[I Kant]

I suppose this is a bit Fi vs Fe, but I am curious anyway.

Lets say you believe X is the right moral thing to do in Y situation, or perhaps that Z is the wrong moral thing to do.

(Which of course assumes you are convinced of it, which means you need to pick an issue you happen to be convinced of.)

Why is that stance right? For instance:

1. Is it because you have merely been brought up that way that makes it right, in which case it is a cultural thing?
2. Is it because some of the people you know are convinced or react to it as such, and the morality has been inducted into your personal sense of right and wrong, in which case it is a localized cultural thing?
3. Is it because you believe the majority are convinced it is right, despite probably not checking if the majority would agree with it, or agree with it anonymously as to truly speak their mind without fear, in which case it is a politics thing?
4. Is it because you believe all people support it, despite the person before you obviously being in contrary to that as well as the diversity among humanity being potentially in contrary to that - in which case it is a... what I don't even...
5. Is it because you believe in some sort of natural rights, in which case it may be a belief thing?
6. Is it because it feels good, in which case it may be an ego thing?
7. Is it because you have seen how people are impacted by the issue, in which case it is a judgement call based on a hopefully wise perspective thing?
8. Other, but based on belief, perhaps even belief and confidence in reasonable premise.
9. Other, based on reason and analysis. Yes I know, edgy considering the contrast to point 8.
10. Mature judgement call bitches. (Because lets face it, certainty and going in circles only goes so far.)

Of course things like philosophy and religion also potentially enter the picture, but if appropriate to your stance you can freely mention them I suppose.

 

[ivagrey]

I'd say 7-9. To give an example (but not to start a political argument with anyone who disagrees--I don't want to offend anyone. This is just my personal opinion), I'd point to the Edward Snowden case. I'm pretty liberal, so I guess if point 2 were true, I should be freaking out that the government is spying on me and citing every conspiracy theory I can get my hands on like all my friends. But actually I had a gut reaction shortly after I heard about the leak that the guy was a self-absorbed jackass who had deluded himself into thinking that he was some principled whistleblower to feel important. I don't know why I thought that (probably because I'm an INFJ and just have feelings that come from "nowhere"). So I guess that's your no. 8. Plus I considered the people who would be hurt by his actions versus the people who would be helped (no. 7). And finally I am fortunate to be married to an ISTJ who generally shares my political beliefs, and he ended up validating my feelings with logic and analysis (no. 9). Therefore I concluded that what Snowden did was wrong.

That's pretty much how I arrive at most beliefs nowadays. Don't know if that's right or wrong, logical or illogical, but that's how I do it.

 

[Aquarian]

Mature judgement call bitches. (Because lets face it, certainty and going in circles only goes so far.)

^ ^ When it comes to moral/right/wrong, this is where I would be coming from.

There's something else for me that can guide my decisions that's related to what I might call my gut sense, but that's not about morality at all, and comes from perception, not assessment/judgement.

 

[OldManRivers]

There was a story in elementary school. Atreasure was hidden behind a locked gate. Only holy water blessed by a bishop would open the gate. Three people set out with a jug of holy water. The first one encountered an man begging for water, but drank the water himself and went on. He kiced a starving dog in his path and when he got to the gate an poured what water he had lef on the lock, he was consumed by fire. A second man did the same thing - and was eaten by a dragon. A young man in his earlt teens started our, gave water to th dying beggar, to the dog, and others -and arrived at the gate with an empty water. The gate keeper appeared as an angel and said no water denied to those in need was pure, but the young man's tears of compassion opened the gate -and the treasure was a blessing on his family.
Situation ethics with a medieval Catholic twist - but an illustration that morality can depend on the outcome - that no deed that caused harm or suffering of others is moral. Simplistic to a fault, but a starting point.

When I was in the army we had a draftee who refused to bear arms on religious principles but went through most of basic training and the company guidon bearer until reassigned to the medical corps. He went to Vietnam asa medic and was ultimately killed while trying to savethe lives of the others. He was openly ridiculed in basic, called a coward. He was not.

