That's simply because the "group" decides (sometimes quite arbitrarily) whether the acts of one person are good or bad. That group decision isn't always a conscious one, but in general it is made (consciously or not) by whether the actions of the individual are helpful to the group's survival/propserity or not. That "standard," which often shifts and changes and is subject to fashion and whim, is the only one external to individuals.
Sometimes the group doesn't know if an individual's actions are helpful to the group or not -- when that happens the group often just sits by and does nothing, waiting to see what the outcome will be. That was the case with many of Hitler's early actions in Germany, when he first took power; the public didn't know if what he was doing would be good or not in the long run, and even though many had personal reservations, they took a wait and see attitude. By the time they realized that many of his actions weren't good, it was too late...he had so much control and power by that time that there was little or nothing they could do about it.
Something is either right or something is going to be wrong. Right now, we are living in a time when the question of what is right or wrong can be very intellectually bewildering. Until this very day, I myself constantly ask myself "what is right?"
The problem that I have with morality is that we have this intellectual evaluation of morals called -values clarification-."
For example, lets say that you are in a small boat in the middle of the ocean and there are too many people in the boat. Now the only people in the boat who are going to be worth the survival risk are the ones who can help contribute to the others survival. You are in the boat, and there is a sick person with pneumonia sitting next to you, and then there is the retard, and then there is just one more strong and healthy person in the boat with you who can do his/her share of the rowing. The boat is very heavy and could very easily sink, in which case all of you will die. But if you throw out the tard and the sick person, then there will be less weight and then the two of you can easily row the boat. That is values clarification. Of course we both know how ugly it is to do something like that, but intellectually speaking, which is worse, the four people dying or just two sacrificed people dying?
Hmmm ..... bad and good are all relative. What is bad to one person, is good to another.
Natural law would say, re: Via_Crucis's example, if your neighbor abuses his wife, then he has broken his covenant with her; and therefore committed adultery against her by breaking the covenant. He has failed to love, protect, honor, and cherish her.
Therefore, if you steal her away from him, have you wronged the person who has committed wrongs?
Perhaps not. Once someone has adulterated their marriage, can it be said that the marriage is broken? Yes.
People fail to see that adultery isn't just cheating, as in having sex outside your marriage. Its much more than that. Its neglecting or abusing a spouse to the point of breaking your vows. There's more than one of them ya know.
Think of it this way: human perception is created through concepts. Concepts are not natural, but human maps that are superimposed on reality. The concept of chair doesn't actually exist, for example. There are four legged things made of wood (or other materials) with a flat surface that you have he capacity to sit on. But nature doesn't consider it a "chair."
Good and evil are human concepts superimposed on reality. A raccoon might kill a cat. That's the objective reality of the situation. But whether or not it's good or evil is the human concept applied onto the situation.
I believe that there is, but that is just an opinion....
I believe that we (with noted exceptions for those with physical impairments to their brain) are all born knowing right from wrong. My kid has taught me this, by watching him & learning from him & having him correct me.
Deceptions, lies, stealing....all learnt behaviours. My kid is becoming a regular human, *sigh*
Never. Society dictates to us what is good and what is bad, and you'll never find any two who can agree on everything re: "good" and "bad". It varies among cultures.
Certainly there is. Do you actually think that Man is the ultimate repository of knowledge, especially the knowledge of good and evil. But, this is one of those things that you either know and believe or you don't.
Answers & Comments
Verified answer
No. But our societies act as if there is.
That's simply because the "group" decides (sometimes quite arbitrarily) whether the acts of one person are good or bad. That group decision isn't always a conscious one, but in general it is made (consciously or not) by whether the actions of the individual are helpful to the group's survival/propserity or not. That "standard," which often shifts and changes and is subject to fashion and whim, is the only one external to individuals.
Sometimes the group doesn't know if an individual's actions are helpful to the group or not -- when that happens the group often just sits by and does nothing, waiting to see what the outcome will be. That was the case with many of Hitler's early actions in Germany, when he first took power; the public didn't know if what he was doing would be good or not in the long run, and even though many had personal reservations, they took a wait and see attitude. By the time they realized that many of his actions weren't good, it was too late...he had so much control and power by that time that there was little or nothing they could do about it.
Peace.
Something is either right or something is going to be wrong. Right now, we are living in a time when the question of what is right or wrong can be very intellectually bewildering. Until this very day, I myself constantly ask myself "what is right?"
The problem that I have with morality is that we have this intellectual evaluation of morals called -values clarification-."
For example, lets say that you are in a small boat in the middle of the ocean and there are too many people in the boat. Now the only people in the boat who are going to be worth the survival risk are the ones who can help contribute to the others survival. You are in the boat, and there is a sick person with pneumonia sitting next to you, and then there is the retard, and then there is just one more strong and healthy person in the boat with you who can do his/her share of the rowing. The boat is very heavy and could very easily sink, in which case all of you will die. But if you throw out the tard and the sick person, then there will be less weight and then the two of you can easily row the boat. That is values clarification. Of course we both know how ugly it is to do something like that, but intellectually speaking, which is worse, the four people dying or just two sacrificed people dying?
Hmmm ..... bad and good are all relative. What is bad to one person, is good to another.
Natural law would say, re: Via_Crucis's example, if your neighbor abuses his wife, then he has broken his covenant with her; and therefore committed adultery against her by breaking the covenant. He has failed to love, protect, honor, and cherish her.
Therefore, if you steal her away from him, have you wronged the person who has committed wrongs?
Perhaps not. Once someone has adulterated their marriage, can it be said that the marriage is broken? Yes.
People fail to see that adultery isn't just cheating, as in having sex outside your marriage. Its much more than that. Its neglecting or abusing a spouse to the point of breaking your vows. There's more than one of them ya know.
No. Nature doesn't deal with good and evil.
Think of it this way: human perception is created through concepts. Concepts are not natural, but human maps that are superimposed on reality. The concept of chair doesn't actually exist, for example. There are four legged things made of wood (or other materials) with a flat surface that you have he capacity to sit on. But nature doesn't consider it a "chair."
Good and evil are human concepts superimposed on reality. A raccoon might kill a cat. That's the objective reality of the situation. But whether or not it's good or evil is the human concept applied onto the situation.
I believe that there is, but that is just an opinion....
I believe that we (with noted exceptions for those with physical impairments to their brain) are all born knowing right from wrong. My kid has taught me this, by watching him & learning from him & having him correct me.
Deceptions, lies, stealing....all learnt behaviours. My kid is becoming a regular human, *sigh*
Never. Society dictates to us what is good and what is bad, and you'll never find any two who can agree on everything re: "good" and "bad". It varies among cultures.
Society's?
Nothing absolute if I am understanding you correctly
Certainly there is. Do you actually think that Man is the ultimate repository of knowledge, especially the knowledge of good and evil. But, this is one of those things that you either know and believe or you don't.
Yes.
Kuma
i believe so.
harming others is bad. taking away rights from others is bad.
allowing others to be however they want assuming they do no damage to others is good.
if there is no victim, there is no crime.