Suicide is a good example of this. So many religions prohibit suicide and threaten hell if you do it, but how many people would continue living if they knew for certain they wouldn't be punished for suicide?
A better question would be, would anyone bother to be moral without fear of consequences. If it were impossible to do harm by any action, would anyone be moral? Would there be such a thing as morality?
Why would anyone follow this "objective morality" if there were no consequences for anything? Why would anyone even stop to think about whether it exists or not?
2 weeks ago
Anonymous
If you could do anything you wanted, you'll get tired. The next step is to shape the world according to your desires. If you set the values, you can also enforce these values on everyone else.
2 weeks ago
Anonymous
No idea, but its a tree falls in the forest situation, could you still have moral and immoral actions even if nobody knew or cared?
Proto-Morality emerged when prehistoric humans killed the bully ape. It developed by killing/punishing thieves and rapists. This developed into marriage and private property (capitalism), the pillars of any functioning society.
>Would anyone bother to be moral without fear of punishment?
In the current day and age actually yes, most people would bother, but only because of their evolutionary past. Over a few generations no one would bother and humanity would effectively become extinct.
>killing/punishing thieves and rapists. This developed into marriage and private property (capitalism)
You have it backwards. Private property existed first, theft and rape are property crime.
I agree with the rape and theft, nta, but what is private property?
Do animals have private property? They have personal space and some animals claim territory, like lions or bears, wolves, bird nests and so on.
Would that be considered private property?
Would you be moral without hell or heaven? If the soul perished upon death? God, leaving man kind with total free will, without a carrot or stick simpky requesting we choose good?
The righteous are few and we need many to build a world. The compromise is to built this safety net to ensure those that would unscrupulously backstab others once they're given the opportunity remain in line.
*Looks at the current state of the world*
.....Perhaps. If the reward was not living in an absolute shit state of affairs. Some people actually want to though (that's the fricked up bit)
"But wherever I found living things, there heard I also the language of obedience. All living things are obeying things.
And this heard I secondly: Whatever cannot obey itself, is commanded. Such is the nature of living things.
This, however, is the third thing which I heard—namely, that commanding is more difficult than obeying. And not only because the commander beareth the burden of all obeyers, and because this burden readily crusheth him:—
An attempt and a risk seemed all commanding unto me; and whenever it commandeth, the living thing risketh itself thereby.
Yea, even when it commandeth itself, then also must it atone for its commanding. Of its own law must it become the judge and avenger and victim.
How doth this happen! so did I ask myself. What persuadeth the living thing to obey, and command, and even be obedient in commanding?"
"Hearken now unto my word, ye wisest ones! Test it seriously, whether I have crept into the heart of life itself, and into the roots of its heart!
Wherever I found a living thing, there found I Will to Power; and even in the will of the servant found I the will to be master.
That to the stronger the weaker shall serve—thereto persuadeth he his will who would be master over a still weaker one. That delight alone he is unwilling to forego.
And as the lesser surrendereth himself to the greater that he may have delight and power over the least of all, so doth even the greatest surrender himself, and staketh— life, for the sake of power.
It is the surrender of the greatest to run risk and danger, and play dice for death.
And where there is sacrifice and service and love-glances, there also is the will to be master. By by-ways doth the weaker then slink into the fortress, and into the heart of the mightier one—and there stealeth power."
no
Suicide is a good example of this. So many religions prohibit suicide and threaten hell if you do it, but how many people would continue living if they knew for certain they wouldn't be punished for suicide?
yes
>mom would be sad
A better question would be, would anyone bother to be moral without fear of consequences. If it were impossible to do harm by any action, would anyone be moral? Would there be such a thing as morality?
That's not a better question. The answer is easy, it's no
Ah, but, it is only no if there is no such thing as objective morality.
Why would anyone follow this "objective morality" if there were no consequences for anything? Why would anyone even stop to think about whether it exists or not?
