Debates Community
The debates community, chat, and discussion.
241K SOULS
2mo
Nice, a debates tag! Morality is a system of conduct defined by and defining norms, and those can be either on an individual or group level (though I'd argue that they're not easily separated). On a group level, good an evil may be relative, but there are sets of mores that groups adhere to in order to maintain unity, identity, and cohesion (and subsequently, be able to function internally and externally). When you join such a group, you either implicitly or explicitly agree to certain morals. Some can change and probably will, while others will definitely shake up the foundation of the group because they embody its core. That's not to say that there aren't people who use that contextual morality hierarchically to set their self apart in some superiority/inferiority contest btw. I agree with you that there are, but it's not generalizable. When I signed up to be on this app, for example, I agreed to abide to certain rules and norms for my and other users' well-being. I can absolutely cross them and know that I will be booted off this site for good, not because I'm objectively "bad", but because I reneged a contract. In a similar vein, being on here and abiding by its mores and norms doesn't mean that I'm objectively "good" either. At the same time, morality isn't static or reducible. A group may on average agree on certain norms at one point in time, only for those mores to shift in nature or strength at a later time. And maybe that's where the individual relativity comes in as members of the group may broadly agree on certain points but maybe don't hold them to the same importance/priority. I'd still argue though that on an individual level, the principles of group morality are mirrored: to internally function within yourself (i.e. have a cohesive and consistent self) and externally interact with others, you need a system of conduct that defines your norms and is adaptable to surrounding norms. Both individual and group morality kind of go through periods of flux where they're negotiated, compromised, or reinforced. If it's happening within a strongly hierarchical or power/authority-focused environment, then I can see why people would use morality as a way to assert superiority, dominance, or ingroup identity. Outside of those spaces though, it's just change.
2mo
Morality is something that changes over space and time. The universe is amoral (not immoral) and is indifferent to the changing human opinion.
2mo
I don't think I saw anyone mention this so I will, we're talking about it singularly meaning applied to oneself. Which is why we're all agreeing it's rather human to be blunt, but good and evil are relative to a point. If someone had the cure for cancer and didn't give it cause there's to much money in it that's evil and self gaining. To us evil, to the man or woman with the cure, just self ethical. Evil is indeed a point of view but we have the words tragedy, massacre, murder, cacophony, calamity, and I can keep going. Are these just empty words for random events and things that happened or are they tied to evil events evil people and evil mindsets?
2mo
Did you know that this app is for 18 years and older? Please leave and come back after reaching adulthood.
1mo
Nietzsche would probably agree. Morality is a framework imposed by relationships of power, culture and faith. It marshals agencies in the name of promoting mutual benefits to a wider community. The difficulty comes when such frameworks obscure, disguise or rationalise their own evil-doing as necessary: then the whole idea of an objective moral position becomes flawed beyond repair. My own research focuses on the idea of dominance and how this plays out in systemic violence so its possible I’m a bit biased 😅
2mo
Moral relativism is fantastic with other people's money and goods, but when they charge you triple for an oil change or steal something from you, that's when we look for what gives order to actions.
2mo
Definitely so
Meet New People
50,000,000+
DOWNLOADS