Atheists! Agnostics! What is right and what is wrong?
How would you define it and on what basis?
Others could also join in and respond.
I am an Ahmadi peaceful Muslim
@paar do you seriously think one needs book for that?...i wonder how world would have been if that if true..there are atleast billions who can't read and for those who can many end up read wrong book...
coming to your question what is basis of my viewing something wrong or right?..well i dont think anything is purely right or purely wrong..it is mere perception...what i see as wrong might be right for some other person...for e.g. i think your belief is wrong but isn't it right for you?..in same way you think that christians beliving in christ as god are wrong...but according to those who believe in christ..they are right...so it is perfect example of how perception rules ...
for me there are only things which i wont do because they are not aligned with my core values...
What are your core values and on what basis? Please
my core values are never harming anyone , never compromising on principals like never getting order by lie,cheating , never over stating or fooling clients and such things....basis or context is my own thinking pattern..any thing which can make me think -ve about myself or work i am doing is something which i wont do ..my priority is having peace with myself...ofcourse it is not based on how good or bad i am..it is plain self centered motto of being at peace with myself..
Are you having a problem trying to figure out the difference between right and wrong?
Neither are "right" or "wrong", both are concepts based on perception.
What is "right" and What is "wrong"? This is basic morality and that is singularly tied to actions, not perceptions.
Speaking out on those perceptions- is an action, which can be deemed "right" or "wrong".
Simple you are wrong, along with all the other god bothering fundies.
That which is right is that which contributes to human happiness, progress, wisdom, health, wealth, strength, pleasure and comfort.
That which is wrong is that which detracts from human happiness, progress, wisdom, health, wealth, strength or comfort, and/or that which contributes to human sadness, misery, backwardness, stupidity, sickness/ illness, poverty, want, weakness, pain and discomfort.
Where do these rules come from, you ask? They come from a realization that one is human, and that one's own happiness, progress, etc, depend at least in part on others' happiness, progress, etc. They also come from simple logic and reason.
As far as we can tell, we are alone in the universe. There is nothing but us: humans. Thus we develop rules that apply to all humans, for all humans. It is not the creation of individual human, it is the creation of many human brains applying logic as best they can to common problems and questions.
Does it work? Can humans be trusted? Can the human race develop viable moral rules on its own, in the absence of a cosmic tyrant to order everyone around?
Evidently, the answer is yes. As the world has become less religious, less inclined to the supernatural, and more focused on the problems of human freedom, suffering, knowledge, happiness and wealth, in THIS world, the human race has become more prosperous and more knowledgeable of the universe.
Today, with some exceptions, the least religious societies tend to be the most prosperous and peaceful and stable, and the most religious societies tend to be the least prosperous, the least peaceful and the least stable. There is a reason for that.
That is another right way of putting things.
Would you please enlighten us as to why right is called right and the wrong is not called "left"?
Hmm. Not sure I understand your question. If you are referring to the niceties of the English language and the words "right," "wrong" and "left," I'm not sure what the etymologies of those words is.
It might have something to do with the fact that back in the middle ages, the right side was considered to be the holy side, the side of God, and the left side the side of evil and the devil. This is why left-handed people were distrusted and feared. It is also why in medieval artwork good or blessed characters are often placed to the right of God or Jesus, and bad characters are placed to his left.
Also, in Italian the word "sinistra" means "left." And "sinistra" also obviously has the same root as the English word "sinister" meaning evil. Bottom line: backward religious belief rears its ugly head again! Always when you least expect it.
But aside from that, if you are asking what is the fundamental basis for labeling stuff that is good for humans as "right," I already answered that question above.
Here's another way of looking at it: If I am thinking, then I am by definition requiring my own existence. Even if I say "I should not exist" still by just thinking this thought, I am in fact admitting that I should exist--I should exist to think that thought.
Thus, by the very act of thinking or doing anything, I am asserting that I *should* exist. If I should exist/ continue existing, then I should do that which contributes to or enhances my existence. And so and so forth, morality continues from there.
In this hub, I further explore the topic of secular morality and secular rights, and why it is superior to the religious alternative:
http://hubpages.com/hub/Secular-Moralit … lar-Rights
I appreciate your post.
Chirality has some significance for the human beings. What is your opinion about it/
I don't know what "chirality" means, so I can't answer your question.
I googled for enlightenment, but I found only chemical definitions.
You mean charity.
