Morality.

What are your views on morality?

I'm taking a class called "Moral Theology", but it's a catholic class, so we only talk about the catholic perspective.

I've always believed morals are completely subjective. My teacher believes that they are objective.

I have plenty more things to say about them, but I'm not able to right now.

I'll respond later if this thread gets going anywhere.

huh? you shouldn't go to catholic classes they are bad for you

http:../bbs/forum15/html/003026.html

Lately morals are all I can think about. Right now I can't think of any reason to have morals. I don't know what they're based on other than keeping things functioning. I guess morals should be based on the fact that we all have "good" and "bad" feelings. When we get hit in the head or a family member dies, that's "bad." When we smoke pot or form a close bond with someone, that's "good." Because we like to have "good" feelings and don't like to have "bad" ones, we should do what we can to make sure other people have more "good" feelings than "bad" so that they might return the favor. Other than selfishness, I can't figure why we should have morals. It's really been bothering me

[LostCause]

Sounds like these catechism classes have been cutting close to the bone with you.

I think you should stop letting other peoples ignorance bother you so much. Just don't stand so close to them if you can avoid it.

But, if you just want my opinion (which I'm sure you do. Because, my opinion is gold.) I'd agree that morality is subjective more or less, but I wouldn't try so hard to can it into either subjective or objective. I mean, what is morality anyhow?

Until you can answer that question, attempting to define it's function in the universe is futile.

Going around anal raping babies and cancer patients day after day - I would say - is objectively wrong. Is concensual anal sex objectively wrong? I'd say no. I'd say may be it's subjectively wrong under some circumstances... I guess. I, myself, am not a fan of anal rape so I'm a bit bias...

I digress. Nothing is in the box. So stop trying to shove everything in there.

Cheers,

Lost

In my meaningless little opinion, only non-religious people are capable of being genuinely moral. Being a good person because of belief in divine reward/punishment is very different from being a good person because you feel like it's the right thing to do.

Moreover, yeah, morality is subjective, but I think most of us could probably agree on the bulk of "good" and "bad" with which we are presented.

[Tyrant]

GlitterPunk112358:

This is the kind of morality Nietzsche fought against, and is therefore not true morality. Your descriptions of 'ethics' are in fact describing a neutered, soulless bastardization of genuine ethics and should be meticulously reviewed.

Magic Nose Goblin:

A religious person has a fundamental basis upon which he can judge what is ultimately 'right' and 'wrong.' A non-religious person mimics this basis according to his needs.