Morality vs reason
Side Score: 23
Side Score: 30
Reasonable Morality? If Morality was a law of Nature, that would make it a lot easier. However we are currently experiencing the dilemma of Free Will. So i'm afraid we are going to have to Logic/Reason our way to properly observe Morality.
Q1. Whose Morality?
Q2. Whose Reason?
Moraility is as maleable as any individulistic value, laws are only changed through capable and intructed reasoning, we only live in a society thanks to the laws that force us to act in a societal manner, there are no moral obligations enforced on anyone, yet laws are enforced at each level of human society. Reason is therefore better at moral decitions than morality.
This debate is a false dichotomy. There is a significant amount of brain space dedicated to moral reasoning. Indeed, this very debate is a moral attempt to reason for the elevation of reason above morals. It doesn't present an actual debatable choice, but rather illustrates the confusion of the debate creator.
There's plenty to discuss about reason and morality, but a discussion of "either/or" isn't truly one of them.
You are the idiot who believes morality is some inherent part of human cognition and not a learned program in the human brain, isn't that right? When you learn what morality is come back, until then suck my gruffalo nuggets. Morality is incompatible with reason because it is essentially a social construct that gets imprinted on your brain from society, and has no inherent connection to empathy or compassion contrary to popular belief. Yes, most people would say it's "immoral" to kill people but morality also deals with trivial and illogical things such as whether homosexuality or masturbation is right or wrong. Morality is absolutely meaningless, when people say it is "immoral" to molest toddlers what they really mean is "unethical". Morality is just the arbitrary taboos and values people come up with within different cultures and has nothing to do with empathy or compassion in an inherent sense like I said before.
You are the idiot who believes morality is some inherent part of human cognition and not a learned program in the human brain, isn't that right?
Morality is simply “ought” and “ought not”.
it is essentially a social construct that gets imprinted on your brain from society, and has no inherent connection to empathy or compassion
Empathy and compassion are social constructs.
Yes, most people would say it's "immoral" to kill people
I think most people would say it depends on why you’re killing.
Morality is absolutely meaningless
Is there nothing that people ought, and ought not do?
when people say it is "immoral" to molest toddlers what they really mean is "unethical"
Please define the difference between morals and ethics.
I REALLY hope not too many go through this life with YOUR moral compass. The world is immoral by most peoples standards in many different ways. It was even MORE immoral in the middle ages and before that. As people grew more intelligent morals changed. Hopefully, that will continue regardless of those with attitudes like yours.
I don't agree with many peoples ideas of morality … Mike Pence, for instance … but, if it keeps them with some iota of compassion for some people, it is a better thing than no "morals" at all!
Gruffalo nuggets are best deep fried … IMO.
who believes morality is some inherent part of human cognition and not a learned program in the human brain
God hasn't clarified this. and scientists definitely won't be able to discern this. it is reasonable to assume that there is a significant percentage hardwired. the easiest way to test this theory is on subjects who were never instructed. but we still can't rule out self-taught. it is overwhelming taught, which is why it isn't usually debated.
OOOF, there's a lot of religious indoctrination to unpack there gruffalo.
First off, Morality is NOT a social construct, i don't understand where you would get that from, but holy shit son, Morality is way older than even man.
Real morality is base off of two things and two things only and even that could be summed down into one phrase. Those two things are:
The survival of the individual DNA and the survival of the group (which is an extension of the first programmed into us due to our social nature as animals) generally based on phenotypes, but can be extended with humans to include other ways of being tribalistic like religion and who you like to screw.
As for why homosexuality would naturally grow to be considered immoral is obvious. It does nothing for either of those two. It does nothing to expand the bloodline, either for the group or for the individual.
Why is it not okay to masturbate? Well first its wasted seed, second like drugs it can become addictive and provides a false reward in the brain which makes men less ambitious, third it tends to weaken pair bonding, and therefore marriages, and therefore strong families and stable homes.
The reason why different cultures express that differently is the same reason why you and i react differently to the same stimuli. WE just like THEM have different experiences, different perceptions of the world, different environments. In essence because we are individuals and that my friend manifests in as many ways as there are grains of sand upon the beach.
As Karl Marx liked to say "Nothing human is surprising"
Morality is first and foremost. There is no reason without a morality for truth. Logic and reason themselves spring from morality.
What reason is there for me not to diddle your butt hole? If i wanted to do it, what would stop me if not the morality of others. if not the way it makes others feel.
Reason means nothing. We can all reason and rationalize anything and everything.