Charity, helping the poor, helping those less fortunate, and similar things--these are all very important.
Why is being charitable moral? Because of my earlier point: it helps to further human progress, health, prosperity and happiness. That is why someone who gives to charity is acting morally.
Chirality is different than charity. Please
"Nothing's either right or wrong. Thinking makes it so." Or something like that.
Rachelle, we'll both laugh all the way to heaven
So what is this perception based on?
"There is no right or wrong"
Is it right to believe this?
I don't think so.
One obeys the traffic rules of the country one lives in? One cannot endanger others by doing whatever one thinks is right or right; for a better society rules have to be made and eforced; otherwise one may prefer to live in jungle.
My point seems to be getting lost in translation.
There is no right and wrong ONLY THE PERCEPTION of right and wrong.
150 years ago it was "right" under US law to keep African Americans as slaves. It was "wrong" under US law for them to be set free, have to access to education, voting or anything related to basic human rights as we see it today.
Majority of white people 150 years felt slavery was "right". Majority of African Americans felt (pretty strongly) that slavery was "wrong".
Today it is "wrong" under US law to keep slaves or to deny ethnic minorities the same human rights as everyone else in the areas of education, work, marriage, voting etc.
So now it would seem majority of society in US feels slavery is "wrong". (Although there are people who do still disagree with this incredibly!)
So is it "right" or is it "wrong"?
How you answer that question is entirely based upon your own PERCEPTION and belief system.
Therefore: There is no right and wrong only perception.
"There is no right and wrong only perception."
This implies that chattel slavery is not right or wrong. You believe it's wrong, someone else believes it's right. Both perspectives are equally legitimate.
I ask again regarding the statement, "there is no right and wrong only perception": is it *right* to believe this?
The answer to this question is either yes or no. Either it is right to believe this statement, or it is not right to believe this statement.
If it is *right* to believe this statement, then in fact there is such a thing as "right," and the statement is false.
If it is *not right* to believe this statement, then this statement is false.
Either way, the statement is false.
This is your perception.
I believe this statement is neither *right* nor *wrong* but simply my opinion.
I don't see the world in absolutes because there are no absolutes.
Everything is in a constant state of flux and change.
I could say at this moment in time that death is the only absolute in life but who knows if in the future even this will always be true. The average life span used to be 35 years now it's 75 years...in the future...who knows?
So if there are no absolutes there is no right and wrong. Right and wrong can exist simultaneously in regards to the same issue. Right and wrong are defined by people in the moment dependent on their perceptions.
Perceptions are based on a complicated mix of: nature + nurture + experience.
So why do I hold this opinion?
Because of who I was the moment I was born, what my parents, teachers and family instilled in me as I was growing and all the experiences and independent study I have done since then and continue to do. It is an ever evolving experience.
Interesting. A few more questions, if I may:
"I don't see the world in absolutes..."
Is this true absolutely?
"there are no absolutes."
Is this true absolutely?
BTW, let me rephrase my earlier question:
You cannot choose your past, or your upbringing. But you can choose what you believe.
Why do you choose to hold this opinion?
Is it in fact because you believe it is... right?
In the moment I typed those words it was what I believed. Tomorrow...who knows?
Nope. It is only true as I view the world in this particular moment, time and place with the knowledge I currently have available to me.
Belief is based on our past and present experiences. I cannot point to one specific reason as to why I hold this opinion only that at this moment in time I do.
Whether it is considered 'right' or 'wrong' is inconsequential to me.
Today it is my reality.
Tomorrow, something may occur in my life that alters my entire philosophy on this subject.
I am therefore I am.
Hmmm. Pretty much the end of the discussion right there. At least you're honest. You admit the very claim you made is not absolutely true. And you say you don't know why you believe what you believe.
It doesn't sound like a very reliable worldview.
"Whether it is considered 'right' or 'wrong' is inconsequential to me."
And yet you are posting on a forum that asks "what is right and what is wrong."
Here's something for you to ponder tomorrow, though: perhaps the reason you choose to believe this is because you really do believe it is right...
Well, as far as world views go...I am a Buddhist. I do follow the Dharma path, however, this is merely my belief system. Open to being challenged and questioned on. (After all, what is the use of a belief system if it is not questioned on a daily basis. )
I take issue with the attachment of 'right' and 'wrong' because they are such subjective perceptions and seem to cause such a host of problems.
