TED Conversations

Douglas Pocock

This conversation is closed.

Is Morality Valid?

Is Morality Valid?
Premise One:
No community or human being would act in a way that is contrary to their established morals unless under distress or coercion. (Argue if you disagree).
Premise Two:
Societies and religions have different morals. Cannibalistic societies obviously have no moral apprehension towards eating people. However, there are vegetarian cultures that preach non-violence. (Argue if you disagree)
Assuming Premises One and Two are valid, then morals are subjective to the culture.

So, if the morals are subjective, are they valid?
And if not, then what should laws be based on?

Most believe murder is wrong, but there are some who don’t. For those who believe that murder is acceptable in earnest, are they less moral?

I for one do not believe that they are morally correct, but I don’t feel that they are morally invalid if morals are valid.

Just looking for thoughts on this subject.

Share:

Showing single comment thread. View the full conversation.

  • Apr 22 2012: Ok. Honor Killing. I had to look it up on Google and found out that Honor Killing was when a member of a family or clan did something that brought so much dishonor to the group that the group's rules mandated that they be killed, I guess to show the other groups that they are serious about their rules. For example, You're daughter gets pregnant by the village bum's son. He's poor, and your daughter can't marry him. He just ain't good enough. What do you do? Well, you have to kill your daughter. She strayed, she made the mistake that made your whole family lose face, she is the face of the embarrassment that is yours right now. It is with great sorrow that you hang the poor girl in the gallows in the public square to show the village that your family is better than that. Your family will not put up with loose female kids that have "relations" with just anyone. Your family has to save face and to do it, the daughter must be taught a lesson. She must die. If I were preaching a Christian sermon, this would fall under the "pride" category.
    Previously, I stated that morality is just a set of rules designed to keep us safe from each other. I said that morals are a society's safety mechanism. I also said that when men choose the rules, then there are no rules. That's not how I phrased it but I did say that without belief in an external judge, "God", then we are left to decide for ourselves what is right and what is wrong. This is a perfect example of how leaving morals up to us is not a good idea. I would assume that this scenario would take place in a culture that is not Christian. Unfortunately, Christian societies have engaged in honor killing since recorded history. The old testament has examples of it. The new testament has examples. People that do things to other people that they would not want done to themselves are called psychotic. There will be people that violate society's morals for their own gain. That does not change a society's moral code.

Showing single comment thread. View the full conversation.