Alternate Morality

[Magisterium]

As a practicing Catholic, I adhere to a relatively strict moral code as laid out by the Catholic Church. However, I understand that many object to many of the precepts of the Church.

Strangely in my recent studies of morality, I've been unable to find a competing moral code. I find that many are wanting to tear out "chunks" of the existing Judeo-Christian morality they disagree with, but none present a new and complete alternative moral code.

Even stranger, is that even among my (admittedly brief) examination of other faiths I was unable to find another with defined moral codes. I could only find vague sort of "do what feels good, because it is good" type of morality.

I do need to include for the sake of intelligent conversation, what it is I mean when I say "morality". I am using Webster's definition 1a of "moral" which is as follows:

Moral:1 a : of or relating to principles of right and wrong in behavior

As such morality refers to standards of right and wrong (in behavior and action).

 

[trunks2k]

Well, what moral codes are you looking at? Islam of course has a strong set of moral codes, and you can probably find a rather strict set of moral codes among the vast array of religions of tribal cultures.

Asian religions, i.e. Buddhism, from my understanding, tend to be based on a more philosophical standpoint and stressing certain things that are considered strengths. But a lot of stuff is left open to subjective thought, with more of an idea that if you keep those certain strengths (in buddhism, respecting other people and nature), there's not too much to worry about. So the code does not have to be specific. Some people take it to extremes like the buddhist monks, other people are more lax.

Similar thing goes for secular humanism and wiccans (from my understanding). There are a few broad guidlines, i.e. don't do to anyone else what you wouldn't want them to do to you, and the specifics are left open for discussion. That way you are in essence saying that "killing and stealing is bad", because very very few people would naturally consider those "good" things, but the more vague and subjective things are not set in stone.

Personally I prefer the moral guidelines with broad statements. Humans are fallible, following a strict, unchanging set of guidelines from years and years ago does not allow for our natural change in culture. Of course if you say it's from god, you can ignore all that, but I don't believe in a god(s). I personally am a secular humanist, I feel that it's important to keep other people safe, promote human rights, just all around help other people, and use my mind to do so.

 

[HadouKen24]

Buddhism actually does have a written moral code. It's called the Five Precepts.

------------------

1. Panatipata veramani sikkhapadam samadiyami
I undertake the precept to refrain from destroying living creatures.


2. Adinnadana veramani sikkhapadam samadiyami
I undertake the precept to refrain from taking that which is not given.

3. Kamesu micchacara veramani sikkhapadam samadiyami
I undertake the precept to refrain from sexual misconduct.

4. Musavada veramani sikkhapadam samadiyami
I undertake the precept to refrain from incorrect speech. 5. Suramerayamajja pamadatthana veramani sikkhapadam samadiyami
I undertake the precept to refrain from intoxicating drinks and drugs which lead to carelessness.

-----------------

You can also find definitive moral codes in Islam, Judaism, Zoroastrianism, Hinduism, and a number of philosophies.

 

[Mekkala]

My thoughts on morality. If you're genuinely looking for some kind of alternate moral code, that's it. I really don't understand how you haven't been able to find a single alternate moral code -- there are literally thousands out there, and every major religion has one. The only thing I can imagine is that you dismiss every moral code you see as "not really a moral code."

 

[trunks2k]

Buddhism actually does have a written moral code. It's called the Five Precepts.

------------------

1. Panatipata veramani sikkhapadam samadiyami
I undertake the precept to refrain from destroying living creatures.


2. Adinnadana veramani sikkhapadam samadiyami
I undertake the precept to refrain from taking that which is not given.

3. Kamesu micchacara veramani sikkhapadam samadiyami
I undertake the precept to refrain from sexual misconduct.

4. Musavada veramani sikkhapadam samadiyami
I undertake the precept to refrain from incorrect speech. 5. Suramerayamajja pamadatthana veramani sikkhapadam samadiyami
I undertake the precept to refrain from intoxicating drinks and drugs which lead to carelessness.

.