I have let go of the idea of 'right' and 'wrong' as it pertains to this discussion because what is considered 'right' today maybe proven 'wrong' tomorrow. What I attach to as being 'right' someone else may be attached to as being 'wrong'.
I can simultaneously be 'right' and 'wrong' dependent on other people's perception of my behaviour or views. I can prove myself 'wrong' on a point I always believed I was 'right' about. Etc.
So, given these things I just chose to let go of the idea of 'right' and 'wrong'. I felt I could be a more compassionate person by not attaching these very rigid judgments to any belief systems or differing philosophical viewpoints.
So why did I post in this forum? Who knows? lol
Too much time on my hands maybe...feeling the need for a good philosophical debate....
Maybe I just wanted to introduce a different opinion into the mix...why does the mind wonder? Because it can!
How about - 'right' is what I like, and 'wrong' is what I dislike. At the moment.
There in lies the rub...
You see, right now I strongly dislike chocolate because I ate way too much of it earlier while making truffles which I strongly like.
I thought I was 'right' to gorge on the "brown, tasty, liquid gold" but now I fear I was very much 'wrong' because my stomach hurts!
"Right" is increasing human wellbeing. 'Wrong" is decreasing human wellbeing.
I go with my Inner Knowledge and how it feels. When I'm in harmony with myself, it feels great and I suppose that is what life is supposed to feel, so I expect my beliefs to evoke the same feelings of well-being and harmony in me.
If it feels off, it is off for me.
The only thing wrong around here might be this ridiculous question. We are still free in this country to believe as we choose, are we not? So neither is right or wrong. Each is simply a matter of personal choice and therefore does not need to be defended to anybody else.
We? This country? HubPages has a global demographic. Further, there is no connection between having the freedom to do something and the rightness or wrongness of that action. In many African nations, mothers are free to excise their daughter's clitoris. Is it right to do so?
Please excuse my tunnel vision. The "we" in my comment live here in the USA. My response was to the question: "Atheists! Agnostics! What is right and what is wrong?" If someone is an Atheist or an Agnostic, who is to say what they believe is right or wrong, certainly not me. It's OK to be either one or the other here in the USA.
I'm not sure what the question has to do with female circumcision however, I wasn't aware that either Atheists or Agnostics practiced it.
As to whether or not it is right to do, depends entirely on how one was raised. Obviously those doing it think it is right and correct. Of course, I do not because I was not raised in that culture.
You or anybody else is free to decide for yourself; even then one decides what is right for your and what is wrong for you. After all you follow some pattern; what is that pattern and why?
There is nothing good or bad in this world, but our perceptions make it so.
I think right from wrong is what goes against conscience. Does it take islam or religion to have a conscience? I don't think so.
What is consience and how it get formed? Does everybody has the same consience?
Thanks. I think the conscience is plastic, it can be trained or untrained, so no I don't think everyone has the same conscience. Do you believe it takes islam to have a conscience?
Doing something with the clear conscience ; make ones at peace. Where the consience pricks; that is not right to do.
Presently nothing comes to my mind about it in Quran. Nevetheless I know Quran has describe "self" in three classifications:
1. Ammara; which is apt to do wrongs most of the time; not being pricked.
2. Lawwama; the state of a person when he does something; his mind pricks and if he does it, his mind is remorseful.
3. Mutmainna; he is at peace; evil thoughts don’t bother him; always does right and virtuous deeds.
One may refer for Ammara:
[12:54] ‘And I do not hold my own self to be free from weakness; for, the soul* is surely prone to enjoin evil, save that whereon my Lord has mercy. Surely, my Lord is Most Forgiving, Merciful.’
http://www.alislam.org/quran/search2/sh … p;verse=53
And for Lawwama
[75:2] Nay! I call to witness the Day of Resurrection.
[75:3] And I do call to witness the self-accusing soul, that the Day of Judgment is a certainty.
http://www.alislam.org/quran/search2/sh … mp;verse=0
And for Mutmainna
[89:28] And thou, O soul* at peace!
[89:29] Return to thy Lord well pleased with Him and He well pleased with thee.
http://www.alislam.org/quran/search2/sh … p;verse=28
Thanks. I do not make it a habit to debate bible or islam bible quotes. I will make an exception for this time. Where in your quotes does it say the word conscience? It says "mind" and "soul" with nothing of brain or conscience. No one knows the origin of conscience or conscious because no one knows the origin of life. As far as mind and soul, these are under duality, there is no proof of duality, but nothing to disprove it. Many materialists believe conscience is simply a creation of the brain of a persons belief between what is right and wrong.
