Yeah this topic could end up all over the place with opinions. But I'm curious to know where your personal sense of morality comes from? Some might say upbringing or culture or even the Bible. But what say you?

The gift of individuality determines self morality.

There are some interesting studies of twins reared apart that suggest that some morality is innate. But I like what my husband says, "When your child is born, your job as a parent is to add a thin veneer of civilization." He thinks it's hard to add a thick one.

There are psychological theories about children developing a conscience needing the step of bonding with a parental figure who they want to please by about age three. Children who are abused or who have breaks in parental caregivers are more apt to skip that step and fail to develop a conscience - these kids are more likely to become sociopaths. I realize that answers a question you didn't ask. I will say that as a young girl when I was growing up, I tended to avoid behaviors that I wouldn't have wanted my beloved grandfather to know about. It was probably not until I was in my midtwenties that I had completely internalized my values aside from - in the back of my mind - thinking that if I did thus and such, I would be so ashamed if my grandfather knew about it.

In terms of where I got my specific values, many came from my grandfather who was known in my family as being an extremely ethical person. That was a big deal in my family and he was greatly respected as a result. I wanted to be like him. My grandmother also insisted on honesty and being responsible for our decisions without making excuses. I also read a number of books that treated being ethical as something highly valued. When I see what sort of crap kids put in their heads from books, videos and television, these days, I shudder to think what their internal value system resembles.

Morality is simply doing what you feel is right, and I think it's almost always easy to distinguish between right and wrong.

If you have to think more than a few seconds, you are rationalizing. Right is usually obvious.

I don't think you need to learn that from a book or other people... I just makes sense. And really, applying the Golden Rule is all you need to do.


I also think it's very important to have moral ambition: to strive to always do the right thing. None of always do right 100% of the time but it is important to recognize when something isn't right, own it, and endeavor to do better next time around.

1r2j9Oz4UjI
Stereolab (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stereolab) -- Whisper Pitch

Does 'right' or 'wrong' come naturally...from birth? If so, are the percentages equal? 50% desire to do right? 50% to do wrong? At what age does a child begin to do wrong and why?

Right and wrong are pretty subjective and most often based on culture and often religion. I can think of a pretty large group who'd say stoning someone to death is 'right' - but I'd beg to differ.

Liberals say you can't legislate morality. Conservatives say morality is all you can legislate.

It has been said that you have to teach a child how to tell the truth, share etc but they come by lying, selfishness etc naturally.

I agree to a certain extent but negative behavior is taught as well (I just think most aren't aware they are doing it). Like when a child uses a curse word and the parent asks, "Where did you learn that?" "From you Daddy"

It has been said that you have to teach a child how to tell the truth, share etc but they come by lying, selfishness etc naturally.

I agree to a certain extent but negative behavior is taught as well (I just think most aren't aware they are doing it). Like when a child uses a curse word and the parent asks, "Where did you learn that?" "From you Daddy"

That reminds of when I was young. My father had a fairly salty tongue. Not crude but salty. It always embarassed me instead of making me want to follow suit. It's very rare that I ever use any similar language.

It all changes with the times. Not that many years ago homesexuality was almost universally considered as immoral. Today that's all changed...men search the Internet for a "twin men" fetish and nobody gives it a second thought. Not my cup of tea, but I don't consider it immoral. This really goes back to the great philosophers who talked all this to death. But it means much more than right and wrong as that is, as Brian said, subjective and open to definition depending on so many different things.

It all changes with the times. Not that many years ago homesexuality was almost universally considered as immoral. Today that's all changed...men search the Internet for a "twin men" fetish and nobody gives it a second thought. Not my cup of tea, but I don't consider it immoral. This really goes back to the great philosophers who talked all this to death. But it means much more than right and wrong as that is, as Brian said, subjective and open to definition depending on so many different things.


http://photo.goodreads.com/authors/1222674982p5/77989.jpg


"The soul is dyed the color of its thoughts. Think only on those things that are in line with your principles and can bear the light of day. The content of your character is your choice. Day by day, what you do is who you become. Your integrity is your destiny - it is the light that guides your way."

