Reason vs. Morality

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Morality is a particular system of values and principles of conduct. The effect of morality on society was that people didn't have to have locks on their doors. Biblical morality remains constant.

On the other hand, reason is the motivation behind an action. It can encompass good or bad behavior. It can be manipulated.

There is plenty of reason out there to excuse the actions of man. And a lack of morality allows for any behavior of the one who has reasoned he is justified in committing the action.

For instance, a lack of morality is responsible for the "if it feels good do it" rational, and an increase in sexually transmitted diseases. A system of values and principles of conduct would prevent that result. Reason results in the unwed mother explosion. They reasoned it was a good idea at the time. Morals would prevent that kind of reasoning.......

The bolded fails as a post hoc fallacy.

What should be perceived as immoral is to compel subjective morality through secular law.

Just as immoral is the notion that a given belief, philosophy, or religion has a 'monopoly' on morality.

 

[PoliticalChic]

What have we given up by relying on the impulses of humanity to guide society?


11. Roger Scruton nails it:
"As God retreated from the world, people reached out for a rival source of membership, and national identity seemed to answer to the need. Although the French revolutionaries paid homage with their heads to the Citizen, the Constitution, and the Republic, their hearts were capture by the Nation,...defined in terms of a visceral membership that demanded one thing above all else- namely, human sacrifice."
Scruton, "The West and the Rest," p.43.


a. Saint Just (1794) more crudely said: “What constitutes a republic is the total destruction of everything opposed to it” (8 Ventôse).

Like an echo, Lenin repeats, “It would be the greatest stupidity and the most absurd utopia to suppose that the passage from capitalism to socialism would be possible without constraint and dictatorship” (May 28, 1917).



12. As one of his friends later recalled, "Vladimir Ilych Ulyanov (Lenin) had the courage to come out and say openly that famine would have numerous positive results...Famine, he explained....would bring about the next stage more rapidly, and usher in socialism, the stage that necessarily followed capitalism.
Famine would also destroy faith, not only in the tsar, but in God, too."
"The Black Book of Communism," p.123-124.


a. Reason as a guide? Here is one iteration of 'reason:'

"The present moment favors us....With the help of all those starving people who are starting to eat each other, who are dying by the millions, and whose bodies litter the roadside all over the country, it is now and only now, that we can-and therefore must- confiscate all church property with all the ruthless energy we can muster....Our only hope is the despair engendered in the masses by the famine, which will cause them to look at us in a favorable light or at the very least, with indifference." Lenin, March 19, 1922

Today, they say: "Never let a crisis go to waste."




If the guide for society is to be reason, or science, or some variation....anything but morality....the result is invariably death, slaughter, oppression, as human life has no value to those infused with the kind of ideology of the French Revolution, Mao's slaughter house, the communist revolution, the socialism of Cambodia, National Socialism, the absolute adherence to the doctrine of abortion, Ethiopia, Uganda, Rwanda, Sudan, etc.


History's lessons on display for all to see.....yet liars and simpletons deny and ignore them.

So.....reason? Or morality?



Or is just too darn late to care.

 

[Roudy]

Morals. "Reason" is the gibberish if those without the guts to do what is Right instead of what they Want.

I wish I had the time to indulge this thread, but on the surface, I would say without first having reason, there can be no morals, as I define those. ( The Golden Rule )

Agreed, rational thinking and ethics are the foundation for a free and healthy society.

 

[dilloduck]

Morals. "Reason" is the gibberish if those without the guts to do what is Right instead of what they Want.

I wish I had the time to indulge this thread, but on the surface, I would say without first having reason, there can be no morals, as I define those. ( The Golden Rule )

Agreed, rational thinking and ethics are the foundation for a free and healthy society.

and the ultimate goal of rational thinking is ?

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

1. Reason or Morality....Which one should guide society?
Either our ability to use logic and reason, or obedience to the morality forged in the crucible of millennia of human interactions and experience?

I know....both would be nice. But, with secularism in the ascendancy, the cultural battle rarely allows for compromise.
...

