Stepping outside morality

Hudson4ever

I am in my late teens and I have recently made some serious decisions regarding my outlook on life. Firstly, I have decided that there is no god, and that religious belief is as dangerous as it is irrational. Secondly I have come to realise that all actions are ulitimately self serving and that there is no such thing as a completely unselfish action.

With these new ideas still fresh in my mind, I have found another interesting question raising itself more and more often. Most people derive positive feelings when they act in a moral manner, they feel good about themselves. Furthermore, people experience negative emotions when they act in an immoral manner. These people would be highly unlikely to sieze a chance to improve their position in life if it meant they had to act in an immoral manner to do so. This is my question: Is it better to live a moral life in order to avoid the negative emotions associated with immorality, or do the benefits of acting in an immoral manner when it would be advantageous to do so outweigh any possible negatives???

Bottle_of_Smoke

A little from column A, a little from Column B.

I hope your personal issue is now resolved.

"the human conscience is a little voice that tells you someone might be watching."

Conor108

Oh depends on the situation I guess...I mean you don't want to be TOO immoral but you gotta look after number 1:D

Captain Chaos

This would probably be better suited to the Atheist forum. It may also give you different insights with other like minded members.

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/forumdisplay.php?f=614

Crumble Froo

maybe a philosophical forum either?

Hudson4ever

To say a little from column A, a little from column B is not only a cliche, it is also a cop out. How can that be the answer? It is a case of do I reject or embrace morality, sitting on the fence is not an option for me. The behaviour resulting from one decision would be diametrically opposed to that resulting from the other.

Hudson4ever

What is TOO immoral, and why not act this way?

DemocAnarchis

Hudson4ever wrote:

I have come to realise that all actions are ulitimately self serving and that there is no such thing as a completely unselfish action.

Hi, welcome to humanity, nice to have you here.

Sangre

Surely as an atheist you accept all morality is created by man not God. Why would this revelation change your views on morality? Do you think you should only be good for some afterlife rewards?

Tbh, immorality might serve you best in isolated incidents but being consistently immoral will only eventually harm you in the long run e.g. isolation, betrayal, jail etc.,

Victor

Hudson4ever wrote:

What is TOO immoral, and why not act this way?

If you are acting like a sociopath or psychopath, thats too far. Of course, many middle managers can be easily noted as having these tendencies.

I suspect if you only get a minor or temporary gain, for a substantial loss to someone else, that is also too far.

Hudson4ever

Morality is not created by man in the sense that we decided to invent it, morality is an off shoot of the complex process of evolution, it is something which evolved along with all other aspects of humanity. My decision to become an atheist is absolutely nothing to do with my views on morality, although I can see how you would think that. To answer your question, no, I do not think you should be goof for some afterlife rewards. I am wondering if I should be good becuase I haven't yet deicided it will allow me to have a better life, as it states in the original post

PeakOutput

are you talking immoral in a bill gates sense or immoral in a ted bundy sense???

Nevyn

Not all morality is found in religious reasons, sure religious reasons are used to back it up but a lot of it is about what is in socities and your own best intrest.

You can be non christian or not religious at all and still have morals.

Hudson4ever

It is known that psychopaths do benefit from their lack of conscience, this is actually something I have been very interested in as I study psych and have often been told that I am a psychopath, although the people who level this accusation at me are not really familiar with the true meaning of the word. So if psychopaths can benefit from a lack of conscience, is it logical to say I too would benefit from acting in a similar manner?

PeakOutput

there are ways to have a great life while upholding strong morals and it is not necessarily any harder than doing it with low morals.........

unfortunately i have column a and column b syndrome.............i do and think certain things that a lot of people would consider immoral(you know what im talking about) but i would not deliberately screw someone over for my own gain(generally)

Hudson4ever

In the Ted Bundy sense and the Bill Gate sense, although I think it is pretty clear that if I were to act in a manner similar to Ted Bundy it would not benefit my life.

PeakOutput

Hudson4ever wrote:

It is known that psychopaths do benefit from their lack of conscience, this is actually something I have been very interested in as I study psych and have often been told that I am a psychopath, although the people who level this accusation at me are not really familiar with the true meaning of the word. So if psychopaths can benefit from a lack of conscience, is it logical to say I too would benefit from acting in a similar manner?

please explain to me how a psycopath can benefit from their lack of consience in the long run?

also i dont think you get to decide this really as i would reckon its a kind of a nurture issue as in how you are brought up. sure u might say iv decided to be immoral now for my own good but if deep down you know what you are doing is wrong and you dont like it even tho the end result is a slightly better life you will drive yourself mad

Sangre

Well the fact that you accept morality as an offshoot of evolution means you should surely accept that in the long run it is benefical to be moral. Well, perhaps its more likely to say benefical to society to a whole than to individuals. That and the fact you probably don't accept having kids as being a success...

