If the average human is immoral, why should average individuals try to be moral?

I just read the title of this thread (I paraphrased the thought) posted on another forum and it hit me that that is probably the attitude of many people. If that's the case, it explains a lot about why the world is such an awful place morally speaking.

It has never crossed my mind to be that way, not since I was an adolescent anyway. In my early teens I grew out of that thinking. I'll admit that I cheated on homework and exams when I was an adolescent and I used the "everybody's doing it" excuse. However, as an adolescent I really wasn't aware enough to fully understand the nature of my moral decisions in many ways. But, I grew out of that and I took full moral responsibility in my early teens. I thought that was called growing up. I thought that's what everyone does.

But, to see an adult admitting openly that they're immoral because they consider themselves to be "average" and "average people" are immoral so they should be no better is abhorrent.

Why?

It's simple logic, an immoral person is generally worthless in most respects. What's the point of living a worthless existence? I see none.

Don't worry about them. It is none of your business. Live your life as you see fit, you will have a much more serene life. We are the judge of our own morality, no one else.

a reply to: Profusion

I think many people have the idea that their morality is some sort of message to other people, like a badge their wear, to let others know how "good" they are. Their morals are contingent upon other people's moral behavior. If that's their motivation for being moral, and they look around and see so many others who don't behave morally, they don't feel a need to keep up the ruse.

I behave morally for myself, only. Because it's the right thing to do. My morals are not dependent on how other people behave.

I have seen SO many people who base their behavior on how others treat them, it's really amazing. I don't care HOW someone treats me, that doesn't give me an excuse to start being a jerk to them.

a reply to: Profusion

I guess if a person is wantonly immoral they are really no better than animals. That is what our corrupt overlords want isn't it? To reduce us all to human cattle? It's easier to control us or cull us that way.

Cheers - Dave

Not sure which world you live in. People are as they are. We choose our beliefs and values, then assess what we perceive externally in relation to our standards. You're saying you believe your standards to be above the average in the world. That's your choice.

Touches on this logical fallacy.

a reply to: Profusion
The average person isn't "immoral". It's that several thousand years ago, somebody decided that everyone was guilty of something, and therefore they needed absolution. They then deduced that playing on peoples guilt was a great way to control them. And since people NEEDED this control to be "good" by THEIR standards. Religion was born, and it has been downhill ever since. Now we have people like this...

...because, you know. We're bad for the planet. We're just bad. God or evolution made a REALLY BIG mistake. Pick your poison.

a reply to: Profusion

Ok, I want to ask you a question, in the form of a thought experiment. Imagine all of the people in this world are digging a hole, from 9am to 5pm we dig, and then engage in our other activists and return digging in the morning, and for the sake of the idea the dirt disappears magically upon being dug up so the hole is in an almost constant state of getting deeper. So my question to you is, what good does it do a thousand people or even a million people to wake up and stop digging, after all the hole continues to get deeper still even with your awareness of the futil endevor?

a reply to: Profusion

Morality is a choice plain and simple.

In my younger years I've made many choices that were not morally good, and as I get older I am making many choices that are.

Maybe it comes with maturity or maybe it was always my choice to see the things I had been doing that were morally wrong.

a reply to: Profusion

Original Sin and ritual salvation are mind traps.

Many religious people claim that it is impossible to stop sinning. They justify there own sins and immorality by claiming it's impossible to stop. Then they condemn other peoples sins that they have decided are worse then their own.

This is justification of immortality. A man who believes himself immoral won't rise up as a teacher of morals and he can be easily controlled by others.

The truth behind the story of Adam and Eve is we are born in a state of ignorance that we can overcome.

Profusion
In my early teens I grew out of that thinking. I'll admit that I cheated on homework and exams when I was an adolescent and I used the "everybody's doing it" excuse. However, as an adolescent I really wasn't aware enough to fully understand the nature of my moral decisions in many ways. But, I grew out of that and I took full moral responsibility in my early teens. I thought that was called growing up. I thought that's what everyone does.

You have overcome your ignorance and sin no longer has a grip on you. You may still make a mistake but you are no longer willfully disobedient.

Knowledge has given you the power to be a moral adult, free from the sinful adolescent mind.

a reply to: Profusion

I don't think the average person is immoral.

