Morality in a teacher

[Syn7]

AH morality...subjective or objective, that is the question...

Subjective. Morality is a social construct, not on the level of something like the laws of thermodynamics.

[David Jamieson]

Subjective. Morality is a social construct, not on the level of something like the laws of thermodynamics.

I don't think the construct of morality is so far apart in society from one member to the next.

It appears as concrete in our systems of law.

IE: it's immoral to be a pedophile - which aligns with the law against it. Would anyone disagree that this is wrong?

It is immoral to be a thief - also alligns with Law. Is this wrong?

Killing is immoral in the boundaries of society, the exception being where a rampaging killer is killed in the process of stopping them. That can be debated as to whether or not that was moral though.

an so on and so forth.

I don't think Morality is vague at all. I think if you want to be clear on morality, you are better off looking at the rule of law under which you live. If there is none, I would agree that it is a lot more grey. But if you are like most members of this forum then you are American or Canadian or for the most part living in a western liberal democracy of some sort and there isn't a lot of people form elsewhere here.

So, in that respect, we share pretty close rule of law which is what really governs what is moral and what is not in our similar societies.

[LaterthanNever]

"seems to have integrity issues?"

If you have to say "seem", you are couching your intent behind being politically correct. Why not just SAY it? The instructors integrity is lacking.

His/her behavior is not ethical. While ethics is relative to some extent..I agree with Gene.

Is it immoral or lacking integrity..if lets say..an instructor smokes cigarettes during class while the class is performing chi gung exercises? If the instructor wants to destroy his health on his own time in private, that's his business.

But isn't chi-gung designed to be for health promoting effects? Isn't it accepted that inhaling carcinogenic agents vis a vis cigarette smoke non health promoting?

Some would say this is not having integrity. I agree.

Is it having integrity to lets say..tell students that one studied with a famous master and was certified in their style of martial arts when the famous master turns around and claims "I met him only once"? Not to me!

There are countless other things one could list.

[Syn7]

I don't think the construct of morality is so far apart in society from one member to the next.

It appears as concrete in our systems of law.

IE: it's immoral to be a pedophile - which aligns with the law against it. Would anyone disagree that this is wrong?

It is immoral to be a thief - also alligns with Law. Is this wrong?

Killing is immoral in the boundaries of society, the exception being where a rampaging killer is killed in the process of stopping them. That can be debated as to whether or not that was moral though.

an so on and so forth.

I don't think Morality is vague at all. I think if you want to be clear on morality, you are better off looking at the rule of law under which you live. If there is none, I would agree that it is a lot more grey. But if you are like most members of this forum then you are American or Canadian or for the most part living in a western liberal democracy of some sort and there isn't a lot of people form elsewhere here.

So, in that respect, we share pretty close rule of law which is what really governs what is moral and what is not in our similar societies.

I'm not saying it's vague. I'm saying it doesn't actually exist apart from ourselves. That makes it subjective.

Also I disagree on the agreement part. Yeah we have many common morals, but we have many that aren't. Like random sex is considered immoral by many, for example.

Some tribes have the young males suck off the elders in order to gain more virility. I see this as exploitive and immoral, clearly they do not.

How bout the death penalty? How bout cutting off a hand for stealing? Those are laws based on morals, yet many find them abominable and deeply immoral.


There are tons of examples.

Subjective....!!!

[David Jamieson]

Subjective....!!!

Not in the society you live in. It is clear cut rule of law that decides what is moral or immoral where you live and where I live.

No death penalty in Canada because collectively, we as a society decided it was immoral and so we don't do that under our rule of law and by that merit our shared morality.

What goes on in countries otherwise can be deemed immoral, even if it is not so in those societies in which the immorality is practiced or tolerated.

We could pretend to be subjective and do what we like, but lets not be surprised when we are arrested for that.

[Syn7]

Not in the society you live in. It is clear cut rule of law that decides what is moral or immoral where you live and where I live.

No death penalty in Canada because collectively, we as a society decided it was immoral and so we don't do that under our rule of law and by that merit our shared morality.

What goes on in countries otherwise can be deemed immoral, even if it is not so in those societies in which the immorality is practiced or tolerated.

We could pretend to be subjective and do what we like, but lets not be surprised when we are arrested for that.

Yeah but the construct of morality isn't limited to the great white north. If you hold your ideas of morality to others who feel different, then yeah they can be immoral. To you...

SUBJECTIVE....!!!

Perspective is subjective. As a species that has a built in desire to survive, we have come to some agreements in order to help ourselves. Don't stick me in the eye and I will give you the same courtesy. Don't take my shit and I won't take yours. All connected to desires we have collectively.

[Sima Rong]

Not in the society you live in. It is clear cut rule of law that decides what is moral or immoral where you live and where I live.

No death penalty in Canada because collectively, we as a society decided it was immoral and so we don't do that under our rule of law and by that merit our shared morality.

