So, why are people so focused on a moral right....

Moderators: Adder, Adhara

So, why are people so focused on a moral right.... 20 Feb 2012 13:09 #50980

There is a socially acceptable status quo in the world that tells people that they need to follow a code that is "acceptable to the masses". No one is the same as the person next to them, so why are people forced to follow the morals and morays of the general public, even if the majority of the public does not believe in them?

Re: So, why are people so focused on a moral right.... 20 Feb 2012 14:30 #51016

  • Adder
  • Adder's Avatar
  • Knight
  • ID: 7778
There's the ethic of reciprocity, the 'Golden Rule' that you do not treat others how you would not want to be treated yourself, and also to treat others how you want to be treated. That's a good starting point for considering a universal standard of morality.... but even that seems to make a bad assumption that others have comparible health, happiness and capabilities as yourself - and ignores the important point that we do not know what other people might be going through. So if morality means proper behavior, I'd be more inclined to have a more regimented approach based on maximum compassion while not creating vulnerabilities in your own self.

Re: So, why are people so focused on a moral right.... 20 Feb 2012 14:46 #51026

What is right and what is wrong, that's the question!

I agree with the phrase "do unto others as you would have them do to you" but as Adder points out this only works when we consider the needs of each individual.

Generally I think that a person should be free to do as they wish as long as it does not harm anyone else in any way and in some way they contribute to the well-being of the society they live in if they are able.

The Force will be with you always.

Re: So, why are people so focused on a moral right.... 20 Feb 2012 15:13 #51030

There are rules to everything. I believe they are designed to bring order and control. Regardless of whether an individual agrees with them these rules represent the moral right.

I would suppose that people focus on them because being unaware and/or non-compliant creates a huge margin for chaos.

Fawks84, what are some specific examples of those moral rights that the majority does not agree with? Maybe we can narrow the scope of this discussion a bit and identify the details.



Re: So, why are people so focused on a moral right.... 20 Feb 2012 17:08 #51037

  • Proteus
  • Proteus's Avatar
  • Apprentice
  • ID: 9105
I think its just part of a society's syndrome of trying to "dominate" itself like it tries to "dominate" the world around it, just part of the sherade of ideas about what "good" and "bad" is, ideas in which we've come to define with our limited perceptions, and we slowly begin to realize just how subjective the ideas of "good" and "bad" really are. What's good for me may certainly not be good for you. It's just our attempt at trying to grasp two polar ends of a reality in which we think good and bad is separate and in which we think one should win over the other. The subjectivity of good and bad, and thus, of moral ideas should come to show that this is and always will be impossible and that both sides are one in the same, interdependent, and that trying to constantly win one side over the other only strengthens the opposition, thus we serve ourselves up another plate of war and politics.
Last Edit: 20 Feb 2012 17:08 by Proteus.

Re: So, why are people so focused on a moral right.... 20 Feb 2012 23:16 #51051

I seem to remember this conversation taking place somewhere before... strangest case of deja vu. :ohmy:

Almost positive this question or one very similar comes up on a regular basis. Since we can't form an opinion to have a discussion with based on vague facts, please define some of these morals, or moral forays, that you are referring to Fawks.
Last Edit: 20 Feb 2012 23:17 by Viskhard.

Re: So, why are people so focused on a moral right 21 Feb 2012 02:09 #51065

  • Macros
  • Macros's Avatar
  • Member
  • ID: 9552
In "The Book," we learn that there can be no morality with out immorality, for we cannot perceive one without the other. Both extremes are present in all people, and this is where one must make a choice.

The Hermetic principle of polarity states that these two extremes are the same thing differing only in degree, and rate of vibration. Therefore if you focus on increasing your own rate of vibration, you will be moral. If you focus on decreasing it, you will be immoral.

