NationStates Jolt Archive

What guides your moral compass? Your religion, your family upbringing? Or perhaps you rely on the old-fashioned moral sextant? Perhaps you just chose your morals by random? Feel free to post what you think guides or shaped your morals.

"Don't treat others how you wouldn't like to be treated yourself."

That's the main thing, I suppose.

A combination of religious, philosophical and societal norms.

"Don't treat others how you wouldn't like to be treated yourself."

That's the main thing, I suppose.
That and the possitive version (cause they are not always equal)
Treat others how you wish to be treated

What guides your moral compass? Your religion, your family upbringing? Or perhaps you rely on the old-fashioned moral sextant? Perhaps you just chose your morals by random? Feel free to post what you think guides or shaped your morals.

My morals, to the best of my ability, are based on two commandments.

"Love the LORD your God with all your heart, soul strenght and mind."

And,

"Love your neighbor as yourself."

What guides your moral compass? Your religion, your family upbringing? Or perhaps you rely on the old-fashioned moral sextant? Perhaps you just chose your morals by random? Feel free to post what you think guides or shaped your morals.

rational thought.

"Be excellent to each other."
-Bill and Ted

"Be excellent to each other."
-Bill and Ted
I never thought I would see a quote of bill an ted’s in a moral/philosophical argument … I was wrong lol

I never thought I would see a quote of bill an ted’s in a moral/philosophical argument … I was wrong lol

Well I think it's a great moral base.

"Love the LORD your God with all your heart, soul strenght and mind."

How does this have anything to do with morals? In a practical, real sense, I mean. You can love God and do pretty much anything you like to anything else (not you specifically. I'm using the general 'you'. I know your second commandment-moral keeps you from turning into a mass-murdering homicidal neo-fundamentalist).

My parents and my religion (Calvinism)

What guides your moral compass? Your religion, your family upbringing? Or perhaps you rely on the old-fashioned moral sextant? Perhaps you just chose your morals by random? Feel free to post what you think guides or shaped your morals.
*lol*

My morals were shaped firstly by my own feelings of how I would want to be treated by others (kindly, honestly, joyfully, etc.) and secondly by reading various authors' attitudes and philosophies that struck a chord with me. I would also list my parents as a significant contributor to my moral structure.

My morals are shaped by rational thought and have only one major part:

1. If something someone's doing can't be demonstrated to cause unnecessary physical, emotional, or financial harm to someone else, I won't even consider being against it.

A combination of religious, philosophical and societal norms.

No offense, but I put little faith in social norms. That's just me. To me, there is more truth in Nature than in society. I rely more on reason, science, and natural laws than on social mores. I believe in just one moral absolute- justice.

rules i live by:

1) i do not have the right to tell other people how to live their lives.

What guides your moral compass? Your religion, your family upbringing? Or perhaps you rely on the old-fashioned moral sextant? Perhaps you just chose your morals by random? Feel free to post what you think guides or shaped your morals.
my own internal reflection guides most of my ideals or philosophies, as well as my morals (but the latter, more than the other two, has been shaped by family/upbringing)

How does this have anything to do with morals? In a practical, real sense, I mean. You can love God and do pretty much anything you like to anything else (not you specifically. I'm using the general 'you'. I know your second commandment-moral keeps you from turning into a mass-murdering homicidal neo-fundamentalist).

While people can profess to love "god" while being homicidal maniacs, it is impossible to truly love God and not be progressively changed and molded into a reflection of His perfect love for all mankind. God is the source of all that is good, noblem upright and moral. Even the good things people claim to do independently of God are inspired by Him IMO.

on the matter of that thing Jesus said or along the lines of "treat others how you would like to be treated yourself"- what if you had low self-esteem?

While people can profess to love "god" while being homicidal maniacs, it is impossible to truly love God and not be progressively changed and molded into a reflection of His perfect love for all mankind. God is the source of all that is good, noble, upright and moral. Even the good things people claim to do independently of God are inspired by Him IMO.

Unless God is in fact a fiction. And anyway, being molded as a reflection of God isn't that good. Remember Sodom? Remember the War in Heaven? Remember the story of Jobe? He's hardly very moral, really.

