How do you measure morality?

[gaara4158]

very simply.

How does society regard and seek to follow the ten commandments?

So the Ten Commandments are the objective standard by which morality is to be measured? Interesting.

 

[Tom 1]

In virtually every measure, the world has become a better place to live IN THE AGGREGATE for the last 200 years at least. Fundamentalists of all stripes (Christian, Jew, Muslim) seem to be entrenched in the notion that the world is going to hell fast.

So, how do you measure morality? What statistics prove that the world is less moral today than even 50 years ago?

Number living in poverty? Starvation? Abortion? Murder? Or is church attendance your only measure?

It’s a pretty big question - do you mean within Western society, or within all societies? Do people claim that the world as a whole is less moral than it was at some other point?

 

[Par5]

Yes



No. That's not obedience, that's assent.



That is the question and difficulty, but that's a matter of communication, not ethics.

How would you feel if you believed your god had communicated with you instructing you to sacrifice your child? I don't know if you actually are a parent, but let's say that you are. What would your reaction be?

 

[(° ͡ ͜ ͡ʖ ͡ °) (ᵔᴥᵔʋ)]

In virtually every measure, the world has become a better place to live IN THE AGGREGATE for the last 200 years at least. Fundamentalists of all stripes (Christian, Jew, Muslim) seem to be entrenched in the notion that the world is going to hell fast.

So, how do you measure morality? What statistics prove that the world is less moral today than even 50 years ago?

Number living in poverty? Starvation? Abortion? Murder? Or is church attendance your only measure?

If there is no God, what is morality? We must have a definition of what morality actually is before we can possibly discuss it's measure.

 

[Steve Petersen]

It’s a pretty big question - do you mean within Western society, or within all societies? Do people claim that the world as a whole is less moral than it was at some other point?

Western society. The fundamentalist meme seems to be that the world is more immoral today than at any time in the past. So, how do they measure morality?

 

[Tom 1]

Western society. The fundamentalist meme seems to be that the world is more immoral today than at any time in the past. So, how do they measure morality?

From a utilitarian perspective I think you could say that the free market, Western style democracy, as far as those things go, the suppression of other ways of governing through violence and economic/political means, and the underlying influences of Judeo/Christian thought on Western Society are all moral things.

 

[RDKirk]

How would you feel if you believed your god had communicated with you instructing you to sacrifice your child? I don't know if you actually are a parent, but let's say that you are. What would your reaction be?

I am a parent. I'd point out that scripture says Abraham reasoned that God could even raise the dead, and so in a manner of speaking he did receive Isaac back from death.

I'd also point out that God provides multiple modes of communication so that: "Every matter is established by two or three witnesses."

Both the Old Testament and the New Testament tell us that God abhors the sacrifice of children (notice that Abraham never did actually sacrifice Isaac), so something would have to overcome those witnesses.

 

[Tolworth John]

So the Ten Commandments are the objective standard by which morality is to be measured? Interesting.

Explained very easily.
A society will not show love for others if that society does not love God.

That is how the 10C work, they start with God and work down through the family and out into the wider socierty.

What would you suggest and why should it be universally adopted.

 

[Tinker Grey]

A society will not show love for others if that society does not love God.

The ten commandments say nothing of love.

 

[Steve Petersen]

Explained very easily.
A society will not show love for others if that society does not love God.

So EVERYONE involved in international relief believes in God? Atheists don't love people?

 

[cvanwey]

If there is no God, what is morality? We must have a definition of what morality actually is before we can possibly discuss it's measure.

Morality is not some transcendent universal word or concept independent of human thought or language. Nor, was such a term invented by the authors of the Bible. The term 'morality' is no more or less a human conceptual term, derived by human beings in the past at some point, and is also associated with 'well being.'

From my estimation, the words 'morality' and 'well being' appear directly synonymous with one another. If one of the main objectives is the 'golden rule', (whether you adhere to Jesus or Confucius), then one could make a sound case for such.

To answer your question, one could instead argue that without a supreme moral judge or arbiter, there exists no bases or standard, as we are instead comparing one human opinion to the next. Yes, most might agree. However, what if the dictator of a nation disagrees? By what standard might one appeal to in 'proving' this dictator is mistaken (rhetorical)?

However, if such a scenario does exist, it is also plausible that we instead have no morality, but instead 'moral dictates', as humans are to follow the commands passed by the 'moral arbiter.' or 'authority'. Which basically means we are following orders with no evaluation of our own.

