Defining Morality

[tumbleweed41]

So it is a complicated situation, and I just don't see where morality fits into it for me. Maybe I am just missing something.

Yes you are.
You are confusing your feelings with what is morally acceptable and unacceptable.
As you should well know, feeling justified, or using selfish means to come to a decision, in no way confirms that your actions are moral.
Even your consideration of the wishes of the dead is selfish on your part. The dead are either gone, or have no concern for the material world. By ensuring their wishes are carried out, you are only fulfilling your own need to satisfy those wishes.

 

[tumbleweed41]

Now, if a very basic definition of morality is
Doing what there are the most logical reasons for doing, while giving equal consideration to the interests of each individual who is affected by one's decisions.

What would be the logical reasons for defining murder as immoral?

 

[tumbleweed41]

First lets describe murder.
Murder is the purposeful taking of sapient life from an unwilling victim by another sapient being.

Why would murder be immoral?
1) The most obvious and reasonable answer would be that if unchecked murder was tolerated in society, no person would be safe, and that society would fail.
2) All but the most despondent humans wish to avoid death as long as possible.
3) Murder is antisocial behavior, thus not tolerable in society.


What other reasonable answers are there to why is murder immoral?

 

[Just_me_Mike]

Now, if a very basic definition of morality is
Doing what there are the most logical reasons for doing, while giving equal consideration to the interests of each individual who is affected by one's decisions.

What would be the logical reasons for defining murder as immoral?

For me murder is wrong, because it is the culmination of multiple immoral attributes at the very moment it takes place and is expressed as murder.

Similar to if I was full of love, patience, forbearance, tolerance, and similar things the culmination of all of these thing at a specific time could lead to charity or provision.

Murder is perhaps the height of immorality in this since.

I doubt that is what you were looking for as an answer, but thought it might make useful somehow.

 

[tumbleweed41]

For me murder is wrong, because it is the culmination of multiple immoral attributes at the very moment it takes place and is expressed as murder.

Similar to if I was full of love, patience, forbearance, tolerance, and similar things the culmination of all of these thing at a specific time could lead to charity or provision.

Murder is perhaps the height of immorality in this since.

I doubt that is what you were looking for as an answer, but thought it might make useful somehow.

Thanks, but as you know, we are talking about reasonable and logical reasons for murder being classified as immoral.
While I do understand your emotional reasons, involving emotions in ethics only clouds the issues.

 

[Just_me_Mike]

Thanks, but as you know, we are talking about reasonable and logical reasons for murder being classified as immoral.
While I do understand your emotional reasons, involving emotions in ethics only clouds the issues.

Help me understand where I introduced emotion in my last post. Thanks.

 

[tumbleweed41]

Help me understand where I introduced emotion in my last post. Thanks.

Sure.

For me murder is wrong, because it is the culmination of multiple immoral attributes at the very moment it takes place and is expressed as murder.

Similar to if I was full of love, patience, forbearance, tolerance, and similar things the culmination of all of these thing at a specific time could lead to charity or provision.

The highlighted areas of your post are emotional references. Not bad reasons, but emotional reasons can easily be used to justify immoral actions also.

 

[Just_me_Mike]

Sure.



The highlighted areas of your post are emotional references. Not bad reasons, but emotional reasons can easily be used to justify immoral actions also.

Hmm, Maybe in my mind it is impossible to separate murder from those things. Seems to me your exercise places murder in a vacuum. I'll think about it though and see if I feel differently.
Thanks

 

[tumbleweed41]

Hmm, Maybe in my mind it is impossible to separate murder from those things. Seems to me your exercise places murder in a vacuum. I'll think about it though and see if I feel differently.
Thanks

I have given three reasonable reason why murder is immoral.
Just asking for any other reasonable answers.

 

[Just_me_Mike]

If I may...
Isn't "safe", "despondent", and "tolerable" words that invoke or are dependent on emotional basis?

 

[tumbleweed41]

If I may...
Isn't "safe", "despondent", and "tolerable" words that invoke or are dependent on emotional basis?

If you like we could include "fail", and "wish".

But that would be silly, taking words out of context.

The word "murder" itself elicits an emotional response.
But in proper context...
Safe-free from harm
Despondent-lacking the will to live
Tolerable- that which is acceptable

We can limit the emotional response and try to come to reasonable conclusions without invoking love, patience, or "similar things."

