What is right?

1. 73

   VationSaysposted 9 years ago

   What is right?
   
   What is right? Is it what you believe it to be? Does everyone have their own interpretation of "what's right"? If so there can be over a billion different versions of what is right when it comes to beliefs and practices. Such a varied notion cannot be right. It breeds anarchy.Which brings me to the conclusion that what is right has to be set by what is not within. The standard of morality and virtue has to be set by an external influence, free from prejudice. God sets the standard.

   replyreport
2. 61

   FatFreddysCatposted 9 years ago

   Umm...Okay. So are you asking us, or telling us?

   replyreport
   1. 73

      VationSaysposted 9 years agoin reply to this

      haha...okay, I was asking...then went ahead to voice my thoughts on the matter

      replyreport
   2. 70

      getitriteposted 9 years agoin reply to this

      The voice of God once told a man to kill his own son. He also drowned the whole world...blaming his creation for his mistakes. Also condones slavery, rape, genocide, etc. Is this character really the one who sets the standards for morality?!

      replyreport
3. 75

   word55posted 9 years ago

   2 + 2 = 4 is right, 3 or 5 would be wrong. Outside of numbers, That which is accepted according to the principles of God is right and measured according to His righteousness. The devil must be released and freed from us.

   replyreport
   1. 73

      VationSaysposted 9 years agoin reply to this

      True...and here's another interesting thought: the number system is based on how you perceive it- binary, decimal, octal, hexadecimal or whichever new one people have come up with.

      replyreport
4. 48

   Ericdierkerposted 9 years ago

   It is a fair question but very broad. I like to think about what is right. So it is fun for me. It is 80 degrees out. A man from the tropics says it is a cool day. A man from the snow mountains says it is a hot day. You say it is an 80 degree day. All three are right to them. But you are most accurate for speech. Hot and cool are basically adjectives and subjective. You are basically objective. But what happens if someone put the thermometer in the basement and someone else put it in the sunshine.Then even your answer would require some interpretation.
   What is right often just boils down to the accuracy of the words we use. Thou shall not kill. Is strange - homicide is the taking of the life of another. Murder is the non-justifiable, non defensible taking of the life of another. And war is hell. And negligent homicide is the accidental death of another that could have been avoided with care.  A sin cannot be justified or defended. So if you killed a man in clear defense of a small child who would have died had you not killed -- did you commit a sin. We all get the concept of pardon but you would have still sinned by killing.
   Perhaps it is easier to say that there is a right and wrong in every situation and right and wrongs "on paper" only tell a part of the story.
   We have the words "but" "and" "if" for reasons.
   Prejudice is pre-judgment. I think it would be fair to say that pre-judgment is wrong. But I would be wrong. If I am prejudice against using illegal drugs that is a good prejudice.
   Now take answering this question the way I have. Some folks will consider it wrong and others will not have an opinion and some will think that it is right. Hey if a society cannot even agree that all homicide is bad how can it decide if gay marriage is right or wrong.
   Of course a disease is bad. So instead of just containing it we send in workers to help eradicate it. Then the workers return home and spread the disease and wipe out another group. Clearly it is right to send in the aid workers --- or is it?
   So it is not an external force that creates a right and a wrong. It is the circumstances and personal decisions. I hate to burst your bubble but there really are billions of rights and wrongs out there.
   God set the standard. Thou shall not kill. I did right when I broke it and saved 30 lives by killing the lone gunman. Or do you think not?

   replyreport
   1. 73

      VationSaysposted 9 years agoin reply to this

      You've set a really big grey area, where justification is based on making the best out of a situation. Trouble is people can come up with different ways in which things could have gone. Hence the need for a perfect standard. Not grey-Black and white.

      replyreport
   2. 48

      Ericdierkerposted 9 years agoin reply to this

      Who says we need a black and white perfect standard?

      replyreport
5. 70

   getitriteposted 9 years ago

   There is no evidence for the existence of ANY Gods.  Ancient humans writing down things in ancient books, pretending to be Gods is all we have.  Therefore morals come from societies. 
   But, first, and foremost, any species has to favor behaviors that are conducive to the survival of the species. Beyond that, individuals can vary widely.