Liberals choose both. We do not recognize the polarized nation you've fought so hard to create.

Without reason there can be no true morality that would serve the interests of mankind.

Without reason we'd be left with religion and we can see where religion without reason gets us: Islamic extremists (beheadings of others for simple disagreements), Israeli Jewish extremists (execution of an innocent child as retribution), and Christian extremists (bombings and shootings in America)

 

[dilloduck]

1. Reason or Morality....Which one should guide society?
Either our ability to use logic and reason, or obedience to the morality forged in the crucible of millennia of human interactions and experience?

I know....both would be nice. But, with secularism in the ascendancy, the cultural battle rarely allows for compromise.
...

Liberals choose both. We do not recognize the polarized nation you've fought so hard to create.

Without reason there can be no true morality that would serve the interests of mankind.

Without reason we'd be left with religion and we can see where religion without reason gets us: Islamic extremists (beheadings of others for simple disagreements), Israeli Jewish extremists (execution of an innocent child as retribution), and Christian extremists (bombings and shootings in America)

Which system of morality is it that liberals adhere to ? How to they determine good from evil ?

 

[Derideo_Te]

1. Reason or Morality....Which one should guide society?
Either our ability to use logic and reason, or obedience to the morality forged in the crucible of millennia of human interactions and experience?

I know....both would be nice. But, with secularism in the ascendancy, the cultural battle rarely allows for compromise.
...

Liberals choose both. We do not recognize the polarized nation you've fought so hard to create.

Without reason there can be no true morality that would serve the interests of mankind.

Without reason we'd be left with religion and we can see where religion without reason gets us: Islamic extremists (beheadings of others for simple disagreements), Israeli Jewish extremists (execution of an innocent child as retribution), and Christian extremists (bombings and shootings in America)

Which system of morality is it that liberals adhere to ? How to they determine good from evil ?

Liberals are not a monolithic bloc like the TPers. They range across the spectrum of religions and degrees of devoutness and include agnostics and atheists. So simplistic concepts like "good and evil" are more nuanced depending upon the individual. The individual right to believe (or not) is what is respected amongst liberals. They all have their own moral codes but they don't go around condemning others who don't believe as they do as being "evil".

 

[dilloduck]

Liberals choose both. We do not recognize the polarized nation you've fought so hard to create.

Without reason there can be no true morality that would serve the interests of mankind.

Without reason we'd be left with religion and we can see where religion without reason gets us: Islamic extremists (beheadings of others for simple disagreements), Israeli Jewish extremists (execution of an innocent child as retribution), and Christian extremists (bombings and shootings in America)

Which system of morality is it that liberals adhere to ? How to they determine good from evil ?

Liberals are not a monolithic bloc like the TPers. They range across the spectrum of religions and degrees of devoutness and include agnostics and atheists. So simplistic concepts like "good and evil" are more nuanced depending upon the individual. The individual right to believe (or not) is what is respected amongst liberals. They all have their own moral codes but they don't go around condemning others who don't believe as they do as being "evil".

Nuanced to the degree where they don't mean anything ? How about secular people. What is there system of morality based on ? Feeling good ?

 

[PoliticalChic]

Liberals choose both. We do not recognize the polarized nation you've fought so hard to create.

Without reason there can be no true morality that would serve the interests of mankind.

Without reason we'd be left with religion and we can see where religion without reason gets us: Islamic extremists (beheadings of others for simple disagreements), Israeli Jewish extremists (execution of an innocent child as retribution), and Christian extremists (bombings and shootings in America)

Which system of morality is it that liberals adhere to ? How to they determine good from evil ?

Liberals are not a monolithic bloc like the TPers. They range across the spectrum of religions and degrees of devoutness and include agnostics and atheists. So simplistic concepts like "good and evil" are more nuanced depending upon the individual. The individual right to believe (or not) is what is respected amongst liberals. They all have their own moral codes but they don't go around condemning others who don't believe as they do as being "evil".

http://www.usmessageboard.com/law-and-justice-system/365044-liberal-attack-religion-again.html

 

[alang1216]

Religious folk often claim that the morality of God is eternal and unchanging. I just don't see that in the Bible.