If you could do anything you wanted, you'll get tired. The next step is to shape the world according to your desires. If you set the values, you can also enforce these values on everyone else.
No idea, but its a tree falls in the forest situation, could you still have moral and immoral actions even if nobody knew or cared?
Proto-Morality emerged when prehistoric humans killed the bully ape. It developed by killing/punishing thieves and rapists. This developed into marriage and private property (capitalism), the pillars of any functioning society.
>Would anyone bother to be moral without fear of punishment?
In the current day and age actually yes, most people would bother, but only because of their evolutionary past. Over a few generations no one would bother and humanity would effectively become extinct.
>killing/punishing thieves and rapists. This developed into marriage and private property (capitalism)
You have it backwards. Private property existed first, theft and rape are property crime.
>Basado
Can you give me any good hint on literature or videos to consoom?
I agree with the rape and theft, nta, but what is private property?
Do animals have private property? They have personal space and some animals claim territory, like lions or bears, wolves, bird nests and so on.
Would that be considered private property?
>be moral
be what?
yes, im motivated by compassion and empathy and a sense of justice, i believe in society and i have love and admiration for people
Thats what a psychopath would say
Also fairness, I feel bad when things are unfair
Compassion, empathy and a sense of justice are ultimately just your brain rewarding or punishing itself for doing what it feels is moral or not.
It is still punishment, just one that is hard-wired into our brains through thousands of years of natural selection.
Dopamine receptors are motivating too
Has this thread been made before? I'm having serious deja vu guys. Please help me.
You’re talking with bots
No. Take your meds
No clue,
Im not moronic enough to be 24/7 on this site
Me neither, I just feel like I've seen this before.
Watch for Al-Aqsa
Would you be moral without hell or heaven? If the soul perished upon death? God, leaving man kind with total free will, without a carrot or stick simpky requesting we choose good?
Some people return the shopping cart because it's beneficial to others
The righteous are few and we need many to build a world. The compromise is to built this safety net to ensure those that would unscrupulously backstab others once they're given the opportunity remain in line.
It's the right thing to do.
You can only be moral without fear of punishment. Otherwise it's just convenient.
*Looks at the current state of the world*
.....Perhaps. If the reward was not living in an absolute shit state of affairs. Some people actually want to though (that's the fricked up bit)
"But.... it's not that bad, is it?"
Y'know, over-looking extinctions and mass-genocide. Yeah, it's not so bad. Fancy another cake?
The virtuous life is the fulfilled life. The moral is the practical. Morality is in your own self-interest
"But wherever I found living things, there heard I also the language of obedience. All living things are obeying things.
And this heard I secondly: Whatever cannot obey itself, is commanded. Such is the nature of living things.
This, however, is the third thing which I heard—namely, that commanding is more difficult than obeying. And not only because the commander beareth the burden of all obeyers, and because this burden readily crusheth him:—
An attempt and a risk seemed all commanding unto me; and whenever it commandeth, the living thing risketh itself thereby.
Yea, even when it commandeth itself, then also must it atone for its commanding. Of its own law must it become the judge and avenger and victim.
How doth this happen! so did I ask myself. What persuadeth the living thing to obey, and command, and even be obedient in commanding?"
"Hearken now unto my word, ye wisest ones! Test it seriously, whether I have crept into the heart of life itself, and into the roots of its heart!
Wherever I found a living thing, there found I Will to Power; and even in the will of the servant found I the will to be master.
That to the stronger the weaker shall serve—thereto persuadeth he his will who would be master over a still weaker one. That delight alone he is unwilling to forego.
And as the lesser surrendereth himself to the greater that he may have delight and power over the least of all, so doth even the greatest surrender himself, and staketh— life, for the sake of power.
It is the surrender of the greatest to run risk and danger, and play dice for death.
And where there is sacrifice and service and love-glances, there also is the will to be master. By by-ways doth the weaker then slink into the fortress, and into the heart of the mightier one—and there stealeth power."