Unless God is in fact a fiction. And anyway, being molded as a reflection of God isn't that good. Remember Sodom? Remember the War in Heaven? Remember the story of Jobe? He's hardly very moral, really.
Even if God is fiction, you can still love him.

While people can profess to love "god" while being homicidal maniacs, it is impossible to truly love God and not be progressively changed and molded into a reflection of His perfect love for all mankind. God is the source of all that is good, noblem upright and moral. Even the good things people claim to do independently of God are inspired by Him IMO.
Not nessisarly ... if they believe in YOUR version of god that is what they should be shaped twords ... but not everyone believes in god ... nor your version

So someone could have a completely genuine belief in god and still not have the same morals as you do

rules i live by:

1) i do not have the right to tell other people how to live their lives.


I agree, if something someone does doesn't restrict other people doing what they want to do then no one has the right to stop them ...IMHO

If you dont like abortion, don't have an abortion
If you don't like Homosexuality, dont be homosexual
If you don't like Pornography, dont look at pr0n

but don't for one second believe you have the right to tell people to conform to your morality

on the matter of that thing Jesus said or along the lines of "treat others how you would like to be treated yourself"- what if you had low self-esteem?

Or if you were a masochist?

i saw the word "sex" so i clicked... ( no not really but had to make that joke :D)

Unless God is in fact a fiction. And anyway, being molded as a reflection of God isn't that good. Remember Sodom? Remember the War in Heaven? Remember the story of Jobe? He's hardly very moral, really.

Only when misunderstood, misrepresented and misinterpreted.

Or if you thought that, if you were a pagan, you'd want to be beaten in to being a good Christian...

--

As for me, my morals are a mixture of empathy and logic. If its not objectively, provably harmful, I don't give a rat's ass. However, since I empathize with people, I prefer them to be happy, because I feed off of their happiness like a vampire. Hurrah for ethical egoism.

Only when misunderstood, misrepresented and misinterpreted.

Or if you have a different moral standard.

The Christian deity isn't a humanist by a long shot.

Military tactics.
AKA, whatever logically will get me what I want, in the most efficient matter.
And I usually take into account future events when I do things.
Generally means I'm nice to people, what good is it to piss people off that I may need later?

Not nessisarly ... if they believe in YOUR version of god that is what they should be shaped twords ... but not everyone believes in god ... nor your version

So someone could have a completely genuine belief in god and still not have the same morals as you do

That's why knowing the only true God is imperative. I'm not claiming to have a perfect handle on knowing God, BTW. I just doing my best based on the info I have.

I was asked what shapes my morality and then was just defending it against a challenge. If someone else believes something else, that is their prerogative. I am not God that I should stand in judgment of another.

Or if you thought that, if you were a pagan, you'd want to be beaten in to being a good Christian...

--

As for me, my morals are a mixture of empathy and logic. If its not objectively, provably harmful, I don't give a rat's ass. However, since I empathize with people, I prefer them to be happy, because I feed off of their happiness like a vampire. Hurrah for ethical egoism.

So if happiness for some is to be tortured and die with honor in the name of Allah, you're all for it??

That's why knowing the only true God is imperative. I'm not claiming to have a perfect handle on knowing God, BTW. I just doing my best based on the info I have.

I was asked what shapes my morality and then was just defending it against a challenge. If someone else believes something else, that is their prerogative. I am not God that I should stand in judgment of another.
But see … (grr this is a tough one to explain) it is not your love for god per se that is the adjuster of morals (it may be a motivator yes but it is not what does the defining)

Your love of god motivates you to change in ways proscribed by the bible … (at least for a lot of the religious influence)
While it is a motivator it is not the actor … in this case the RELIGION (or text) is the actor

That was the separation I was trying to make

But see … (grr this is a tough one to explain) it is not your love for god per se that is the adjuster of morals (it may be a motivator yes but it is not what does the defining)

Your love of god motivates you to change in ways proscribed by the bible … (at least for a lot of the religious influence)
While it is a motivator it is not the actor … in this case the RELIGION (or text) is the actor

That was the separation I was trying to make


I see what you're getting at, but you're using a limited definition of the word love. Love is a noun and a verb and when love for God takes on the verb form it takes on characteristics of both motivation and action.