In conclusion, to answer the OPer's question, let's start by directly comparing the term 'morality' to 'well being', as it becomes difficult to call something 'good' or 'bad' without recognizing that the two terms are synonymous with one another.

 

[cvanwey]

Explained very easily.
A society will not show love for others if that society does not love God.

Can it be any God, or just the one in which you specifically subscribe? Because it has been demonstrated that people can be in love with someone or something in which they've never met or seen.

 

[Steve Petersen]

Morality is not some transcendent universal word or concept independent of human thought or language. Nor, was such a term invented by the authors of the Bible. The term 'morality' is no more or less a human conceptual term, derived by human beings in the past at some point, and is also associated with 'well being.'

From my estimation, the words 'morality' and 'well being' appear directly synonymous with one another. If one of the main objectives is the 'golden rule', (whether you adhere to Jesus or Confucius), then one could make a sound case for such.

To answer your question, one could instead argue that without a supreme moral judge or arbiter, there exists no bases or standard, as we are instead comparing one human opinion to the next. Yes, most might agree. However, what if the dictator of a nation disagrees? By what standard might one appeal to in 'proving' this dictator is mistaken (rhetorical)?

However, if such a scenario does exist, it is also plausible that we instead have no morality, but instead 'moral dictates', as humans are to follow the commands passed by the 'moral arbiter.' or 'authority'. Which basically means we are following orders with no evaluation of our own.

In conclusion, to answer the OPer's question, let's start by directly comparing the term 'morality' to 'well being', as it becomes difficult to call something 'good' or 'bad' without recognizing that the two terms are synonymous with one another.

This is part of the reason I asked the question in the OP. How do we measure morality? If a nation is moral, I would expect murder rates to be declining; I would expect a decrease in extreme poverty and so forth.

 

[RDKirk]

This is part of the reason I asked the question in the OP. How do we measure morality? If a nation is moral, I would expect murder rates to be declining; I would expect a decrease in extreme poverty and so forth.

But those are your expectations.

What if the murder rate stayed the same but nobody was starving and everyone was housed?

What if almost everywhere in the world could enjoy peace and material sufficiency as long as one continent was ravaged viciously for the resources the others were using?

What if Shirley Jackson's "The Lottery" was something that actually worked?

 

[Steve Petersen]

But those are your expectations.

What if the murder rate stayed the same but nobody was starving and everyone was housed?

What if almost everywhere in the world could enjoy peace and material sufficiency as long as one continent was ravaged viciously for the resources the others were using?

What if Shirley Jackson's "The Lottery" was something that actually worked?

So how do YOU measure the morality of a nation, or even the world for that matter?

 

[cvanwey]

This is part of the reason I asked the question in the OP. How do we measure morality? If a nation is moral, I would expect murder rates to be declining; I would expect a decrease in extreme poverty and so forth.

Yes. But you are barking up the wrong tree in this crowd I reckon Most here will not answer in the way you expect, as the term 'morality' does not mean the same thing as it does to you, or even I.

From most Christian perspectives, they might argue that, 'without God, there can exist no morality'. That without a 'supreme moral law giver', there exists no true standard. So I might ask the fundamental question, in which needs to be first addressed; a question which philosophers have been arguing on both ends for millenniums...

Prove your God exists first, then we can discuss details...

 

[RDKirk]

So how do YOU measure the morality of a nation, or even the world for that matter?

Operationally, I don't.

Inasmuch as human nature has not actually changed since homo became sapiens, I expect that visible changes in morality are marked by region and duration with no net worldwide difference over time.

We would have to identify that a fundamental difference in human nature has occurred to argue that humanity (the world) is either more moral or less moral than it ever was in the past.

Even if we look only at the bible--particularly looking at it as "instructional fable"--folks today aren't any different from Cain and Abel.

 

[Tolworth John]

The ten commandments say nothing of love.

They are in and of them selves a statement of love.

 

[Tolworth John]

So EVERYONE involved in international relief believes in God? Atheists don't love people?

Do all those involved in international relief love those they are helping.
Do those aid officals in expencive hotels etc love the poor outside?

 

[Tolworth John]

Can it be any God, or just the one in which you specifically subscribe? Because it has been demonstrated that people can be in love with someone or something in which they've never met or seen.

As this is a 'Christian forum' we are talking about Christianities God.