Conscience is what we as individuals deem right and wrong as far as how it is developed? that all depends on where you were born who you were born too what their morals are how they talk to you about them and what you think of them and what you decide to choose that is what makes up 'our' consciences. and do we all have the same conscience? no that would be almost impossible to achieve we are all raised differently with different beliefs and feed different information on a daily basis and we all have the freedom of choice to choose what we want to believe.
Where does the conscience reside in our body; is it the brain or heart or mind?
where does you belief reside in your body?...is it the brain or heart or mind?
Why does it have to 'reside' somewhere can't it just...be. It just is.
Unless a tning is physical; some people find it difficult to figure it out. Brain and heart they can understand; soul they can't understand. Nevertheless "mind" they will use witout questioning it; they will then subdivide it subconcious mind etc
I could believe in being the most kind, giving, helpful, just person in existence. But if I had no job, and no way of bettering my situation, I'd still rob you blind to support my family.
Right and Wrong is merely a perception. People develop these perceptions based on how it applies to them. Many people hold beliefs of right and wrong that are borrowed from others. They don't have a personal opinion on it so with what their group(be it religious, ethnic, social) chooses. Other than philosophically, does your opinion matter to anyone other than yourself anyway?
I'm gonna stick with a simple version. Do what you do as long as it doesnt hurt others.
One should not harm one's ownself; one should not commit suicide also; it is wrong though it does not harm others. Please make allowance of it. One should not harm animals; one should not harm anykind of tree or any form of life. This is on the negative side; as it would be wrong to do.
One should contribute towards preserving life in any form on the positive side.
Don't harm a tree?? A bit late for that!
So you live without firewood or timber?
If this wasn't so stupid it would be funny.
It is in keeping with the rest of the dribble you believe though.
In many poor countries; the trees are being cut with such a speed that the forests are getting disappeared; hence cutting of trees unnecessaritly is not prolife; alternates resources should be used as much as possible. This is one cause of frequet floods; the forest are natrual impediments of floods.
So you live in a wood free environment too?
I thought you were agreeing with our resident muslim...
"one should not harm anykind of tree or any form of life."
Earnest, I put a little bit of tobacco on the ground and recite a prayer before chopping down my neighbor's abrasive branches.
The only use I have found for tobacco is to make marijuana burn better.
I take it for CNS pain relief, the only pain relief marijuana provides.
Marijuana increases pain in most circumstances.
Marijuana effects everyone differently, of course, but CNS isn't the only pain it relieves.
(card carrier and proud)
"well both laugh all the way to heaven" -- If the Christian god is as people claim, then I doubt anyone would get in with *that* attitude toward their "brethren".
Seems almost like you relish the thought of someone *not* going to heaven. That's kindof just sickening. Keep your evil little religion. Seriously.
by aka-dj2 years ago
It seems that Islam is on the rise in just about every nation around the globe.They are pushing their agenda onto any and every government that is TOLERANT, and using the freedom (and laws) in those countries to gain...
by paarsurrey5 years ago
The atheists agnostics skeptics apatheists; all while away their lives; finding no purpose in life and no goal in life, their actions become meaningless and their thoughts get frustrated.
by Rhonda D Johnson4 years ago
1. I've never met an evangelicval atheist:. They're under no commission to spread the gospel of atheism to every creature so they have no problem with what I choose to believe or not believe.2. No atheist...
by paarsurrey6 years ago
Hi friendsI don't agree with dutchman1951 .The Atheists Agnostics are equally brainwashed as are the religionists; being humans all are equally susceptible to such tendencies. Who has given the Atheists Agnostics the...
by Tony Lawrence5 years ago
I think not.Some say that they just aren't sure, but they figure "I'm a good person, so if there is, I'm fine". I'd say that person is actually a theist.Others say they don't know and don't care. They never...
by Pachomius6 years ago
In regard to the article of Arthur Windermere on atheists being reasonable while agnostics are not, I wrote a comment on it but it did not come out.In my comment I said that atheists are not reasonable in terms of...
Copyright © 2017 HubPages Inc. and respective owners.
Other product and company names shown may be trademarks of their respective owners.
HubPages® is a registered Service Mark of HubPages, Inc.
HubPages and Hubbers (authors) may earn revenue on this page based on affiliate relationships and advertisements with partners including Amazon, Google, and others.