shaun

I think I still need you to answer these questions before we can proceed:

Where do those morals come from?
What do you mean by "morals"?
Why is religion even inherently tied to morals?
What do you mean by "religion"?

[quote=NotConvinced;20824][quote=shaun;20823]Why do you even need to be moral? What inherent value is there in even being moral, and why is that linked to your happiness? Who ever said you had to be morally good - and if so, why did you believe them?

NotConvinced

Where do my morals come from? From philophical conclusions reached in my head.

By morals, I mean a personal set of ethics, principles or habits with respect to right or wrong conduct.

I believe religion is inherently tied to morals because of the history of religion itself. I believe religion is based on a fear death, thus the creation of an afterlife is central to most all religion. They then create a way to achieve said afterlife, through the way you live your life, thus the morals. Those religions that didn't fit such a model, were over time weeded out.

By religion, I refer to the organized "biggies," Judaism, Christianity, Islam, Buddhism, Hinduism.

I also reserve the right to modify my definitions of morals and religion as I see fit. They aren't historically simple definitions.

shaun

Okay.

Wait a minute - new definitions here. What do you mean by "right" or "wrong"?

Fair enough.

I think that's a speculation that needs circumstantial evidence to warrant any serious merit, but you are definitely entitled to your beliefs.

I would like to know why you think following morals is important?

NotConvinced

Me personally? I don't "need" to be moral, I choose to be moral, because I believe it leads to being more happy, and having a better life. Why is being moral linked to my happiness? Because of the interactions and relationships I have with other people I know, and don't know...they flourish under higher morals, this is my personal belief. Who ever said I had to be morally good? I've had my parents tell me this, as well as church elders of the many churches I've attended, as well as college professors. Why did I believe them? Because eventually I reached the same conclusion on my own.

shaun

So, you are moral simply because of the social benefits - please correct me if I am wrong.

Where would you say that these morals are initially constructed from?

NotConvinced

Well, we're slowly getting at the full flegded definition of my entire ethical code....which I don't have time to lay out before taking my finals exams later today.

shaun

That's fine. Blessings on your exams!

NotConvinced

There are also mental benefits, emotional benefits, and inherently the benefits of others that result from my actions.

Where are these morals constructed from? I'm having trouble understanding if you mean "where they're historically constructed from on a global scale" or "where in my personal history are they constructed from." Please clarify.

marmalade

I agree that religion serves a useful purpose for not only individuals, but for society as a whole. Even though they aren't the best places to learn rational thought, they are the best places for most people to learn morality.

I think about this in terms of spiral dynamics. Here is an article analyzing Christianity according to this model.

http://www.integralworld.net/index.html?smith13.html

shaun

I mean how do you even get a basis for what you say are your morals?

It seems to me that you're espousing a relative morality based upon what you *feel* to be right. However, what I'm asking you is: where does that feeling come from? Because the answer to that is crucial.

If it's just genetics, then how is any other relative morality "better" than another? Why cannot I just say stealing all your money is relatively "good and moral" for me? If I did, and you subscribed to a personally-defined morality, then you couldn't argue with me and remain intellectually honest.

If it's socially-defined, then you've basically just said the Holocaust was "good and right" because it was morally correct for that specific society. If you claim then that it was evil, you're saying your society's morals say it's wrong - and who is to say that your society's morals are better than another?

I'm stating that without some form of absolute morality - inherent good and evil not defined by humanity or social constructs - then nothing is "good" and nothing is "evil". Nothing is right or wrong. And you escalate into chaos pretty quickly.

I don't think people function that way - look inside yourself and you'll find you don't. If you look at your actions, you'll have to admit you act according to a principle of goodness that is outside of yourself, and not necessary relegated to even your own society.