PeakOutput

Hudson4ever wrote:

In the Ted Bundy sense and the Bill Gate sense, although I think it is pretty clear that if I were to act in a manner similar to Ted Bundy it would not benefit my life.

well bill gates im sure starting off made some pretty immoral(maybe unethical is a better word) decisions and it benfitted him in the long run but i think the business world is slightly different. if you want to set up a business and be successful you are going to have a certain cut throat attitude or you wont survive. i dont know if it is immoral as such seen as it is necessary to survive

am i bovvered

op, from reading your own beliefs.....
if you derive hapiness from inner peace you should choose A
if you derive hapiness from a "position" in life you should choose B

Hudson4ever

Ohhh, close, close close to the heart of the issue, well done. That is an idea that is very interesting to me. In a society where it is normal to act in a moral manner, it may give you an advantage over a large percentage of that society to ignore morality in situations when it could would be beneficial to do so. (PS I said morality was an evolutionary off shoot rather than a product of evolution, it did not evolve in the same way our fear of death did. I cannot really explain it in sufficent detail to be convincing here due to issues regarding laziness on my part, but if you are familiar with the views of the great Richard Dawkins you will know what I am refering to)

Hudson4ever

How can psychopaths benefit from their lack of conscience? The situation of a psychopath is different than that of a person who doesn't suffer from this disorder, but psychopaths can do well in the business world provided other issues surrounding the disorder dont bring them down first. I have read this in psychological books, I am not just making this up. Try reading Mask of Sanity by Cleckly if you are interested in this idea or the disorder as a whole

PeakOutput

i would just like to point out to whoever moved this to religon and spirituality that this has nothing to do with either religon or spirituality

aidan24326

Hudson4ever wrote:

Secondly I have come to realise that all actions are ulitimately self serving and that there is no such thing as a completely unselfish action.

Not 100% true. Altruism has been observed in many species not just humans, so it clearly goes beyond morals and into selective advantage in an evolutionary sense. Whether that altruism is ultimately self-serving to the individual in some way is another matter, it's not necessarily always. You may be correct in saying that nobody does anything for no gain at all, but why you feel that should make us all abandon morality I'm not sure. We have our moral framework for as sure a reason as we have teeth and ears, that we may not fully understand it doesn't make that any less true.

PeakOutput

op while im sure you are right in saying that it can benefit some people it may not benefit you and I would say that the vast majority of successfull people are not immoral people. one does not automatically lead onto the other and being moral does not put you at any disadvantage in the long run imo

Hudson4ever

It is 100% true, altruism has been seen in other species, but it is still a selfish response. It is a complicated matter, but briefly: studies on this idea tend to show us that behaviour which appears to be of an altruistic nature is in fact, not. Treating other members of a population clearly benefits an individual as it this behaviour is reciprocated. This is just one example...

Hudson4ever

Being moral may not lead to disadvantaged as such, but it may prevent you from bettering you position in life

Victor

Moved from Personal Issues.

pH

I think there's too much emphasis put on morals and examining systems from which we devise them - let's be honest here one of the main arguments against an immoral life is that society just won't tolerate it - rape, murder and theft are pretty much out, because the rest of us don't want you to do them to us, and are going to punish you for doing them.

All this talk about morality is mostly just tedious philosophising, much of what you can and cannot do is laid down in our legislation, and all the deep thinking and pondering won't change any of that.

Whether you can come to terms with not hating yourself for stealing my car, or whether you'll bitterly regret is for years is of no importance to me - I'm coming after you with a bat to break your legs - I really couldn't care less how you feel.

PeakOutput

Hudson4ever wrote:

Being moral may not lead to disadvantaged as such, but it may prevent you from bettering you position in life

so may being immoral

eg; two people going for the job both exactly the same skills..........one attacks the other subtely for no reason to try and gain an advantage.........they are about to be offered the position when the boss realises what has happened and fires the immoral person for being a dickhead

also regarding the altruistic thing surely weather the benefit to yourself is known or not know at the time surely plays into it.

Hudson4ever

Well pH, I think it is pretty clear that coming after me with a bat and breaking my legs is laid down in out legislation, so you have already made a point against your primary one. I realise this is a childis remark to make but I couldn't resist. You are right in that it is illegal to perform many seriously immoral acts, but this doesn't stop people, that is obvious. However there are many actions, lying and using people for two simple examples, which are not illegal at all....