-Heraclitus (http://www.goodreads.com/author/show/77989.Heraclitus)

Hi Cameron,

Not sure what this nice aphorism has to do with the question? Philosophically, it might fit with 'virtue' but I fail to see the connection between my post which argues societal mores are dependent on geography and dateline as much as anything. Mores are always in flux. Great quote though attributed to Heraclitus. Too bad he ended up a complete misanthrope who hated humanity.

The Gita, The Bible, The Koran, The Kitab-I-Iqan, The Torah, The Teachings of Buddha, The Stories passed down through indigenous people's past, all of these things contain fantastic moral principles. Any one of them can lead someone to a good life if they really dive into them. Most of them can also give the lazy and the corrupt ammo to justify their awful choices when read briefly or out of context.

I've known a lot of moral people of every faith and of no faith. I've known quite a few less-than-savory people of most faiths as well. I think listening for God's instructions is important(especially in my own case) but many seem to do alright without it.

Nice quote by Heraclitus.

I abandoned Judeo-Christian based ideas of morality as a pre-teen. Eventually came to the realization that morality to me is just an expression of respecting the individual rights of others. If it steps on the rights of others it is immoral.

Does 'right' or 'wrong' come naturally...from birth? If so, are the percentages equal? 50% desire to do right? 50% to do wrong? At what age does a child begin to do wrong and why?
I think it is more a question of at what age does a child begin to recognize the difference.

Liberals say you can't legislate morality. Conservatives say morality is all you can legislate.
No they don't. Bunty, where in the world did you get that????

No they don't. Bunty, where in the world did you get that????

LOL, haven't you on radio or TV heard liberals say you can't leglislate morality and if a conservative is present, especially from the religious right, the come back is "it's the only thing you can legislate."

That reminds of when I was young. My father had a fairly salty tongue. Not crude but salty. It always embarassed me instead of making me want to follow suit. It's very rare that I ever use any similar language.
I think that is very typical once we reach our pre-teen/teenage years and everything our parents do. I was thinking more as very young children when we are more sponges or recorders. Years ago now, my pre-school aged 2nd Cousin could repeat entire phone conversations (yelling matches) of her divorced mom & dad. Complete with the swearing and name calling. The mother couldn't understand where her daughter was getting this stuff. I told her what I had observed during the kids play time and mom tried to watch herself from there on. LOL

I abandoned Judeo-Christian based ideas of morality as a pre-teen. Eventually came to the realization that morality to me is just an expression of respecting the individual rights of others. If it steps on the rights of others it is immoral.

Help me understand - if trespassing on someones property ("stepping on the rights of others") to rescue them from a fire would that be moral or immoral? It just seems like your definition is somewhat vague?

Liberals say you can't legislate morality. Conservatives say morality is all you can legislate.

No they don't. Bunty, where in the world did you get that????

LOL, haven't you on radio or TV heard liberals say you can't leglislate morality and if a conservative is present, especially from the religious right, the come back is "it's the only thing you can legislate."
While i have certainly heard the first part expressed, can't say i have ever heard the 2nd part. but if you break down most laws, they come down to morality (right/wrong). We have decided (through our elected leaders) to put into writing what is right and what is wrong with the punishments or rewards that go along with it. In a perfect world we wouldn't need a lot of the laws we have, meaning there shouldn't have to be a law telling someone that they shouldn't kill, rob etc.

I am often amused(?) by politicians and such, after something is exposed, they will say something to the effect "I didn't go anything illegal" rather than "I didn't do anything wrong"

Help me understand - if trespassing on someones property ("stepping on the rights of others") to rescue them from a fire would that be moral or immoral? It just seems like your definition is somewhat vague?

That is what you call a judgment call (and an easy one). As one of my law professors once said, "Life (and the law) isn't a 60 MPH speed limit."

LOL, haven't you on radio or TV heard liberals say you can't leglislate morality and if a conservative is present, especially from the religious right, the come back is "it's the only thing you can legislate."

No, I've never heard anything so absurd. That may be what you're "hearing" but I doubt if that is what is being said unless you are listening to a loon.

The gift of individuality determines self morality.

Sorry, Thunder, but can't agree with you there. Despite our contemporary culture where relativism rules, there is absolute right and absolute wrong.

No, I've never heard anything so absurd. That may be what you're "hearing" but I doubt if that is what is being said unless you are listening to a loon.

