DISCUSSION: Does morality evolve or . . .

[woman.at.the.well]

is it absolute and unchanging?

 

[EnemyPartyII]

Changes.

What is moral in one circumstance is not necesarily moral in another.

Further... what we define as moral guidance changes... it was once "immoral" to eat shellfish... although this was a health warning, not a matter of "right" or "wrong"

 

[HypnoToad]

What is moral in one circumstance is not necesarily moral in another.

Further... what we define as moral guidance changes... it was once "immoral" to eat shellfish... although this was a health warning, not a matter of "right" or "wrong"

Seems like you might be confusing specific actions with the underlying moral principle.

Just because one takes different actions in different situations doesn't mean the underlying moral principle changes.

(I have to go to work, so hopefully this won't explode into 20 pages by the time I get back.)

 

[EnemyPartyII]

Seems like you might be confusing specific actions with the underlying moral principle.

Just because one takes different actions in different situations doesn't mean the underlying moral principle changes.

Technological advances can change underlying moral principals...

 

[christalee4]

It may evolve over time. For example, in the "good" old days, it was considered fit and moral to execute people and children publicly by hanging, burning, the sword and stoning, for crimes such as adultery, witchcraft, homosexuality, heresy and being wilful and disobedient to one's parents. I would say in this present day and age, it is not only inappropriate, but barbaric to do these things. Do you agree or disagree?

 

[chaz345]

I don't think that morality itself, that is the ultimate right and wrong ever changes. But what can change is our understanding of that ultimate right and wrong.

The ultimate right and wrong is perfect and unchanging, but our understanding is flawed becuase we are imperfect beings.

 

[EnemyPartyII]

I don't think that morality itself, that is the ultimate right and wrong ever changes. But what can change is our understanding of that ultimate right and wrong.

The ultimate right and wrong is perfect and unchanging, but our understanding is flawed becuase we are imperfect beings.

I disagree... reliable contraception has, for example, changed the underlying morality relating to sexual mores

 

[JohnHarthover]

I think that it depends on how you define morality. Normally people define it in an absolute way and I believe that our sense of morality has evolved to correspond to a very absolute form of morality.

My view is that morality is doing things that are advantageous for the community and that are directly disadvantous to yourself. That is an absolute definition of morality that won't change and I think it is one that evolution selects certain groops to percieve as moral - that too could be universal.

 

[EnemyPartyII]

My view is that morality is doing things that are advantageous for the community and that are directly disadvantous to yourself.

morality doesnt have to be disadvantageous to the self

 

[jayem]

People have always had differing opinions on social norms. What changes is the prevailing opinion, or consensus on whether something is right or wrong.

I'd say 50 years ago, it would have been widely accepted that marriage between people of different races was wrong, in a moral sense. While some today no doubt still agree with that, it's not the overwhelming consensus it once was.

I remember reading about the highly moralistic tone taken by those opposing women's suffrage. That involving women in the sordid world of politics would be an immoral affront to their natural purity, delicacy, and refinement. Even back in the day, not everyone bought such drivel, but it took time for the consensus opinion to change. And most every reasonable person today would agree such ideas are just poorly disguised male chauvinism.

 

[Voegelin]

Onward and upward huh? Progress! Justice Scalia had this to say about evolving standards of morality:

Okay, what is another approach to interpretation of the Constitution? Well, you know maybe 60 years or so ago we adopted, first in the Eighth Amendment area cruel and unusual punishment the notion that the Constitution is not static. It doesn't mean what the people voted for when it was ratified. It doesn't mean that. Rather, it changes from era to era to comport with -- and this is a quote from our cases, "the evolving standards of decency that mark the progress of a maturing society." I detest that phrase, but because -- (laughter) -- because I'm afraid that societies don't always mature. Sometimes they rot.

Source:

Transcript of Discussion Between U.S. Supreme Court Justices Antonin Scalia and Stephen Breyer -- AU Washington College of Law, Jan. 13, 2005​

​

 

[flicka]

It's ever changing and dependent on society. Not too long ago it was fine to hang a man for stealing a horse...one individuals life wasn't considered that valuable. Today you have people crying over and fighting to save fertilized eggs.

 

[Arnold_Philips]

Any serious study of history shows that morals and tastes of what is acceptable varies wildly over time and space.

 

[kopilo]

Does morals on an individual level change? Well I think that is dependant on the person, I personally would say they have changed through out my life as my understanding of different topics have changed, by this I mean my underlying reasoning.

Does ethics (what society considers as right and wrong change over time?) I am tempted to say yes as there are many examples where ethical values have changed but I do believe it is still dependant on the society and how that society operates.

 

[quatona]

is it absolute and unchanging?

Given all those diverse moral systems that existed throughout history and still exist today simultaneously to me it appears to be painfully obvious that the terms "absolute" and "morality" do not go together well.

 

[Paulos23]

It changes. Every society or civilization, past and present, have a set of morals that differer. Granted there are a few that are common across many societies, but they change with the pressures of the times, whether environmental or social.

 

[HypnoToad]

Technological advances can change underlying moral principals...

For example ... ? Your comment is a bit too vague to be meaningful.

It may evolve over time. For example, in the "good" old days, it was considered fit and moral to execute people and children publicly by hanging, burning, the sword and stoning, for crimes such as adultery, witchcraft, homosexuality, heresy and being wilful and disobedient to one's parents. I would say in this present day and age, it is not only inappropriate, but barbaric to do these things. Do you agree or disagree?

Again - is that the underlying moral principle that changed, or the expression of an underlying principle that's changed?

I disagree... reliable contraception has, for example, changed the underlying morality relating to sexual mores

Again - vague. What is the underlying principle?

It's ever changing and dependent on society. Not too long ago it was fine to hang a man for stealing a horse...one individuals life wasn't considered that valuable. Today you have people crying over and fighting to save fertilized eggs.

Apples and oranges. Have you seen a lot of fertilized eggs committing crimes?

So far, no one has presented a specific moral principle and how it's changed. All that's been said are vague statements, or specific actions with no mention of the underlying principle.

 

[EnemyPartyII]

Quote:
Originally Posted by EnemyPartyII
Technological advances can change underlying moral principals...

For example ... ? Your comment is a bit too vague to be meaningful.

safe, effective contraception effects the underlying morality behind sexuality... just like advances in medicine require more specific moral guidance for some cases...

 

[kopilo]

So far, no one has presented a specific moral principle and how it's changed. All that's been said are vague statements, or specific actions with no mention of the underlying principle.

Straightedge went through three different eras since its creation in 1980[6]. Associated with punk-rock, the early years of the straightedge subculture were called the Old School Era. However in the late nineteen eighties the straightedge subculture seemed to drift further and further away from the punk culture. The following era called Youth Crew, presented different types of elements that began to change the subculture. For example, vegetarianism became a major theme along with following the Krishna faith. Youth Crew also led to tension inside the subculture. After nearly a decade of the separation of straightedge-punk from the punk culture, the era called Straight Edge 2000 brought the cultures together without clash.

Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straight_edge

 

[RealSorceror]

Morality evolves, but it tends to retain some consistancies.