist.com are going to agree with you on this on. I'm sure there are quite a few cultures though that would believe that sacrificing a life, no matter how many lives it saves (Christianity rings a bell) is wrong. Or maybe they believe that the baby has more of a future ahead of it and is therefore worth more than older people. I think it's wrong to say that "they did the right thing no matter what majority opinion might be". Logically you may be right, but again you're making the assumption that all cultures are placing western "logic" as high as you are in their belief systems.

This is interesting.

Andrew

[Beener]

Generally I just do something that I feel is right and if it turns out to be wrong later, then I learn from it and move on.

[uni57]

When the teacher grades your homework and there is a big red X next to

2 + 2 = 5

then you know you were WRONG.

If you buy stock based on a hot tip from your Uncle Skeeter (who isn't really your uncle) and the stock price tanks and never comes back, then you bought the WRONG stock.

In linguistics, WRONG is preceeded by an asterisk.

I am right.
* I are right.

Right and wrong are determined by a jury of your peers.

Right and wrong are determined by experimentation and observation.

Lastly...

The reputation system will tell you when you were WRONG, which takes all the guess-work out of posting.

[Gilby]

Originally Posted by uni57

Lastly...

The reputation system will tell you when you were WRONG, which takes all the guess-work out of posting.

I should give negative rep for that. Just kidding. The reputation system does not tell you right and wrong. It's a feedback system that provides you opinions from others.

[Gilby]

It is innate. It is majority opinion. It is revealed. It is unknown.

The question here is not which one is correct, but how to interpret all of those statements. Assuming this question is about what is moral and what is not, I think the short statement that can best define it is:
Morality is defined as what's ultimately best for the greater good.

It is innate, because altruistic behavior is engrained in us. Altruism is a neccessary component of our society and many societies of other organisms. We help our young prosper because that allows our genes to be passed on to further generations. We help those in our society because working together can make it where we are all better off and able to pass on our genes.

It is majority opinion, because over the entire life of the universe, the majority opinion favors those that help the greater good, for the universe to advance to a greater state. Right now, our societies create laws that represent what is the greater good for that society and we punish those that do not adhere to it. This punishment results in them being less likely to reproduce and their genes are not passed on. It also results in detering others from taking those same actions that society has determined to be immoral.

It is revealed, because over time we are learning more and more about what is ultimately the best for the greater good. We obviously do not know right now what that is, but with lots of trial and error, the universe will and is revealing it to us and those that follow us.

It is unknown, because the universe continues to evolve and appears to be endless in time and space, so at this moment, there are many unknowns about what is immoral and what is not.

there are certain universal truths like the idea that murdering someone out of anger is wrong, and nearly everyone naturally knows that it is wrong. if someone has to sacrifice their baby in order to save more people, they did the right thing no matter

I disagree with those two examples. Murder is a horrible thing and in most cases it would be immoral, but in some, it may not be.

Choosing to sacrifice their baby verses saving more people may not be the most moral thing to do. Having a greater number of people surviving is not always the best thing, though the probably in this example is that most likely it would be the best case to sacrifice one baby in order to save more people. It's all about what would happen in the future if the baby survives verses what would happen if the many others survive. At the time that this decision is made, it is probably an unknown on what the future benefit of either decision will produce.

[TheObieOne3226]

Originally Posted by harper

I thought it was right and left. Oh, sorry, same thing.

Zing?

[Mikefule]

The fact that some individuals (psychopaths) simply fail to see things in terms of right and wrong implies that a sort of social awareness akin to a knowledge of right and wrong is born into us.

The fact that so many cultures have come up with so many different codes of right and wrong implies that right and wrong are socially determined.

There are several possible definitions of "morality" and we would have to assume one definition and agree on it before we could conclusively decide on whether a given act was "right" or "wrong".

I suggest morality starts when the individual willingly sacrifices his own personal advantage for the greater good of his community.

[andrew_carter]

"Lila: An Inquiry into Morals" by Rbert M. Pirsig is an interesting read...a slow one though. I seem to have been half way through it for weeks now. I'm enjoying it though.

Andrew