-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
do morals evolve or...
- Thread starter waitasec
- Start date
Even the standards keep changing.
Kilgore Trout
Misanthropic Humanist
Owning another human being.
It seems there have been many changes in popular morality over the centuries. For instance, since 1900 alone, police brutality has increasingly become socially unacceptable while lying has increasingly become acceptable.
I do not think there has been an evolution towards any particular goal or outcome. Like biological evolution, changes in morality seem to be without regard to whether something is for the better or not.
But despite some changes in morality, anyone who reads ancient history is assured that human nature pretty much remains the same now and before.
I do not think there has been an evolution towards any particular goal or outcome. Like biological evolution, changes in morality seem to be without regard to whether something is for the better or not.
But despite some changes in morality, anyone who reads ancient history is assured that human nature pretty much remains the same now and before.
Last edited:
tumbleweed41
Resident Liberal Hippie
Morals change as societies evolve.
Keeping in mind that evolve does not necessarily mean change for the better.
Keeping in mind that evolve does not necessarily mean change for the better.
Morals evolve, and evolve they must, since the social environment and understanding does change along time, thereby making better moral achievement possible.
waitasec
Veteran Member
so my question is,
if what is wrong now was not in the past, how do we come to the realization that that is wrong?
i like to think of evolving morality as sort of like peeling back the layers of indifference and getting closer to the core to our inclination of striving for self dignity
Midnight Pete
Well-Known Member
Morality changes as social attitudes change. And social attitudes change with time.
If moral achievement is "better" only by the new standards, is it really better?
waitasec
Veteran Member
are you saying there is no constant standard by which we are moving towards
or
what is wrong today was not wrong in the past simply because of social attitudes change.
tumbleweed41
Resident Liberal Hippie
Pretty much.
waitasec
Veteran Member
then do you think slavery, for instance, can be considered acceptable again, here in the western world?
Midnight Pete
Well-Known Member
Not to put too fine a point on it, yes. That's what I'm saying.
Slavery was once considered perfectly moral in this part of the world but since social attitudes changed, slavery is now considered morally wrong. Ditto for how the rights and status of women have changed in the last few centuries.
waitasec
Veteran Member
well i would disagree with that only because there were abolitionists...
were they more moral then slave owners?
A sweeping statement is usually unfair, but generally yes, it is better. The old standards may well have been better for their time, however.
Midnight Pete
Well-Known Member
Yes, because they cared about the lives of human beings owned as slaves. Abolitionists genuinely wanted to help these people, and not just for some personal gain. That is moral.
tumbleweed41
Resident Liberal Hippie
I doubt it. If so, it would slowly creep it's way into acceptance. Perhaps starting with a form of indentured servitude to pay off debts.
I would never consider it morally permissible, but a society as a whole could.
But right now the horrors of our last attempt at dehumanizing slaves are still fresh in our minds.