   replyreport
   1. 73

      VationSaysposted 9 years agoin reply to this

      Okay...what would to take to be as evidence of the existence of God? Some need to see a sea parting in half, others bread multiplying from one basket, while others simply have to take a walk in the neighborhood to observe nature at work.

      replyreport
   2. 70

      getitriteposted 9 years agoin reply to this

      Evidence for the existence of a God should be OBJECTIVE...and irrefutable. Every example that you mentioned is based upon nothing but human whim and very faulty conjecture.

      replyreport
   3. 73

      VationSaysposted 9 years agoin reply to this

      But people DID see a sea parting in half-in fact they walked right through it. People also DID get bread multiplied from a handful of loaves. Unless you are saying that the authors who witnessed these occurrences separated by centuries were lying.

      replyreport
   4. 70

      getitriteposted 9 years agoin reply to this

      Using Odds & Probabilities...the most likely answer, overwhelmingly, is that...Yes..they lied!
      Ergo
      Number of times I have seen seas parting = 0
      Number of times I have seen people lie = >100,000

      replyreport
   5. 73

      VationSaysposted 9 years agoin reply to this

      So you've based your decision on the probability of a documented event being truthful- which is not objective. "It's not the truth because it's more likely to be a lie". Odds and probabilities don't determine facts.

      replyreport
   6. 70

      getitriteposted 9 years agoin reply to this

      What?! OK...I see you NEED to believe in ancient fairy tales...for some reason or other. Please continue to do so, but u should keep it to yourself, because u have no argument in your favor...AT ALL. This kind of programmed absurdity is expected.

      replyreport
   7. 73

      VationSaysposted 9 years agoin reply to this

      Ancient fairy tales...because they are from old manuscripts and detailed "unfathomable" feats? Programmed absurdity...because I subscribe to a faith and believe in God? Am I wrong because it's unlikely that am right? Oh well...that's my path.

      replyreport
   8. 70

      getitriteposted 9 years agoin reply to this

      Yes, I am sure you are as wrong as anyone else who believed in all the other outlandish man-made IMMORAL deities from the past. Willful ignorance of the laws of nature and psychology does not make your indoctrinated beliefs any truer than the others.

      replyreport
6. 83

   tamarawilhiteposted 9 years ago

   If everyone is free to have their own opinion of what is right, the vicious and violent can say they are free to harm, maim and rape others because no one can say what they are doing is wrong - or that might makes right.

   replyreport
   1. 73

      VationSaysposted 9 years agoin reply to this

      I agree. And there can be over 7 billion opinions on one single issue. And true-might doesn't make right. Neither does the minority having their say and the majority having their way. This doesn't bring justification- it simply brings order.

      replyreport
7. 82

   Say Yes To Lifeposted 9 years ago

   The laws of Cause and Effect determine what is right.  The way you dress in Alaska is different from the way you dress in Hawaii.  The skills required to fix a car are not the same as for doing surgery on a person.  What is considered friendly in one society can be seen as forward, or even rude, in another.
   Some things are right or wrong everywhere.  It's all based on the laws of Cause and Effect.  There could be one God who sets the standard, or many Gods - or perhaps none.

   replyreport
   1. 73

      VationSaysposted 9 years agoin reply to this

      Cause and effect will help you understand why things went the way they did.  But does it justify it? And if we rely on a society's standard on what is right, and every society has its standard, then it becomes a case of following the masses.

      replyreport
   2. 82

      Say Yes To Lifeposted 9 years agoin reply to this

      Wearing too little clothing in Alaska causes death by freezing. Wearing too much clothing in Hawaii causes death by heatstroke. Yes, it is justified - if you want to live.

      replyreport
   3. 73

      VationSaysposted 9 years agoin reply to this

      Situation: My neighbor has a great car, I don't.
      Action: I steal the car.
      
      Why?
      Cause: Am always late for work, plus I really like my neighbor's car.
      Effect: I always get to work in time.
      