I don't think it's good to look at it in those black and white terms. Morality is a complex thing and there's a ton of gray areas.

It's not an issue of being moral, or immoral.

We are animals. Animals have basic instincts. Wants. Desires.

Morality is a social construct. It is a tool for getting along together, as are the Ten Commandments. A means of co-existing in a group of people that will avoid conflict.


Just as puppies nip too hard at their mother, and the mother dog will bite back, hard...until they yelp...at which point the mother will stop....she is teaching them. Don't hurt others. Don't hurt me. You do this, and this is the response to expect. We are taught this as children, too. As well as other concepts that are conceived to prevent conflict.


We are animals. Complex and advanced animals, yes. But to forget this fact, is not only foolish, it is hubris.

a reply to: nullafides

I think it's foolish to compare yourself to one that licks it's own genitals. But hey believe what you want.

a reply to: Isurrender73

That is a game-changer, you're right. My life would be very different if I could lick my self.

We are addicted to failure.

originally posted by: Isurrender73
a reply to: nullafides

I think it's foolish to compare yourself to one that licks it's own genitals. But hey believe what you want.

I think it's foolish to deny the truth.

Keep on thinking you're gonna sprout wings. Maybe, just maybe, we as animals will get smart enough to make it happen from a gene-splicing standpoint.

Children are not born moral.
They are selfish, self centered and totally self absorbed little beings.
If they don't get their way, they throw tantrums, bite, kick, cry, scream.
If they don't get their way NOW, they throw tantrums, bite, kick, cry, scream.
As toddlers their motto is what is mine is mine, what is yours is mine.

So yes in that sense we are all born selfish, self centered, little beings
who expect the world to be my way or else.

Are children born moral? Only if you think taking what is not yours is moral.
Only if you think that your way is the only way and everyone else should bend to your will,
and you should be allowed to physically hurt anyone who disagrees with you.

Is that immoral? Maybe not in your world.

It all depends on your definition of what is moral.
That definition changes faster than the wind blows.
It is highly relative and the most vocal group normally
sets the morality for the rest of the human group.

So why should we care about morality, if you have
no moral compass other than popular culture
and listening to the most vocal or powerful
group within a society. Then I say we really
shouldn't care about that morality, because
it changes so fast, like a laser beam.

It is so relative in our current culture, that you
have a point that we should not care about
morality since what is moral today is immoral
tomorrow and what is immoral today is moral
tomorrow.
With no moral compass allowed in modern
society, well morality really doesn't matter.

a reply to: Profusion

It's simple logic, an immoral person is generally worthless in most respects.

What a terrible thing to say, especially from such a moral person such as yourself.

When you do bad things to hurt yourself, someone else, or the environment.... you have to wear that negativity brand on your chest or shoulders. I prefer to do good kind things so I don't have to worry about as much. Life hands you bad situations and broken problems daily. Why add to your burdens? Be good, so you can have some dignity and feel proud with esteem.

originally posted by: grandmakdw

It all depends on your definition of what is moral.
That definition changes faster than the wind blows.
It is highly relative and the most vocal group normally sets the morality for the rest of the human group.

I hear that a lot but there is quite literally almost no validity to what you are saying.

Children are born attached to understanding that getting what they want satisfies them. The first time they are hungry and are satisfied by the breast they form an attachment to the physical world of wants and needs.

However, as the adolescent mind matures the law of do unto others as you would have them do unto you becomes understandable.

No one is pleased when someone lies to them or steals from them.

The 10 commandments are 3500 years old. Plato and the Buddhist text are at least 2500 years old. Morality hasn't changed much in 3500 years.

There are people who are so extremely selfish that they justify immorality for personal gain, but you won't find the thief arguing in court that stealing is moral.

There are religious zealots, racial zealots, and other elitists mentalities that teach one ideology is better than another and they use this to instigate wars imagining that they are fighting for self preservation.

But none of these exceptions to morality are new. Since they have existed at least as long as organized religion.

The only moral goalposts that have moved in the minds of the majority seem to be in the realm of sexual morality.

Religious morality which can be called ritualistic morality has changed, but the morality of the 10 commandments has not.