Those come across to me as more general statements. If the bible was just the 10 commandments, then I't put Judeo-Christianity under the same heading. But the bible gets much more specific than this

 

[Magisterium]

Well, what moral codes are you looking at? Islam of course has a strong set of moral codes, and you can probably find a rather strict set of moral codes among the vast array of religions of tribal cultures.

Asian religions, i.e. Buddhism, from my understanding, tend to be based on a more philosophical standpoint and stressing certain things that are considered strengths. But a lot of stuff is left open to subjective thought, with more of an idea that if you keep those certain strengths (in buddhism, respecting other people and nature), there's not too much to worry about. So the code does not have to be specific. Some people take it to extremes like the buddhist monks, other people are more lax.

Similar thing goes for secular humanism and wiccans (from my understanding). There are a few broad guidlines, i.e. don't do to anyone else what you wouldn't want them to do to you, and the specifics are left open for discussion. That way you are in essence saying that "killing and stealing is bad", because very very few people would naturally consider those "good" things, but the more vague and subjective things are not set in stone.

Personally I prefer the moral guidelines with broad statements. Humans are fallible, following a strict, unchanging set of guidelines from years and years ago does not allow for our natural change in culture. Of course if you say it's from god, you can ignore all that, but I don't believe in a god(s). I personally am a secular humanist, I feel that it's important to keep other people safe, promote human rights, just all around help other people, and use my mind to do so.

Well, first of all, I am referring to specified moral authority. For example, like mosaic law, which lays out very specific precepts and regulations. Likewise coded canon law (in most western countries) explicitly lays out laws, and judicial processes. I'm including Islam under mosaic because it claims the same Abrahamic monotheist source as Judaism.

As for cultures of the far east, I see an interesting philosophical/subjective moral code, but much is left to local discression. Additionally, I find such things as limiting the number of females born, forced abortions, and forced sterilization to be unacceptable breaches of basic human rights. (Of course my view is colored by my christian understanding of human dignity).

At any rate, it occurs to me that people don't seem to realize that removing portions of Christian morality compromises the integrity of the whole system. For instance, in the 1930's when the Anglican church condoned abortion for "only extreme grave cases" such as rape or when the mother's life was in danger, they could not have known that in 50 years, it would be widely considered and used as a method of birth control.

Likewise, even now, as homosexual couples seek to have marriage expanded to include same sex unions, polygamists are filing in the same suit exclaiming that "if you allow one alternative lifestyle, you must allow all". And they're right. Even behind them are members of NAMBLA organizing and seeking to get their piece of the pie. For instance, why can't a 13 or 14 year old boy or girl be capable of making their own decisions? Are not many 14 year olds more mature than other 18 year olds? They're people too... Why is the legal age set so high at 18? With the dropping of the legal age, underage porn and sexual promiscuity (both things which are still largely abhorred by our society will have to be allowed)

The unfortunate fact is, unless you appeal to some authority (theistic or otherwise), laws are nothing but arbitrary lines in the sand to be repositioned at will...

Am I way in left field here? Please respond intelligently....

 

[Magisterium]

My thoughts on morality. If you're genuinely looking for some kind of alternate moral code, that's it. I really don't understand how you haven't been able to find a single alternate moral code -- there are literally thousands out there, and every major religion has one. The only thing I can imagine is that you dismiss every moral code you see as "not really a moral code."

No, I'm looking for a moral code which is not based upon a theistic source. I'm looking for a moral code which a society follows which is not based upon what some god says to do, but what rational and reasonable man has derived for himself through sheer force of reason... and I can't find one...

I'm not referring to vague philosophical precepts, I'm taking coded canon law with explicitly stated violations and penalties. Effectively everything necessary to instruct the public, identify violations and violators, and punish, contain, and/or rehab violators. Effectively, a system of ethical/moral justice which is not theistic in its origin.

I can't find a single one!

 

[Natro]

No, I'm looking for a moral code which is not based upon a theistic source. I'm looking for a moral code which a society follows which is not based upon what some god says to do, but what rational and reasonable man has derived for himself through sheer force of reason... and I can't find one...