I recently watched the movie "Ali" staring Will Smith -a defining role and excellent movie - Ali refused to kill or to serve in the army. Moral? It was his idea of moral. It was right form him. In retrospect, maybe he was right.

There are some things that are clearly yes/no, and a lot of things in the grey area. All I can see is that each of us are untimately to choose and to bear the consequences of out choice.

 

[Vivid Melody]

Mainly 7. In what way does the decision benefit others (if at all) and in what way does the decision harm them (if at all) in the long run?Does it promote growth and well being? If not, then it's not the right thing to do. It has nothing to do with how it feels and everything to do with wisdom as you mentioned in 7. It's easy to make wrong choices by solely going off how the decision makes YOU feel while completely disregarding how the action will affect others. That being said, we're all inevitably subject to error and sometimes you have to make a mistake in order to learn what the right thing is.

 

[meiming8]

Very interesting topic. I have to think about it more, but generally I base my decisions on 6-10. I wouldn't say 6 is necessarily due to the ego; i.e 'I am doing this because it will have a positive impact on me' but rather an inherent sense of right and wrong. I chose 6 over 5 because it's not necessarily a set belief, but just a feeling. This sense is generally tied up with 7, so I guess overall it's a gut reaction of 'does this person need help?' and 'do my actions feel right?' Then I analyse them based on 8-10, where 10 seems to just be a combination of 8/9?

 

[_zac_]

Personally, I would say that it would be a combination of reasons 7 through 9. Generally, I try to take a position that will do the least harm, which, I believe, lines up with reason 7. I suppose that, in my mind, regardless of our individual beliefs, we all have to share the same space (relatively), and it just makes sense to create the least amount of friction possible. With that in mind, I try to take a "live and let live" sort of stance whenever possible.

I do, however, have some very well defined religious convictions, and those must always take precedence (that would be an example of the aforementioned convictions). It's not really a cultural thing, as is the case in reason 1, I was raised in an environment that held the same values, but, long ago, I began the practice of weighing those values against what I have learned to be be true, and the seem to hold up. That, then, is where reason number 9 comes into the picture. Yes, my moral stances are based on deeply held convictions, but those convictions, in themselves, have been well-reasoned. I'm not the sort of person to blindly follow whatever I am fed, I feel a profound need to analyze such things, and determine, for myself, if they have any credence. Actually, I suppose that's, essentially what reason 10 is.

I suppose that if one were to sum up my entire value system, it could be conveyed in this phrase: "don't be a douche-bag."

 

[Anonandon]

I'd say for me it's a combination of what I was raised with- what's been ingrained into my psyche, my spiritual beliefs- shaped by my ideals and philosophy, and my experiences- what I've observed and experienced.

I do believe most rights/wrongs are cultural, but I also believe some of the more universal rights/wrongs come from an absolute ideology: harmony. We're a social species and while we struggle with our primitive aggression, the framework we've created/found/adopted that allowed us to form massive groups is why we're here now, and I think if we continue in the direction of team work, understanding, and tolerance- the ideals civilization was built on- we'll be moving closer to the ideals of the cleric, scientist, philosopher alike.

In my humble opinion of course

 

[Lad]

They are good or right simply because I believe they are. This thinking is often considered narrow minded, perhaps even dangerous, but the truth I believe we are the God(s) of our own world and everything is subject to our interpretation. This sense of inward empowerment may exonerate us from feeling a sense of guilt or moral conflict when presented with choices. Whatever we wish for is so.

Awhile back when I met with someone who suffers from schizophrenia. He was quite a brilliant individual and he kind of reminds me of that movie "A Beautiful Mind" -- which I'll avoid spoiling. Anyways, he said to me if you look up to sky and see it as green every single day of your life, then one day someone tells you it's blue, would you believe them? Chances are, we'd think they were crazy. At the end of it all, we see what we see. From the outside looking in, there is no singular reality. To us though, we can only see that one reality that is in our heads.