Two men arrested for going after the most dangerous game with tactical gear, night vision goggles, and unregistered AR-style rifles

[ThatRobGuy]

I guess youd find no important moral difference because.... morality is just whats socially acceptable?

But when you boil it down, most of the things we put in the buckets of "moral"/"immoral" are simply just a matter what's socially acceptable. (whether that social acceptability comes from a religion, a government, or culture of the region where we live)

Look at the stark contrasts between what's considered "moral" in, say, the Middle East vs. Westernized cultures. (both of which think they're doing the "moral" things).

Heck, you don't even have to go international with it. Even domestically, compare a rural conservative town vs. a progressive city and they'll have diametrically opposed positions on the same issue, both of which think they have morality on their side in holding said positions.

 

[durangodawood]

But when you boil it down, most of the things we put in the buckets of "moral"/"immoral" are simply just a matter what's socially acceptable. (whether that social acceptability comes from a religion, a government, or culture of the region where we live)

Look at the stark contrasts between what's considered "moral" in, say, the Middle East vs. Westernized cultures. (both of which think they're doing the "moral" things).

Heck, you don't even have to go international with it. Even domestically, compare a rural conservative town vs. a progressive city and they'll have diametrically opposed positions on the same issue, both of which think they have morality on their side in holding said positions.

So for you, you dont call things right / wrong? Not even just casually?

 

[ThatRobGuy]

So for you, you dont call things right / wrong?

Oh I do, but I realize that most of those feelings are the result of where I grew up, and a combination of the values held by the various social circles I've been in throughout life (family, friends, coworkers).

For instance, I would call the concept of arranged marriages as very immoral and very wrong. But I had I grew up in India for my entire life, there's a solid statistical chance that I would have a different stance on the matter. And even if I was one of the people in India who disagreed with the practice, I'd still be less likely to have the same level of visceral reaction to it had I lived decades in an environment where the concept was normalized vs. how I view it today being someone who's lived for decades in a place where that's not considered normal.

 

[durangodawood]

Oh I do, but I realize that most of those feelings are the result of where I grew up, and a combination of the values held by the various social circles I've been in throughout life (family, friends, coworkers).

For instance, I would call the concept of arranged marriages as very immoral and very wrong. But I had I grew up in India for my entire life, there's a solid statistical chance that I would have a different stance on the matter. And even if I was one of the people in India who disagreed with the practice, I'd still be less likely to have the same level of visceral reaction to it had I lived decades in an environment where the concept was normalized vs. how I view it today being someone who's lived for decades in a place where that's not considered normal.

I dont get it. You can call arranged marriage "wrong", but you dont think ramming deer for fun with your car falls into a right/wrong domain?

 

[ThatRobGuy]

I dont get it. You can call arranged marriage "wrong", but you dont think ramming deer for fun with your car falls into a right/wrong domain?

No, what I'm saying is that I wouldn't be in a position to claim to be appalled by something that's the equivalent of arranged marriage (in terms of it's impact on the people who are forced into those situations) if I myself were embracing arranged marriage (if I'm explaining that well)

I personally wouldn't be ramming my car into a deer (much like I wouldn't trophy hunt) and I would say it's wrong based on my own ethical positions.

But I'm under no illusions about the reality that I'm participating in something that's even more harmful (to more animals) every time I order a pizza.

Therefore, if I were someone who said "I'm okay with hunting if you want to eat it" but said "hunting for trophies is horrific", I'd be exhibiting a measure of hypocrisy on the matter.

Because in both cases, it's the same experience for the deer (bullet/arrow hitting it, it running for a bit in pain, then dying), the moral differentiation is purely based on how a 3rd party is perceiving the act.


It'd be like if I were observing two separate instances of shoplifting in someone else's store, If I'm not the one being stolen from, I wouldn't really be in a position to deem one to be "understandable" and the other to be "egregious".

 

[durangodawood]

No, what I'm saying is that I wouldn't be in a position to claim to be appalled by something that's the equivalent of arranged marriage (in terms of it's impact on the people who are forced into those situations) if I myself were embracing arranged marriage (if I'm explaining that well)

I personally wouldn't be ramming my car into a deer (much like I wouldn't trophy hunt) and I would say it's wrong based on my own ethical positions.

But I'm under no illusions about the reality that I'm participating in something that's even more harmful (to more animals) every time I order a pizza.

Therefore, if I were someone who said "I'm okay with hunting if you want to eat it" but said "hunting for trophies is horrific", I'd be exhibiting a measure of hypocrisy on the matter.

Because in both cases, it's the same experience for the deer (bullet/arrow hitting it, it running for a bit in pain, then dying), the moral differentiation is purely based on how a 3rd party is perceiving the act.


It'd be like if I were observing two separate instances of shoplifting in someone else's store, If I'm not the one being stolen from, I wouldn't really be in a position to deem one to be "understandable" and the other to be "egregious".

Part of moral reasoning emerges from the harmful effects actions can have on others. The other part comes from considering the the state of mind the subject would have while committing an act.

So in the case of killing deer, the food hunter and the gleeful driver both have pretty much the same effect on the object, the deer. But we consider the drivers behavior immoral because it reflects a state of mind thats associated with harmful behaviors toward other humans.