greywolf90

so you don't think it would be wrong for someone to kill your family and not recieve any punishment. if right and wrong don't exist than why would we punish people. we see that someone does something they should not have and we take vengence on them. these are not things that we learn. these are instincts that we are all born with. right and wrong do exist. it is true that it depneds on the environment. the rules may not alwaysbe the same, but there will always be right and wrong. humans did not create right and wrong, it is something universal to all life, and if it did not exist, life would be chaos. observe the animals, and you will see that there is a certain order. a predator does not kill without need or reason. animals that live in packs/flocks/herds are a type of society. as a society, they all function with certain rules.

greywolf90

to go further with my theory on human instinct, there is also emotions to consider. the feeling of gratitude when someone helps us. we feel hatred towred someone who commits something we percieve to be wrong. and so on and so on... like i said, right and wrong is based on our perception, but how can we feel something that does not exist? it is a mystery that we may never understand, but that doesn't mean that it is not real. those are my feelings on the subject so feel free to disagree.

Heroofthepast

Right and Wrong are concepts. They change based on society. And yes humans did create wring and wrong for where do you see vengeance in animal life? Right and Wrong are defined by society. Anything defined by society is not an instinct.

darklord5

i belive that the action in its self cant be right or wrong until you look at the motive that compeled you to comit said action. it doesn't mater what you do as long as the motive behind that action is right or wrong. and i also belive that right and wrong can only be difined on an individual basis.

__________________
if no one knows then no one can care.

greywolf90

in wolf packs, the alpha male punishes members that go against their wolves. if something endangers a lionesses cubs, she attacks it. there is an endless list. i've already said that it depends on the environment. i've already given reasons for why it is instinct, but you have not given any reasons for why it isn't. why is it not instinct?

Heroofthepast

Ok, you want a reason? Because when we are raised, we are taught by OUR PARENTS what is right and wrong. If we are taught something, that means it's not instilled in us from birth. Instict of survival comes to us naturally, we never think of it when we are in danger. We do everything, without thinking about it just in attempt to survive. When we try to decide what's right and wrong, we think a lot. We remember what people said, what they think about a certain event and then we make a decision whether the action is wright or wrong. And every person like you noted has a different view on it. With instincts, they are all the same. Also vengeance is not influenced by whether a situation is right or wrong, it's influenced by your feelings. Feelings cloud your judgment, I hope you've heard that before. Vengeance usually leads you to committing "WRONG" things, making "wrong" judgments. By the society you will be viewed as bad as the person who you are exerting your vengeance on.

Heroofthepast

On Good and Bad
Sorry to disappoint, but those do not exist. Well, they exist but not in a way they are usually though of. See, most humans have a definition between good and bad, right or wrong that is not the same as the person for example sitting next to them. Why? Because, despite the contrary belief, good and bad and the ability to tell them apart are not instincts, but concepts. You may choose to disagree, you may not like what I have just said, but that’s the clear truth. An instinct is something instilled at birth that is not needed to be taught. The concept of good and bad is determined by society and taught to each kid differently after their birth. In one society, it may be seem as a good thing to bury your enemies and in another it may seem that it’s good to eat them. In one society, smoking may be considered as a good thing, in another it may be considered as bad. Because the society is an unstable being and always fluctuates, the concept of bad and good changes. Since they are dependant on an unstable concept, they are thus themselves are unstable.

Drizzling Blur

Nice one there, need some time to think about his and then reply back in here, all i know is Science will not lie, while the conflict between our head and heart shall always persist and so will right and wrong.

Maximus

Well, like I've said before there is no right and wrong, the only difference is a majority of people associate right with good, or beneficial, and wrong as bad or negative.

That's pretty much it.

Skepticologist

Maybe this should be a new thread, but it seems to fit in with this one.

I agree that right and wrong are very subjective considerations, but I don't think they're as nebulous as some posters make out.

Although I'm reluctant to quote anything quite so simplistic, I think the old Golden Rule can give us a lot of guidance. If something hurts you, you shouldn't do it to anyone else. Conversely, if something feels good to you or helps you, it's probably a good thing to do unto others.

The more I think about right and wrong, the more I'm convinced Charles Darwin may have discovered more secrets of life than his research into evolution might at first indicate. In that vein, let me advance a postulate: anything a member of a species does that perpetuates that species can be considered right, and anything a member of a species does that threatens or damages that species can be considered wrong.

Please don't assume I've thought this concept through. This is just off the top of my head. It's very probably been thought of and explored before, but at least on its surface it seems to work.

__________________
"I am an agnostic; I do not pretend to know what many ignorant men are sure of."

Clarence Darrow