I'm not referring to vague philosophical precepts, I'm taking coded canon law with explicitly stated violations and penalties. Effectively everything necessary to instruct the public, identify violations and violators, and punish, contain, and/or rehab violators. Effectively, a system of ethical/moral justice which is not theistic in its origin.

I can't find a single one!

The communist?

 

[USincognito]

No, I'm looking for a moral code which is not based upon a theistic source. I'm looking for a moral code which a society follows which is not based upon what some god says to do, but what rational and reasonable man has derived for himself through sheer force of reason... and I can't find one...

I'm not referring to vague philosophical precepts, I'm taking coded canon law with explicitly stated violations and penalties. Effectively everything necessary to instruct the public, identify violations and violators, and punish, contain, and/or rehab violators. Effectively, a system of ethical/moral justice which is not theistic in its origin.

I can't find a single one!

How about the Law of the Twelve Tables or, and yes, there's a lot of theistic language, but it's mostly lain down by the king Hammurabi. Or perhaps the laws of Draco, further refined by Solon.

 

[Magisterium]

The communist?

Oh yeah, I guess I discounted communism on account that it failed in Russia. However, I guess it does fit the criteria and it seems to thrive in China where population is out of control, abortions are forced, number of children and sexes of children are strictly controled, and sterilization is state issue. Of course the poverty level is staggering and the average quality of life inspires people to attempt month-long container rides to the USA where if they can avoid deportation, they might be able to scrape together a living as an indentured servant.

Of course I can't escape the irony that it is actually more morally oppressive than most theistic forms of government. Certainly there must be one more reasonable and less oppressive moral/governmental system than that?

 

[Mekkala]

No, I'm looking for a moral code which is not based upon a theistic source. I'm looking for a moral code which a society follows which is not based upon what some god says to do, but what rational and reasonable man has derived for himself through sheer force of reason... and I can't find one...

I'm not referring to vague philosophical precepts, I'm taking coded canon law with explicitly stated violations and penalties. Effectively everything necessary to instruct the public, identify violations and violators, and punish, contain, and/or rehab violators. Effectively, a system of ethical/moral justice which is not theistic in its origin.

I can't find a single one!

Look, I think you're being a bit unreasonable here. You're redefining "moral code" until the only code it fits is the one in your Bible.

For example, the link there went to a post of mine describing a moral system derived purely by reason. However, I hadn't gotten into building an entire logically reasoned justice system, which I have neither the time nor the education to build -- I'd only made a basic system by which any given action could be judged "moral" or "immoral".

Or, I could point you to the justice systems of secular nations today -- but all those justice systems were originally formed with strong theistic influence, and are gradually being rehashed logically until all laws can be defended by pure logic. None of them have actually reached the point where they can be said to not be based on theistic reasoning at all.

I could point to Communism, but the Communist justice systems were not invented to protect ethics but to protect the positions and wealth of those in power -- that is, they were derived purely logically, but the logic was based on an amoral goal. So those do not fit your criteria either.

I don't think you're *going* to find a moral code that fits your criteria. We're still getting past theistic thinking and building secular justice systems and moral codes, and in the process, our view of morality will constantly change -- but you want an unchanging moral code. Until we've gotten past this major change in human morality, the only unchanging moral codes you'll find are theistic moral codes, and those codes are what we're trying to get away from.

 

[snotling]

Magestrium... what are you talking about.. All moral codes come from people. They come from government.

 

[trunks2k]

I could point to Communism, but the Communist justice systems were not invented to protect ethics but to protect the positions and wealth of those in power -- that is, they were derived purely logically, but the logic was based on an amoral goal. So those do not fit your criteria either.

I'd also be hesitant to really refer to it as "communism" in the terms that Lenin had put it in. Lenin and Stalin had drastically different political ideas. And it's Stalin's policies and idealologies that carried on throughout the USSR until Gorbachev, at which point the damage done was too great to repair, not Lenin's. If Trotsky had come to power, like Lenin wanted, instead of Stalin, things probably would have turned out much different. I personally think it's a bit more accurate to refer to the USSR as a "Stalinist" state rather than a "Communist" one. But that's my view on it, certainly not the most educated one.