• 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!

Your Source of Morality

Nakosis

Non-Binary Physicalist
Premium Member
What is the source of your morality?

My view is morality is the product of feelings. Feelings are a product of evolution/genetics and culture.

We feel whether something is right or wrong. Evolution has created a commonality based on survivability. So we who have genes that have survived through the ages share much the same feelings about what is right and wrong.

However individually exceptions exist. Genetic drift. Cultural norms. I think it is easy to understand that religious leaders took what they felt to be right and wrong as inspired by God since they had no understanding of evolution or genetics. They proceeded to create codes and laws based on what they felt was right. Therefore evolution/survival encoded morality into our DNA.

We may rationalize our morals but ultimately we are still victims of our feelings.
For example, homosexuality is not a survival trait. So people aren't commonly geared to see this as morally good. However we also possess feelings of compassion and group support. These feelings in some outweigh the other but not in everyone.
 

RestlessSoul

Well-Known Member
What is the source of your morality?

My view is morality is the product of feelings. Feelings are a product of evolution/genetics and culture.

We feel whether something is right or wrong. Evolution has created a commonality based on survivability. So we who have genes that have survived through the ages share much the same feelings about what is right and wrong.

However individually exceptions exist. Genetic drift. Cultural norms. I think it is easy to understand that religious leaders took what they felt to be right and wrong as inspired by God since they had no understanding of evolution or genetics. They proceeded to create codes and laws based on what they felt was right. Therefore evolution/survival encoded morality into our DNA.

We may rationalize our morals but ultimately we are still victims of our feelings.
For example, homosexuality is not a survival trait. So people aren't commonly geared to see this as morally good. However we also possess feelings of compassion and group support. These feelings in some outweigh the other but not in everyone.


Whose feelings are we talking about? If I feel an overwhelming urge to have sex with my neighbour’s wife, and she reciprocates, is it therefore morally right for us to follow through on those feelings?
 

mikkel_the_dane

My own religion
What is the source of your morality?

My view is morality is the product of feelings. Feelings are a product of evolution/genetics and culture.

We feel whether something is right or wrong. Evolution has created a commonality based on survivability. So we who have genes that have survived through the ages share much the same feelings about what is right and wrong.

However individually exceptions exist. Genetic drift. Cultural norms. I think it is easy to understand that religious leaders took what they felt to be right and wrong as inspired by God since they had no understanding of evolution or genetics. They proceeded to create codes and laws based on what they felt was right. Therefore evolution/survival encoded morality into our DNA.

We may rationalize our morals but ultimately we are still victims of our feelings.
For example, homosexuality is not a survival trait. So people aren't commonly geared to see this as morally good. However we also possess feelings of compassion and group support. These feelings in some outweigh the other but not in everyone.

Slight site note. A combination of homosexuality, a culture of taking caring of my siblings children in a close family setting and access to limited land could be a survival combination for my family's genes.
 

Nakosis

Non-Binary Physicalist
Premium Member
Aversion to the evident and observable harm that negative actions have on others, and attempting to attain a society and/or community where all feel comfortable and secure.

I feel the same but I can't speak for everyone. Obviously some folks find ways to justify their negative actions towards others.
 

mikkel_the_dane

My own religion
In a certain sense there are 2 overall survival modes for humans. An alpha group that uses power to achieve its goals and a cooperative group that uses a democratic mode.
 

Nakosis

Non-Binary Physicalist
Premium Member
Whose feelings are we talking about? If I feel an overwhelming urge to have sex with my neighbour’s wife, and she reciprocates, is it therefore morally right for us to follow through on those feelings?

Your feelings. There is no absolute right and wrong. Yet the group/community would likely feel you relationship as harmful and judge accordingly.

Were you feel an action is right, others feel it is wrong. The majority usually enforce what they feel is right and wrong on the individual. While evolution encodes some feelings it is not exact. We still have genetic/cultural differences which cause disputes over what we claim is right and wrong.
 

Nakosis

Non-Binary Physicalist
Premium Member
Yeah, but that is also feelings and thus a form of morality.

We can't escape our feelings, IMO. While we try to rationalize what we claim to be moral it is still our feelings that cause us to make the attempt to rationalize.

There are sociopaths. They possess different feeling about right and wrong. I'd think if the traits of a sociopath promoted better survival then we all be a lot less compassionate.

While we can rationalize survival as the basis for morals I think evolution made the choice for us.
 

RestlessSoul

Well-Known Member
Your feelings. There is no absolute right and wrong. Yet the group/community would likely feel you relationship as harmful and judge accordingly.

Were you feel an action is right, others feel it is wrong. The majority usually enforce what they feel is right and wrong on the individual. While evolution encodes some feelings it is not exact. We still have genetic/cultural differences which cause disputes over what we claim is right and wrong.