Loving God gets played out in my everyday actions and provides a good portion of the definition of my morality/moral code. ;)

Basically, I don't do anything to other people that I would have anything against being done to me, in the same situation. That is, unless other alternatives are worse in that case. (worse in this case = a sum of better/worse to me and better/worse to others involved) Then there are of cource a few exceptions when it comes to minor things from time to time...

Other than this basic morality, I use rational thought. It should also be noted that I do not believe in right/wrong/good/evil. (an irrational belief that cannot survive intense logical thinking) Nothing is neither good or bad in itself. For something to become good or bad, you need to see it in a perspective.

As soon as you do, everything becomes less or more good and/or bad according to that perspective. I tend to view things from many different points of view according (mainly) to how it affects firstly me, secondly others, thirdly everything that exists as a whole, and sometimes switching those three priorities. (for fun, try thinking logically and mainly thinking about how something affects everything that exists as a whole. You will probably come up with many unusual conclusions before you go back to thinking in whatever way you usually do) That way, I can weight different things against each other from an open and fairly neutral point of view.

The problem with doing this is that a lot of things you have been taught to believe to be good or bad unconditionally (which is IMHO pure stupidity) then gets neutral in themselves, opening up endless new possible ways to think about it that you then have to keep for yourself and completely ignore (or atleast pretend to) most of the time, because otherwise "normal" people will think you are extremely weird and/or nuts and despise or even hate you for your unusually rational and open-minded thinking.

1. nothing(physical thing) is truely provable.
2. all things eventually end.
3. the third atyi is a bit confusing, i'm not quite shure how to translate it into english, but i'll give examples of it. a chair isn't actually a chair, chair is just a word symbolizing something that is organized and sat on. another example would be; (a) life has no purpose. (if you want to look at it in a scientific view, the reason it has no purpose is because it is only a group of chemical reactions that together copy themselves.)
4. nothing has a value.
5. life's common goal is to reproduce.

there are more, but i believe those are the most important 5(they're not actually in that order)
does anyone else speak yopenese, so i could tell them the yopenese sentance of the third atyi and maybe they could better translate it into english?

1) Love those you can, keep your mouth shut about those you can't, and put a good word in for those in between.

2) Nobody has any right to believe that they're better than me; conversely, I have a responsibility to treat others as equals.

3) Live and let live. People have a right to do - and have people do - to themselves what they want, so long as it causes no harm to others.

Anyone breaching my morals, in my eyes, loses the protection from my rude, sadistic and egomaniacal side, and I'll treat them like the worthless dirt they are. Especially anarchists or others who don't believe in helping others unless it provides some benefit to themselves.

The guideline would be:

Ethics. If it's ethical then it's moral. If it's unethical, then it's immoral.

Then maybe a combination of logic and empathy or summat. I dunno for sure really, I'll just explain further with a few points on how to deal with others.

1) People have the right to act and say what they want so much as that it doesn't negatively affect others.

2) No one has the right to tell another person how to live their lives. No matter how your own morals differ from that person's morals. That is their lives, not yours. They have their own ethics and morals, whilst you have yours. They are bound to differ, and as such you have no basis on which to tell others what they are doing is immoral, as it may no be to them. WHICH IS ALL THAT MATTERS.

3) What's happened in the past is just that, the past. I don't hold long grudges. Yet I do learn from the past, and things like trust and such shift variably from time to time as people make their different actions.

4) Treat people with respect. Treat others how you wish to be treated. Well I think I try to follow this one for the most part, but I think I screw up on it from time to time because of my excessive need to make jokes and half the time they are bad jokes. But in this sense I have two different people in my head, first is the shy and innocent guy who doesn't like to talk alot. Then there is the comedian, who likes making jokes including when they are bad jokes. I have a constant battle between the two. Most of the time when it's a bad joke, I'll remain silent, but they do come out at times.

That's basically the rules I live by.

To quote Abraham Lincoln, "the proposition that all men were created equal".

The guideline would be:

Ethics. If it's ethical then it's moral. If it's unethical, then it's immoral.

Then maybe a combination of logic and empathy or summat. I dunno for sure really, I'll just explain further with a few points on how to deal with others.

