Tuesday, February 07, 2006

morals

Morals never made much sense to me but as so many people seem to think they are important, i wanted to think about them some more...

After looking at morals and their application in the world, i conclude that morals are used by humans to justify being inhuman. It seems that by being moral people do the very worst things.

So morals are not what people think them to be.

As most inhuman acts are done in the name of morals I am glad i never bought into them. I think it is best to be nice to people rather than being moral to them. But I guess some cant figure out how to do the being nice thing, so they madeup morals instead.

The problem is every situation in life is unique, if you apply a fixed ruleset to life you are a robot and you will endup treating people bad in key situations.

Morals cant substitute being sensitive to a persons feelings or even just asking them what they would preffer in a tricky situation you dont quite understand.

Taking this further i guess the most moral people must be the most insenstive people. They will need a moral code because the cant figure out what to do, they have to go an look up in a morals book.

The reason someone wont be able to figure what to do is because the cant intuitivly 'feel' what is best in relation to the preson or situation... they are 'numb'.

So logically, insensitive people have to be the moral ones. Insensitive robot people that will do whatever the program in the book says. Its easy to manipulate numb people, its normally done by carrot and stick techniques.

I am glad that we are challenging traditional moral codes in society. So much unconstructive behaviour comes of these. We are transitioning from being a set of inhuman robots programed by religious rulers to nice human beings that have a chance of getting on.

You see, if everyone has morals it is impossible to get on. The sooner we drop morals completly the better.

3 comments:

Barking_Mad said...

Interesting post but it seems in your quest to be 'nice' to people you've labelled anyone with morality to be 'insensitive' and 'robotic'. That's not very 'nice' is it? ;) Besides, isn't being 'nice' some form of morality in itself?

My point being that morality is a label, you can choose to define it how you like as you have proven. Not all morals are bad. The ones that are are usually illogical and not grounded in reason.

It's interesting you use the word 'logically' in your post, yet I guess you would dismiss any morality based on logic.

I guess it just shows how words can be used to make any point we wish. Not everyone due to their own (possible bad) life experience knows how to be 'nice' to people. How do you ask them to do that without trying to show them how some things are wrong and hurtful to others? By telling them that it is wrong then aren't you by your own definition being moralistic?

You said,

"I am glad that we are challenging traditional moral codes in society. So much unconstructive behaviour comes of these. We are transitioning from being a set of inhuman robots programed by religious rulers to nice human beings that have a chance of getting on."

I've no problem with that overview, but we certainly haven't progressed from 'inhuman robots' to where we are now by simply being 'nice' to others. Philosophy has taught us much about our own nature and caused us to reflect on our own actions.

Morals should be code's but not hard and fast ones that have to be stuck by, Ill leave that to religious fanatics.

Cheers

Barking_Mad said...

edit: apologies - that last paragraph I wrote should read,


"Morals *shouldn't* be code's that have to be stuck by, i'll leave that to religious fanatics.

servan said...

>>
you've labelled anyone with morality to be 'insensitive' and 'robotic'. That's not very 'nice' is it? ;)
>>
Yes it is my observation, that the level of morality of a person correlates with the level of insensitivity. It appears you have a judgement about that ;)

>>
It's interesting you use the word 'logically' in your post, yet I guess you would dismiss any morality based on logic.
>>
I would, as its still robotic to have any level of behaviour pattern you follow, logical or not.