So in your analysis, right and wrong do not exist as absolute concepts? All that divides the one from the other is who benefits, or is perceived by the tribe to benefit?
 

Nakosis

Non-Binary Physicalist
Premium Member
So in your analysis, right and wrong do not exist as absolute concepts? All that divides the one from the other is who benefits, or is perceived by the tribe to benefit?

More the tribe will enforce it and pass judgment on the outliers. Doesn't make it "right" or even guarantee the survival of the tribe. Just over time, the tribes that survived pass on the traits.
 

mikkel_the_dane

My own religion
We can't escape our feelings, IMO. While we try to rationalize what we claim to be moral it is still our feelings that cause us to make the attempt to rationalize.

There are sociopaths. They possess different feeling about right and wrong. I'd think if the traits of a sociopath promoted better survival then we all be a lot less compassionate.

While we can rationalize survival as the basis for morals I think evolution made the choice for us.

Okay, I mean it. Forget your feelings for a moment.. You know the 4 Fs in biology, right. As long as there are not to many sociopaths, it can a viable biology strategy in how to meet the 4 Fs. Because sociopathy destroys the social element in what makes humans overall reproduce, there can't be to many. But on another hand a small percentage can do fine.
 

mikkel_the_dane

My own religion
More the tribe will enforce it and pass judgment on the outliers. Doesn't make it "right" or even guarantee the survival of the tribe. Just over time, the tribes that survived pass on the traits.

Yeah, but the tribe is not humanity. We seem to be evolved to function in groups of max ca 150 humans and for larger systems we get in trouble.
Further if a tribe is good internally doesn't mean it has be so externally to other tribes.
 

osgart

Nothing my eye, Something for sure
The source of morality is in the virtues. Vices are against morality. The virtues are reliable facts that don't depend on people's acceptance for their truth. There are many, many virtues, perhaps about 100 or so.

Virtues explain themselves if defined accurately and properly. The virtues are founded on trustworthiness, and deserves. Love, charity, discretion, wisdom, patience, honesty, defense of virtue, are all examples of virtues.

For those that think and feel the virtues are inescapable truthes about how to make life worthwhile and productive. Everyone must grapple with their meanings, and how to apply them. Virtues are motives, and intentions that manifest in actions of those that care about such things.

Whether unconsciously, or consciously humans are always dealing in virtues and vices.
 
We feel whether something is right or wrong. Evolution has created a commonality based on survivability. So we who have genes that have survived through the ages share much the same feelings about what is right and wrong.

If survival is the key then environment will play a big role in morality. Survival also incorporates status, as this helps our genes survive.

In harsh environments, from Afghanistan (to this day) to Steppes Nomads and the Scottish Highlands (historically), you often saw strong honour codes develop.

This is because you had to rely on others for survival, so reputation was important and anything that made your family/tribe/clan lose honour was a serious problem.

Things like honour killing or vendettas that make no sense to us today, had/have a certain type of logic in these cultures. If you let people within your tribe compromise your honour, or let outsiders take advantage then you couldn't be taken seriously and people couldn't trust you which could be a death sentence.

A modern 'live and let live' approach does not translate, just as an unbending honour approach doesn't translate well to the modern, urban world.

So while we do have moral instincts, how they develop is dictated by environment and how this impacts how we gain status. In some environments our empathy and cooperative instincts develop most as these gain status, and in others our in group loyalty and willingness to punish transgressors gain status.

There are obviously other factors in play too.
 

Heyo

Veteran Member
What is the source of your morality?
There are at least three:

1. Inherited instincts like responding to the baby scheme, aversion to killing, etc.
2. Education/formation. That what my society tells me is moral.
3. Thinking about morality.

1. is only instinct, that is not morality. 2. is only rules, that is not morality. 3. is what makes true morality but without 1. and 2. I wouldn't have a basis to think about.
 

RestlessSoul

Well-Known Member
More the tribe will enforce it and pass judgment on the outliers. Doesn't make it "right" or even guarantee the survival of the tribe. Just over time, the tribes that survived pass on the traits.


So right and wrong is what the tribe says it is? And if the tribe says that might is right, the King’s authority is total, and justice is administered according to his whim, there is no absolute morality by which this can be challenged?
 

mikkel_the_dane

My own religion
So right and wrong is what the tribe says it is? And if the tribe says that might is right, the King’s authority is total, and justice is administered according to his whim, there is no absolute morality by which this can be challenged?

Well, look at the history of England. The queen is still technically in charge as the sovereign, yet it has changed over time. Now it is my tribe against your tribe. :D Unless you believe in humanity. :)
 
Top