1) People have the right to act and say what they want so much as that it doesn't negatively affect others.

2) No one has the right to tell another person how to live their lives. No matter how your own morals differ from that person's morals. That is their lives, not yours. They have their own ethics and morals, whilst you have yours. They are bound to differ, and as such you have no basis on which to tell others what they are doing is immoral, as it may no be to them. WHICH IS ALL THAT MATTERS.

3) What's happened in the past is just that, the past. I don't hold long grudges. Yet I do learn from the past, and things like trust and such shift variably from time to time as people make their different actions.

4) Treat people with respect. Treat others how you wish to be treated. Well I think I try to follow this one for the most part, but I think I screw up on it from time to time because of my excessive need to make jokes and half the time they are bad jokes. But in this sense I have two different people in my head, first is the shy and innocent guy who doesn't like to talk alot. Then there is the comedian, who likes making jokes including when they are bad jokes. I have a constant battle between the two. Most of the time when it's a bad joke, I'll remain silent, but they do come out at times.

That's basically the rules I live by.

I would tend to agree - except Ethics and Morality are not equivelant.

Morality can probably best be defined as Ethics modified by Dogma. For example; It is unethical (at the lowest order of abstraction) to cause intentional, unapproved harm to another person. It is, however considered by many to be Moral to do so. Similarly, Sex outside of Marriage is considered by many to be Immoral, but it is in no way unethical (unless it is a violation of an existing marriage contract).

Seeing that Morality is definitively Subjective, it cannot be an objective basis for human interaction. Since Ethics is a lower order abstraction than Morality (e.g. Morality IS Ethics modified), we need to define Ethics in a non-subjective way in order to make it aplicable to human interaction across cultural boundries.

Most Versions of Ethics do not do this because they attempt to define Ethics in terms of "The Good" - which is a highly Abstract, Subjective, and therefore undefinable term. (Here's my Godwin... Hitler thought killing Jews was a Good - in and of itself a reason to syspect the phrase "for the Good of...")

What then can be used as a basis for Ethics that has the lowest possible level of semantic abstraction? Quite simply, physical harm (injury). Harm (injury) is an objectively quantifiable term that is flexible in degree (from nearly imperceptible to Death/Destruction).

From this low-order abstraction we can create an Ethical statement that meets the Categorical Imperative: "An Ethical Action is that Action which causes the least amout of harm possible."

This does not preclude self defense, however. We can take it as axiomatic that the first priority of any living thing is to survive. Therefore, in an hostile situation, the non-agressive party can still act ethically in defense of self inasmuch as doing sufficient harm to the attaker to prevent further attack/injury. If that means killing the attacker (because if yu dont, you will be further injured,) then that is the Least amount of harm necessary. This has been well defined over the years in the (soft) martial arts and in the Police Continuum of Force.

Nor would this preclude meat (sustinance) hunting/fishing - though it would raise some issues with those as "sports".

I could go on , but I have to get back to work.

Do Least Harm. Pretty simple.

That old "and harm ye none, do what you will" gumption. That's it.

Philosophy

bump for boredom

Basically I aim to have a positive impact on my situation and "do no harm." And try to be happy while I'm at it.

A combination of military thinking, cynicism and hope. Odd that. Also, my parents and my TOTAL LACK of religion. In fact, I'd say my atheism is probably the main reason I've actually done any thinking on morals in my life.

Sorry, bit OT there.

I do "good" things because it makes me feel nice - I get a sense of reward.

I don't do "bad" things because it makes me feel absolutely terrible.

I believe this stems from a strong sense of empathy that I have. However, I know that this isn't present in everyone. My seven and a half year old son does not seem to have that same empathy, he has no problems laughing at someone else's misfortune.

Perhaps all kids are like that at his age... but I don't know, it worries me sometimes. He is incredibly smart (I know all parents would say this of their kids but it is true), however there is not even an ounce of common sense in him. For a bright kid he can do some pretty stupid things sometimes...

Anyway, I'm personally motivated to do the right thing and avoid doing the wrong thing by a mixture of my own internal compass and my upbringing. Oh... and the hope that karma works.