What goes on in countries otherwise can be deemed immoral, even if it is not so in those societies in which the immorality is practiced or tolerated.

We could pretend to be subjective and do what we like, but lets not be surprised when we are arrested for that.

I'd like to believe that there is a general human sense of morality, but laws are something different.
As much as I would like to feel that I am in a civilized society, I know that there are many people who get away with what I would personally consider immoral behaviour because of laws, and that many laws exist to control people who don't have the power to break them.

All the same, I'm glad there are laws. Just not all of them. Laws are not morality of themselves.Many laws are just a contract like for a piece of new software that you ignore and skip through to agree with for the sake of living in a society.

We could absolutely be arrested for doing something in one civilized society which most people in another different civilized society consider to be perfectly moral.

[David Jamieson]

Morality is interesting, because I believe it is not only just learned but it is also intuitive due to emotional content.

We are not only our minds, we are our hearts as well and while we use our minds to impede emotion to further some other action, that emotion still happens.

What I believe this organic reaction to be and what it is are two different things I suppose, but nevertheless, there it is. I am compelled to feel compassionate and to act morally towards someone in dire need.

[sanjuro_ronin]

Subjective. Morality is a social construct, not on the level of something like the laws of thermodynamics.

A hot topic of debate in some circles.
While most will agree that certain aspects of morality are indeed cultural ones, most will also agree that, regardless of society and culture, there are things that everyone may view as universally wrong.
What those things are does, however, differentiate between culture BUT that all agree with is a wrong and right, yes.

So, while morals may be subjective, the notion of right and wrong exists in a universal way.

[RenDaHai]

Subjective. Morality is a social construct, not on the level of something like the laws of thermodynamics.

It is precisely like Thermodynamics.

Moral laws could be scientifically derived if we knew enough about the construction of the human mind.

There are absolutes. All humans are extremely similar machines to one another.

The deep conclusions of morality are made inevitable by the human condition.

The whole purpose of Religion and philosophy and spirituality is to assist us consciously identify Vice from virtue, right from wrong, absolute from relative. Truth from illusion.

Of course there are many relative things but all of them are created by the human mind. The human mind fractures things into Yin and Yang by its confused condition but the truth is absolute and unchanging. And there IS truth to the human condition.

Sorry to sound religious and preachy, I wasn't trying to.

[Scott R. Brown]

.....most will also agree that, regardless of society and culture, there are things that everyone may view as universally wrong.
What those things are does, however, differentiate between culture BUT that all agree with is a wrong and right, yes.

I think that all peoples consider "right and wrong", but specifically what is right and what is wrong does vary from culture to culture.

So, the IDEA of "right and wrong" is universal, but just what specifically is right or wrong varies.

[David Jamieson]

There's a few things I've learned whilst travelling around the sun:

People in general have a tendency to be afraid of leading, being accountable for their actions and taking responsibility. this is reflected every day throughout society and through our individual actions or lack of them in a given circumstance.

There are very very very few people who actually posses this virtue most of the time. I am not one of them and don't claim to be, but that I am aware, for now is enough in my opinion and regard.

Another thing is that it is rare that someone will stand up and do the right thing for the sake of it. It would appear we will wait a long long time before anyone including ourselves does this without ulterior motivations.

Persecution, prosecution and keeping the light off oneself seems to be the way of us.

I personally am disheartened by it all.

[sanjuro_ronin]

I think that all peoples consider "right and wrong", but specifically what is right and what is wrong does vary from culture to culture.

So, the IDEA of "right and wrong" is universal, but just what specifically is right or wrong varies.

Correct and I agree and this is where religion comes in, to make a more concrete statement about what is right or wrong.
Religion and civilization have gone down hand-in-hand through the ages and it is debatable about which beget which BUT, IMO, I think religion lead to civilization.

[sanjuro_ronin]

There's a few things I've learned whilst travelling around the sun:

People in general have a tendency to be afraid of leading, being accountable for their actions and taking responsibility. this is reflected every day throughout society and through our individual actions or lack of them in a given circumstance.

There are very very very few people who actually posses this virtue most of the time. I am not one of them and don't claim to be, but that I am aware, for now is enough in my opinion and regard.

Another thing is that it is rare that someone will stand up and do the right thing for the sake of it. It would appear we will wait a long long time before anyone including ourselves does this without ulterior motivations.

Persecution, prosecution and keeping the light off oneself seems to be the way of us.

I personally am disheartened by it all.

Sadly, there is much truth to that.

[Scott R. Brown]

Correct and I agree and this is where religion comes in, to make a more concrete statement about what is right or wrong.
Religion and civilization have gone down hand-in-hand through the ages and it is debatable about which beget which BUT, IMO, I think religion lead to civilization.

I don't know about that. In the Western Tradition of the peoples of the book and Buddhism, morality and religion are connected, but not for most other religions.

In the ancient world morality was distinctly separate from religion.