The morality of the OT was based on the Israelite nation. The nation had to be pure to earn the benefits of God and any transgressors needed to be removed. The benefits being earthly success in war, no droughts, no plagues, etc. After being repeatedly conquered due to the nation's "sins" against God Judaism turned inward toward a more personal relationship with God. It was now up to the individual to be right with God since there really was no Israelite nation. I believe this was view of Judiasm that Jesus preached and this personal relationship with God became the basis for Christianity.

This is one example of how the morality of the Bible "evolved" over time. There are others but this shows me that the morality of the Bible was hardly a constant but was a reflection of mans society and values.

Just my two cents.

 

[dilloduck]

Liberals choose both. We do not recognize the polarized nation you've fought so hard to create.

Without reason there can be no true morality that would serve the interests of mankind.

Without reason we'd be left with religion and we can see where religion without reason gets us: Islamic extremists (beheadings of others for simple disagreements), Israeli Jewish extremists (execution of an innocent child as retribution), and Christian extremists (bombings and shootings in America)

Which system of morality is it that liberals adhere to ? How to they determine good from evil ?

Liberals are not a monolithic bloc like the TPers. They range across the spectrum of religions and degrees of devoutness and include agnostics and atheists. So simplistic concepts like "good and evil" are more nuanced depending upon the individual. The individual right to believe (or not) is what is respected amongst liberals. They all have their own moral codes but they don't go around condemning others who don't believe as they do as being "evil".

They much prefer to portray anyone with religious a belief as stupid and bigoted.

 

[PixieStix]

Well, it's wrong to hurt people without a damned good reason. Beyond that we can discuss things like no allowing laws to be taken into one's hands because of the breakdown in society that will arise in the presence of vigilantism or how the authority of the state means the state alone will have a monopoly on violence.

and that damned good reason is ?

They don't want to go to prison? Because the law of the land forbids murder? They will refuse to admit that they actually need a written code

 

[PratchettFan]

It needs both. Reason without morality and morality without reason are both justifications for a bloodbath.

 

[dilloduck]

It needs both. Reason without morality and morality without reason are both justifications for a bloodbath.

Try telling a liberal that. They would be perfect happily if religious people all left America.

 

[PratchettFan]

It needs both. Reason without morality and morality without reason are both justifications for a bloodbath.

Try telling a liberal that. They would be perfect happily if religious people all left America.

Most liberals are religious. There are as many on the right who would have atheists leave as there are those on the left who would have the religious leave. Neither side has any monopoly on idiots.

 

[G.T.]

Morals are arrived at through reason.

 

[dilloduck]

Morals are arrived at through reason.

Not the 10 Commandments

 

[G.T.]

Morals are arrived at through reason.

Not the 10 Commandments

Every one except those referring to God.

The ones referring to God were also arrived at through reason, just flawed reasoning or - perhaps successful reasoning if the intent was to create obedience.

 

[dilloduck]

Morals are arrived at through reason.

Not the 10 Commandments

Every one except those referring to God.

The ones referring to God were also arrived at through reason, just flawed reasoning or - perhaps successful reasoning if the intent was to create obedience.

That's not what Christians believe----other religions also believe that morality is an edict from a supreme being or beings. The were given specific instructions as to what was right and wrong---good or bad. Even told what to eat,-- ad infinitum.

 

[G.T.]

Not the 10 Commandments

Every one except those referring to God.

The ones referring to God were also arrived at through reason, just flawed reasoning or - perhaps successful reasoning if the intent was to create obedience.

That's not what Christians believe----other religions also believe that morality is an edict from a supreme being or beings. The were given specific instructions as to what was right and wrong---good or bad. Even told what to eat,-- ad infinitum.

I'm aware it's not what they believe.

I'm also aware of how to reason to each of the 10 commandments using logic, and so it's by no stretch of the imagination that they likely came from the reasoning of man. Not even close.