@ Cofty - As if your latest post substantiates or invalidates anything that has been posted on this thread. Cofty, all you do on this Forum is to post conclusions and and cut and paste. Nathan Natas summed you up. Nothing more needs to be said.
Does Morality Exist?
Fishy always needs to have the last word - Cofty
^^^^ hahahaha ^^^^
I guess I'm lost....
Fisherman: You asked if morality exists.
Some of us pointed out that even if the nihilistic view is correct, morality would still exist as a social construct. (i.e. No less real than other intangibles like what constitutes humor or altruism or male and female attire.)
Unless I've misunderstood however, you don't accept the idea that morality is simply a social construct.
Ergo, you must believe it exists.
you don't accept the idea that morality is simply a social construct. - TD
Even if enforceable laws based on arbitrary standards did not exist, right and wrong actions exist, socially constructed in cooperation for the purpose of well-being as expressed on this thread. But all that is, is well-being and labeled as morality -also expressed by a poster. Another poster expressed that the concern for the well-being of others, also known as empathy, was not given to humans by God but evolved in the human organism as a result from successful cooperation that resulted in prosperity. So concern and other human "virtues" are not endowed by God but are merely mechanisms that evolved for the purpose of survival of the species originating from successful cooperation or social construct. If this is what you are saying that morality is, there is nothing moral about morality. It is only a device that evolved for the purpose of the survival of the species. That is all it is. And our feelings are lying to us. And "morality"is only a gimmick designed by evolution to survive as a species for no other purpose than to exist successfully and to survive - and then die.
I enjoyed reading many of the posts although I did not express that to each of the posters.
TD, Oh, the elegance of your written expressions!
Fisherman - At last we get to the actual meaning of your thread.
You think that unless right and wrong is based on the dictates of your deity, and unless our actions lead to eternal rewards or punishments there is no point in being moral.
It always amazes me when believers attempt to make this point. Is it only your superstitious beliefs that keep you from murder, rape and theft?
All of us avoid harm and desire things that contribute to our welfare and pleasure. These are not simply social constructs they are objective realities. Living in a certain way contributes to the quality of our lives and those of others.
All day every day we do things that are of only temporary value. We clean our homes, tend our gardens, paint the fence and wash the car even though all of these efforts are quickly undone. They make our lives better. Being concerned about the wellbeing of others - who likewise respect our interests - also contributes to the quality of our lives. To do otherwise would lead to dystopia.
The instincts that underpin our moral decisions are a result of evolution. Far from being a "gimmick" they have made it possible for us to prosper as a social species. Despite all our failings our achievements are astonishing.
Fisherman - According to your worldview what exactly is morality?
I'm writing this post because I want to say how much I agree with cofty at this moment (except for the social construct bit, but that's irrelevant...) The purpose of this thread isn't to debate the "existence of morality"—whatever the hell that's supposed to mean. Its purpose is to demonstrate that morality is pointless unless there is a value to it that we can experience eternally. What a load of bullshit.
My car isn't going to survive forever. It's going to die. In fact, it's going to die pretty soon compared to the average human lifespan. That doesn't make it meaningless. Cars are still useful—sometimes VERY useful. Try having a job long distance from home. How about you sell your car because it's only temporary? Are you satisfied with your job now? Yeah, I thought so. Same with the moral code.
I'm not going to live forever. I'm going to die. Maybe I'm going to die the next day, week, month, year, or decade. Whatever. The fact is that I'm going to die. So what? The point of living is to find the best way to be happy. Just compare the modern Western society to the society from the TV show The 100. See the difference?
And now please do tell me how our moral code is meaningless because I won't live forever. Now please do tell me how morality is just a label we put on well-being. Now please do tell me how there's nothing "moral about morality" (Jesus Christ, he's so confused...) because our instincts are a result of evolution. And here's the sentence which wins the prize: "And 'morality' is only a gimmick designed by evolution to survive as a species for no other purpose than to exist successfully and to survive - and then die." Please do tell me how "existing successfully" is such a futile goal.
And after telling me all this, take a course on logic and ethics because if you think that morality is meaningless without eternal experience, then you are still a long way from having an intellectual discussion on this topic where both opponents actually contribute to the conversation.
In unprecedented case, Swedish man on trial for ‘raping’ Canadian girls - over the internet.
No one in Sweden has ever been convicted of rape for deeds that occurred over the internet - let alone on another continent - but prosecutors are hoping to set a precedent, she said.
A rape conviction could send a message to the growing number of predators who might not have the nerve to assault a child in person, but are willing to victimize them in the digital world, said Wennerström.
Goes to show that morality is an ever evolving facet of human society. We created it and we will continue to refine it ad infinitum. The development of morality will only stop once all scientific knowledge is attained and all human progress and evolution has been expired.
So concern and other human "virtues" are not endowed by God but are merely mechanisms that evolved for the purpose of survival of the species....
Your comment reminds me of the eternal debate over whether true altruism actually exists. Most of us like to think that it does, but because there is almost always some sort of reward for the donor, (Even if it's only a sense of personal satisfaction.) it's very, very hard to find a pure example of it.
At the end of the day, is the distinction really that important?
At the end of the day, is the distinction really that important? TD
If that is all that matters.
Is it important that wolves feel concern as they cooperate during the hunt as long as they all enjoy the food and survive as a species?
Does it matter at the end of the day whether or not the sun feels right or wrong as long as it does what it is supposed to do?
Does it matter whether you are the sun, a wolf or a human.
Does it matter whether you exist or not?
It is important to an individual not feel pain. It is important to an individual to feel satisfaction. That is what is important to each person.
If the human species did not exist, would morality and things like justice exist?
Is it important to a person whether or not the world exists after the person is dead?
I'm reminded of the book of Job..
Is the mutuality inherent in all relationships really that distasteful?
Would it matter if Jesus of the Bible took a personal satisfaction in healing people? Or are good deeds only virtuous when they are distasteful?
Does it matter that if in return for respecting the life and property of others, they agree to respect ours as well?