 

[Just_me_Mike]

If you like we could include "fail", and "wish".

But that would be silly, taking words out of context.

The word "murder" itself elicits an emotional response.
But in proper context...
Safe-free from harm
Despondent-lacking the will to live
Tolerable- that which is acceptable

We can limit the emotional response and try to come to reasonable conclusions without invoking love, patience, or "similar things."

OK I understand that. I certainly don't mean to drag your thread through the dirt, so if I am please advise, and I will quit.

I think what I was saying is Murder is immoral, simply because it is dependent upon a human being culminating all those things you say are emotional reasons.

How about this, is this acceptable: Negative times a negative equals a negative.

So if there are NO reasons at all to ever murder a human being given the circumstances you provided, the reason it would be immoral is because it is the product of only immoral precepts, whatever they be. So, neg plus a neg, or neg times a neg always equals a neg(immoral).

 

[tumbleweed41]

How about this, is this acceptable: Negative times a negative equals a negative.

So if there are NO reasons at all to ever murder a human being given the circumstances you provided, the reason it would be immoral is because it is the product of only immoral precepts, whatever they be. So, neg plus a neg, or neg times a neg always equals a neg(immoral).

Although mathematics does not correlate with philosophy, your analogy works in that...
"there are NO reasons at all to ever murder a human being given the circumstances you provided"

 

[tumbleweed41]

OK, so we have reasonably concluded that murder in the sense described is immoral.
That was an easy one.

And by using some of the same logic we can conclude that rape is immoral, as it involves an unwilling participant, and can leave physical and emotional scaring on the victim.

But what of consensual sex between unmarried legal adults?
Is this an immoral act?
Why or why not?

 

[MSizer]

OK, so we have reasonably concluded that murder in the sense described is immoral.

What does it mean "in the sense described". Surely there are times when murder is morally permissible, and even times when it is a moral duty to murder someone.

It would be permissible if it were your only means of defence. It would be your duty (no?) if you knew an armed person were on his way to detonate a bomb in a public place and you didn't have time to alert authorities or the innocent people who would be killed (assuming his intention is to kill you if you try to interfere by holding him somehow). No?

 

[tumbleweed41]

What does it mean "in the sense described". Surely there are times when murder is morally permissible, and even times when it is a moral duty to murder someone.

Murder is the purposeful taking of sapient life from an unwilling victim by another sapient being.

Why would murder be immoral?
1) The most obvious and reasonable answer would be that if unchecked murder was tolerated in society, no person would be safe, and that society would fail.
2) All but the most despondent humans wish to avoid death as long as possible.
3) Murder is antisocial behavior, thus not tolerable in society.

It would be permissible if it were your only means of defence. It would be your duty (no?) if you knew an armed person were on his way to detonate a bomb in a public place and you didn't have time to alert authorities or the innocent people who would be killed (assuming his intention is to kill you if you try to interfere by holding him somehow). No?

There are numerous factors that would warrant the taking of another's life, however I meant in the most basic sense of willfully taking the life of an unwilling victim, no extenuating circumstances involved.

 

[MSizer]

There are numerous factors that would warrant the taking of another's life, however I meant in the most basic sense of willfully taking the life of an unwilling victim, no extenuating circumstances involved.

Ah, ok, sorry. Well then we know that either god is guilty of issuing immoral commands, or the bible contains incorrect information about god then. It's one of the two.

 

[tumbleweed41]

Ah, ok, sorry. Well then we know that either god is guilty of issuing immoral commands, or the bible contains incorrect information about god then. It's one of the two.

Granted, but we are still talking about mortals.

Now, is safe-sex between two consenting unmarried legal adults immoral?

 

[MSizer]

Now, is safe-sex between two consenting unmarried legal adults immoral?

Absolutely not. As long as nobody murders anyone in the process of course (unless by request of the murderee).

 

[tumbleweed41]

Absolutely not. As long as nobody murders anyone in the process of course (unless by request of the murderee).

LOL

OK, but why is it not immoral?
1) All concerned individuals are consenting to the act.
2) All concerned individuals are of legal age.
3) Risk of STD's is minimized through contraception.
4) There is very little chance of causing physical harm.

Agreed?