So, why are people so focused on a moral right.... 21 Feb 2012 02:25 #51072

  • Reliah
  • Reliah's Avatar
  • Councillor
  • ID: 8859
I've read people speaking of the "golden rule" and have been taught of a higher rule: treat others the way they desire to be treated. I'm not exactly sure how I feel about either of those rules, to be honest.
Intake Officer ~ Youth Officer

Re: So, why are people so focused on a moral right.... 21 Feb 2012 02:29 #51076

The fact of the matter remains, the real purpose of duality of that of balance. Everything we say we believe in as Jedi supports that. All that we do is to geared towards negating a polar opposite, the dark side. We know that we can't get rid of the dark side and we shouldn't want to. We need the dark side just as much as we need air to breathe. We do what we do to keep the dark side in check. I would agree that we should look at morality as trying to attune to a higher vibration. That would make the most sense.

Re: So, why are people so focused on a moral right 21 Feb 2012 03:01 #51083

  • Macros
  • Macros's Avatar
  • Member
  • ID: 9552
The higher law is more in keeping with the jedi creed.
Latest Posts Comments Articles
    • invitation to totjo (Last post by Brenna)
    • I'm curious. Various of the other communities appear to have a poor opinion of TOTJO in general, more so recently it would seem. And considering that even on your show there has been an undertone of judgment, why now? Your own opinion of the invalid nature of online teaching is well known, would the interview be objective and unbiased? Or used as a base for further comparison?
    • Father knocks out sons abuser. (Last post by Khaos)
    • Quote: Just wondering what the point of the thread is? I know its General Discussion but you just copy and pasted a news story. Whats the point of starting any thread? Discussion. You dont have a "Current events" thread, or at least I didnt see it, or I" would of posted it there. I also copy and paste for the " This week in Science" thread, to which no one has asked me for a point, and ironically, doesnt garner much discussion.
    • What are your opinions about euthanasia? (Last post by Luthien)
    • There are people who, because of not having the option for early termination, choose to end their own life by starving themselves to death. One can choose to stay off of medication to allow their body a natural death, though painful, regardless of what is advised by caretakers, yet one is not allowed to ask for a lethal, humane shot to end their life as peacefully and painlessly as possible. Honestly, I think it would be just fine to use the same technique used in a spinal block. It just seems more humane, especially if the patient is in pain and they'd be on life support for the remainder of their life. We humans behave as if we have dominion over the lives of other animals, but not our own. We somehow just can't handle ourselves? I would personally choose death over life support.
    • Saber Smithing - What's Colour would you have and ... (Last post by ChaosMerdy)
    • Hey everyone! It's been a while since I posted here but I've stumbled across a bit of a hurdle while building my saber. I was actually wondering if anyone had any ideas as to how to craft a removable blade for mine? I have a plastic tube that I've adjusted to the correct length for the blade, but I'm not sure how to go about attaching it in a way that is removable. I'd like to be able to alternate between commemorative/ceremonial display piece and actual useable blade. Thanks in advance!
    • Everything is Made of Energy Stuff (Last post by Gisteron)
    • So... if energy is conscious and aware (whatever the heck that means because with the ill, nay, sick non-definition of energy it could be literally anything and one might expect that consciousness and awareness are buzz words of the same nature), and we are an example of that, then wouldn't rocks be an example of energy being not conscious nor aware (unless the ill, nay sick non-definitions of conscious and aware are such as to allow for conscious and aware rocks, i suppose)? If we are arguing from examples, surely that must go both ways, and conversely, in order for it to only go one way the argument must be one that wouldn't rely on examples. To the second paragraph of Rickie's post #153098 (and only to it from this point on) I would comment that admitting you don't know is something one should do if one doesn't know. At the same time, when I know, let's say, that the earth resembles an ovoid in shape, I am perfectly comfortable saying I know this (and I can show that I do), and, and here comes the crucial bit, while I am open to change my mind as new evidence comes about, I am not just "open to the possibility" of flat-earth geology. My skepticism wouldn't have me stick to a belief