What guides your moral compass? Your religion, your family upbringing? Or perhaps you rely on the old-fashioned moral sextant? Perhaps you just chose your morals by random? Feel free to post what you think guides or shaped your morals.

Experience. That's it.

What guides your moral compass? Your religion, your family upbringing? Or perhaps you rely on the old-fashioned moral sextant? Perhaps you just chose your morals by random? Feel free to post what you think guides or shaped your morals.


Common sense and the whole reverse golden rule "Don't treat others as you would have them not treat you"

What guides your moral compass? Your religion, your family upbringing? Or perhaps you rely on the old-fashioned moral sextant? Perhaps you just chose your morals by random? Feel free to post what you think guides or shaped your morals.

My moral compass is near a magnet. :D

rational thought.

Seconded.

I believe people should be able to do what they want, live their lives however they see fit, as long as they aren't hurting other people. I try and do good in this world, in my own way, because it makes me feel good to know that i helped someone. I have a strong sense of empathy for people, i don't like to see anyone in pain, to see anyone suffer. I have so many things that others don't, i figure that the least i can do is give back a little. I believe we are all connected, none of us can walk alone. The only way we will get through this is together. I believe strongly in karma, but to me, doing good just because you hope that good will come back to you is the same thing as doing good just so you can get into heaven. You should do good because you believe in it, because you see its worth and its value. My morals just come from within me, from years of living and contemplating. As you grow up, you learn who you are and what your place in this world is, my morals come from that.

What guides your moral compass? Your religion, your family upbringing? Or perhaps you rely on the old-fashioned moral sextant? Perhaps you just chose your morals by random? Feel free to post what you think guides or shaped your morals.
my values are based on the sum and total of my experiences.

My morals are shaped by rational thought and have only one major part:

1. If something someone's doing can't be demonstrated to cause unnecessary physical, emotional, or financial harm to someone else, I won't even consider being against it.
Sounds like the Wiccan reed,
"As thee harm none, Do as thou wilt."
A fine basic moral code.

My morals, to the best of my ability, are based on two commandments.

"Love the LORD your God with all your heart, soul strenght and mind."

And,

"Love your neighbor as yourself."

i agree with this. some have said different things, like referencing sodom and gamorah (i really cant remember the spelling). in response to that, all i can say is that sometime people just need to die so that their evil wont spread (note, God should be the one to do the killing, almighty creator of the universe doesnt need any help). how would loving God help? you would become more like Him, over time. and despite the fact that He does whoop up on people (who deserve it) He gives them a chance first, and He really does love us more deeply than i can understand.

how does that influence my moral compass? i can learn to love people who hate me, and to be compassionate to people when they need it the most. am i perfect? no. are a lot of you who read this going to disagree with me? yes, but thats ok, you can choose to beleive whatever you want (or not beleive in anything, if you can pull it off).

...
live and let live, fairly take and farily give
...
soft of eye an' light of touch, speak little listen much
...
when ye have need, harken not to others' greed
with the fool no season spend, or be counted as a friend
merry meet and merry part, bright the cheeks and warm the heart
mind the Threefold Law ye should, three times bad and three times good
...
true in love ever be, unless thy lover's false to thee
eight words the Wiccan Rede fulfill, an' it harm none do what ye will

Mine are based upon reason and intuition.

I actually have a Moral Ouija Board.

Anywho...Commen sense and compassion for the less fortunate, I suppose.

What guides your moral compass? Your religion, your family upbringing? Or perhaps you rely on the old-fashioned moral sextant? Perhaps you just chose your morals by random? Feel free to post what you think guides or shaped your morals.

Well, the answer to the first question is: I do. All the philosopher and theologians in the world wouldn't do me a whit of good were I to choose to ignore their advice. For I while in my life, I did. I learned better.

Nowadays, I would say that my notions or morality are guided most by two philosophers: Immanuel Kant and Aristotle. Kant's good will and categorical imperatives are IMO the closest anyone has ever come to a purely logical breakdown of Christian ethics as it is truly supposed to be (not as it is often taught). Aristotle's notion of the purpose of life (the perfecting of the soul/happiness) and the means to do it (use of practical wisdom to do good actions and moderate in all things) strike me as excellent arguments for how to go about becoming a true Christian.