I've heard it many times over the years, especially the "can't legislate morality." It's clearly ludicrous on its face, because virtually every law that is passed is an extension of morality, eg its illegal to steal, illegal to murder...if those aren't extensions of moral precepts, don't know what is.... :)

Help me understand - if trespassing on someones property ("stepping on the rights of others") to rescue them from a fire would that be moral or immoral? It just seems like your definition is somewhat vague?

Really?

PennyQuilts, I have heard the "you can't legislate morality" line so many times I lost count years ago. Now as far as the "loon" part of your statement...well...."no comment" :-)

I've heard it many times over the years, especially the "can't legislate morality." It's clearly ludicrous on its face, because virtually every law that is passed is an extension of morality, eg its illegal to steal, illegal to murder...if those aren't extensions of moral precepts, don't know what is.... :)

That isn't legislating morality - it is passing a law that recognizes a societal consensus on a given value. Legislating morality is imposing (instead of recognizing existing values) a set of values via a law.

PennyQuilts, I have heard the "you can't legislate morality" line so many times I lost count years ago. Now as far as the "loon" part of your statement...well...."no comment" :-)

You can't legislate morality is a common statement and I think the government is begging for resentment when it tries to do it.

You can't legislate morality is a common statement and I think the government is begging for resentment when it tries to do it.

Can anyone say "Prohibition"? That wasn't just about morality but it had a big morality based backing.

That isn't legislating morality - it is passing a law that recognizes a societal consensus on a given value. Legislating morality is imposing (instead of recognizing existing values) a set of values via a law.
But by definition it is:
leg·is·la·tion/Noun
1. The act or process of legislating; lawmaking.
2. A proposed or enacted law or group of laws

mo·ral·i·ty/Noun
1. Principles concerning the distinction between right and wrong or good and bad behavior.
2. Behavior as it is affected by the observation of these principles.

Unless you are trying to say that a particular law doesn't reflect what must in the society hold to be right/wrong? In other words if the morality leads to the legislation it is ok, but if the legislation leads to morality it isn't? I am totally confudled now???

or in other, other words, are you saying there is "Morality Legislation" and "Legislating Morality" and they aren't the same thing?????

Neither one of them seem to be able to legislate a cotton picking thing lately!

Historically, the phrase was used in reference to "victimless crimes" with liberals speaking to conservatives.

Is personal morality an issue of the intellect? heart? soul?

Historically, the phrase was used in reference to "victimless crimes" with liberals speaking to conservatives.
hmmmm, yet another misnomer?

Sorry, Thunder, but can't agree with you there. Despite our contemporary culture where relativism rules, there is absolute right and absolute wrong.


Is personal morality an issue of the intellect? heart? soul?

Your turn, Dave.

One could probably argue (wouldn't be surprised if he did) that the head of that splinter Mormon group that was recently convicted of having sex with under-aged girls was a victim of not only religious persecution but legislated morality? How dare society try to impose it's restrictive rules! After all there are societies where the age of marriage and/or sexual consent is much younger than how we define it today. Even in our own history you can find numerous examples of taking relatively young brides. Essentially once puberty ensues, they are old enough. This was even referenced on the old sitcom the Beverly Hillbillies where the quite youthful teen-aged character of Elly Mae was considered by Granny to be an old maid by then. Strongly suggesting that she should have been married off years before. And yes, I know it was "just a TV show" but it was not uncommon practice in various locales and historical periods.

By no stretch of the imagination is a 12 year old child capable of understanding, let alone choosing to have sex with a 50 year old man.

OKCJosh: I don't disagree, all I was saying it wasn't always viewed that way.

Yeah this topic could end up all over the place with opinions. But I'm
curious to know where your personal sense of morality comes from?
Some might say upbringing or culture or even the Bible. But what say
you?
Morality is inherent. If it wasn't then morality wouldn't exist? Survival
of the fittest is the best reason against adjudicated morality.

http://photo.goodreads.com/authors/1222674982p5/77989.jpg



http://blog.fluidesign.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/07/qed3.jpg

1r2j9Oz4UjI
Stereolab (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stereolab) -- Whisper Pitch


Interesting song, Cameron! Though I personally don't believe in "perfect pitch", there's most definitely "absolute pitch".

(wrong thread)