despite and against reason but at the same time, it wouldn't let me accept any without reason either, much less when I have plenty of reason to accept an incompatible claim to the one suggested. Yes, I agree, on the quest of knowledge the blind reliance on one method is irrational. But of course if it happens to be the one and only most reliable method with no other ever showing any remotely comparable merit on any occasion, the reliance on that particular method, be it limited as it might, suddenly becomes very easy to justify. The assumption that we are capable to master all things is not rational and perhaps ultimately false, too, but we are fully aware of that when we employ it as a working assumption. If we assumed the contrary, we would constantly have to ask whether there is anything at all we can master and how would we go about telling masterable and unmasterable things from each other which would make the kind of progress that enables us to write without carving anything into stones and shipping them across the oceans over months rather than milliseconds, simply put, impossible. Most of us owe their lives and all of us owe their lifestyles to the working assumption that things are within our reach and that we will get them all if only we try hard enough. It is not humble to assume that we cannot, it is cowardly and lazy. We know that there is a lot we don't know and we even know about some of the things we don't know. But to not know everything doesn't mean to not know anything. And we are open to whatever the answers we find shall imply for what we previously had accepted as working assumptions. We aren't open to possibilities, we are open to advancement. Our minds aren't free due to our ignorance, they are trapped instead in the pits of ignorance struggling to climb outand succeeding, one inch at a time, day after day. We acknowledge our ignorance, but we don't accept it - we fight it. And wouldn't that be a sentiment to tie to or get out of the second line of the code? ;)
    • Live Service - Saturday 26th July at 2000 UTC (Last post by MCSH)
    • I'll be conducting a live service on Saturday 26th July at 2000 UTC. The sermon part of this live service would be available as a normal sermon for everyone to read. To find out what this time would be on your timezone click here.
    • Cognitive Dissonance - Your Thoughts (Last post by Rickie The Grey)
    • Well it seems to me knowing yourself: likes, dislikes, desires and expectations would be helpfull? Then knowing your limits while working to expand them would keep dissonance to a minimum? I think it's all about: living, learning and becoming a better person. Don't get hung up on your flaws and keep on keeping on.
    • Words Mean Things. (Last post by Jestor)
    • Quote: In type, you should strive to be more clear, if anything, as there is not context of voice inflection, body language, etc. In type, it much more easy to misunderstand something, hence, to be as clear as possible and non subjective with your words will open more doors then close them. Of course... But if I think I'm clear, and as clear as I can be, and still not getting through, it can't be helped... And, an individual should realize that not everyone is going to understand what someone else is saying so further questioning should be done...:) Quote: It goes against the argument of subjectivity really. Such as this... Would you explain? This is just another point where people get separated... The "prickly" people, and the "goo" people.... :lol:....
    • Still Around (Last post by Brenna)
    • It was really nice to see you Scott. Its been a while :)
    • Another XKCD- Answers (Last post by Vusuki)
    • Not sure where to put this- so thought I'd just add it here. Just a bit of a fun poke at star wars Don't turn it on.
    • Unacceptable Casualties of War (Last post by Deepseablue)
    • Quote: Czech Airlines were not flying from Seoul to Prague above Ukraine. Only above Russia. We have arrived safely in Prague. Good for you! I wouldn't have wanted to be anyone anywhere near Ukraine in the days after the "crash."
    • Well, I thought I would make a few suggestions... (Last post by Proteus)
    • The shoutbox was a 3rd party code which ren was managing when he was admin but took it down after the site's update due to some kind of compatibility or functional issues and never finished fixing it back up. Whatever its condition was when he left, I forgot, but I can check and see if there's anything we can do about it.

There are 286 visitors, 5 guests and 20 members online (one is in chat): Akkarin, Octagon, Connor L., Adder, Wescli Wardest, Learn_To_Know, Luthien, Alexandre Orion, MJ Hannigan, Rosalyn J, MCSH, Khaos, Arcade, Brenna, Buvan, Llama Su, Archon, tzb, ChaosMerdy, jasonwilkins, Jamie Stick, Jer-Pen Dan, TambelSadera.

Follow Us