      I believe my actions are right. Am I justified?

      replyreport
   4. 82

      Say Yes To Lifeposted 9 years agoin reply to this

      If your neighbor did the same to you, would it be justified?

      replyreport
   5. 83

      tsmogposted 9 years agoin reply to this

      @ VationSays :-) justification is fickle when it comes to justice. There are three justifications I am aware of - a priori, a posteriori, and Kant's view of synthesis. I justify Kant's view at times because I can't use the other two satisfactorily.

      replyreport
   6. 74

      Aime Fposted 9 years agoin reply to this

      Your car cause/effect answer doesn't stop there. You stole a car so now you have a criminal record and most definitely don't still have your neighbour's car. Most people have the capacity to think ahead and determine consequences.

      replyreport
8. 83

   tsmogposted 9 years ago

   Once a long, long time ago when arguing with my sister my grandpa broke it off. First she said, "I'm right!" Quickly I retorted, "I'm right!". We were both adamant about our position. In his maybe odd wisdom he sat us both down asked us each why.
   
   After listening as we too did so he finally asked us a question saying, "Do you understand the difference between who is right or wrong?" After shrugging our shoulders he shared, "The difference between right and wrong is what's left."
   
   With thought anyone can surmise there own wisdom from that or set it aside. I know I ponder it with many debates I have encountered. I always giggle + giggled when I think of the left and the right while ponder if between decides wrong or not.

   replyreport
   1. 73

      VationSaysposted 9 years agoin reply to this

      "The difference between right and wrong is what's left."
      Why don't sensei's and wise people say what they mean, call a spade a spade, instead of leaving us more confused?

      replyreport
9. 74

   Aime Fposted 9 years ago

   What is 'right', morally speaking, is mostly determined by societal and cultural norms. I think most people have at least a minimum standard for morality thanks to empathy and common sense, but there are some greyer areas which vary depending on who you're asking and likely where they're from/how they've been raised.
   
   I think when it comes to the grey areas it's the thought and discussion and consideration that make us better, more informed people (and therefore closer to 'right'). I think the experience of figuring out for yourself what you believe to be right is much more valuable than someone/something just laying the answers down in front of you. Sort of like if your kid asks you to tell them the answers to their homework - you're not going to tell them the answer. You're going to show them how to do it so that they actually learn it and can do it again in the future. I think it's the same with the choices we make every day. You have a foundation (human nature) and you have to work towards the answers...sometimes making mistakes along the way. But you (hopefully) learn and you're smarter because of it.
   
   Of course those of us who don't believe in God do not want to live by those standards anyway. To live by God's standards would to be assume that you're right by believing he's real. Which is fine. But I disagree both with that assumption, and that some of the "moral standards" in the bible are the right standards to live by.

   replyreport
   1. 48

      Ericdierkerposted 9 years agoin reply to this

      What an interesting answer. Clearly there is a line between adults and children. I suppose we could say that nurture plays a big role in what we determine is right or wrong. And religion just may be a big part of that for 50%.

      replyreport
10. 95

    MizBejabbersposted 9 years ago

    The key to your question here is in your final sentence, but your execution of the key shows that there is a better understanding of the difference between spirituality and religion.  You have made a statement born of religion. God is an external source? Really. Even those in religion dance around the issue that God is within. If your preacher tells you to let the holy spirit come into your heart and you do, you are opening yourself up to the image of God. Then when you live with the awakening to the realization that you are made in the image of God, you are living spiritually. God cannot be an external force. God is always within as you're made in his image. You only think God is external because you have blocked and shut the wisdom and will of God out.
    Go back to the little Baptist girl who has done as her preacher told her to. She's let Jesus into her heart and feels love for everyone. In other words, she has unblocked her heart and mind to her God-source. So when her friends tell her to mock and jeer at another child in the neighborhood and she refuses because she knows it is wrong and not what God wants, it is coming from within, not from an external God who is shaking his finger at her and saying, "No, no, I'll send you to Hell if you do."
    On the other hand, if she doesn't let what the church calls the holy spirit into her heart, she fears God because she has been taught that he can send her to Hell, Her fear creates the illusion that God is an external force. When she refuses to taunt the child because she is afraid of God, it is the right action for the wrong reason.
    Awakening to listen to God from within in a priceless experience. You never have to fear an external God again, because tuning in to God is like tuning the radio with your headsets on.

    replyreport