Why is it immoral?

Pendlum

Cherished Member
Verified
Gold
Joined
Feb 24, 2008
Posts
2,138
Media
44
Likes
339
Points
403
Location
Washington, USA
Verification
View
Sexuality
80% Straight, 20% Gay
Gender
Male
Because bad and immoral are linked. It's like asking why is doing bad things considered not good? If you acknowledge that things can be immoral, then you are basically acknowledging that there are bad things, and people can be bad. Moral is considered good, thus immoral is bad. Linked. What is good and what is bad are subject to the collective conscience and ideas of the people.
 

Bbucko

Cherished Member
Joined
Oct 28, 2006
Posts
7,232
Media
8
Likes
326
Points
208
Location
Sunny SoFla
Sexuality
90% Gay, 10% Straight
Gender
Male
Well, if you are a sociopath who manifests extreme antisocial attitudes and behavior and a lack of conscience, then it is not possible to answer your question.

Exactly: we need the OP's definition of "moral", "immoral", "good" and "bad" before understanding the meaning and intent of his post. In and of themselves, these terms are so relative as to be practically meaningless without an understand of his POV.

FWIW, I've been called "immoral" by lots of people who don't understand my ethical standards, though more generally I prefer the term "depraved", myself :cool:, yet no one has called me "bad" since I turned ten or so, except to call me a "bad boy", which wasn't a negative critique.
 

D_Tim McGnaw

Account Disabled
Joined
Aug 30, 2009
Posts
5,420
Media
0
Likes
111
Points
133
Exactly: we need the OP's definition of "moral", "immoral", "good" and "bad" before understanding the meaning and intent of his post. In and of themselves, these terms are so relative as to be practically meaningless without an understand of his POV.

FWIW, I've been called "immoral" by lots of people who don't understand my ethical standards, though more generally I prefer the term "depraved", myself :cool:, yet no one has called me "bad" since I turned ten or so, except to call me a "bad boy", which wasn't a negative critique.



Kindred spirits we two :wink:
 

B_subgirrl

Sexy Member
Joined
May 15, 2010
Posts
5,547
Media
0
Likes
34
Points
73
Location
NSW, Australia
Sexuality
99% Straight, 1% Gay
Gender
Female
Exactly: we need the OP's definition of "moral", "immoral", "good" and "bad" before understanding the meaning and intent of his post. In and of themselves, these terms are so relative as to be practically meaningless without an understand of his POV.

FWIW, I've been called "immoral" by lots of people who don't understand my ethical standards, though more generally I prefer the term "depraved", myself :cool:, yet no one has called me "bad" since I turned ten or so, except to call me a "bad boy", which wasn't a negative critique.

Then of course, there's the difference between immoral and illegal.
 

Bbucko

Cherished Member
Joined
Oct 28, 2006
Posts
7,232
Media
8
Likes
326
Points
208
Location
Sunny SoFla
Sexuality
90% Gay, 10% Straight
Gender
Male
Then of course, there's the difference between immoral and illegal.

I've said many times that just because something's legal doesn't make it right any more than making something illegal makes it wrong. Then I quickly add that I've never been arrested :cool:
 

paigexox

Sexy Member
Joined
Oct 12, 2010
Posts
1,048
Media
37
Likes
56
Points
83
Age
38
This reminds me of a Philosophy class I took called "Right & Wrong." I was always a big fan of relativism when calling topics like these into question, but maybe that was just the lazy way out. :smile:
 

B_subgirrl

Sexy Member
Joined
May 15, 2010
Posts
5,547
Media
0
Likes
34
Points
73
Location
NSW, Australia
Sexuality
99% Straight, 1% Gay
Gender
Female
I've said many times that just because something's legal doesn't make it right any more than making something illegal makes it wrong. Then I quickly add that I've never been arrested :cool:

*giggle* :biggrin1:


This reminds me of a Philosophy class I took called "Right & Wrong." I was always a big fan of relativism when calling topics like these into question, but maybe that was just the lazy way out. :smile:

I'm another fan of relativism (although I'm also lazy :tongue:).
 

SilverTrain

Legendary Member
Joined
Aug 25, 2008
Posts
4,623
Media
82
Likes
1,329
Points
333
Location
USA
Sexuality
No Response
Gender
Male
I'm totally lazy. And so it's a matter of course, that this entire thread is a waste of time, as there was no legitimate query put forth initially, via the OP.

I yawn in yer general die-rect-ion.
 

petite

Expert Member
Joined
Mar 3, 2010
Posts
7,199
Media
2
Likes
146
Points
208
Sexuality
No Response
Gender
Female
It would seem that in order to make the judgment that a person is a very bad man, you would have to understand why it would be immoral, and I don't know how you could be capable of making one judgment but not the other.

How many surrealists does it take to screw in a lightbulb? Fish!
 

SilverTrain

Legendary Member
Joined
Aug 25, 2008
Posts
4,623
Media
82
Likes
1,329
Points
333
Location
USA
Sexuality
No Response
Gender
Male
There is a level of amorality that would be considered sociopathic.

Is this bad?

Not if you want that person to fight your wars or work on Wall Street.

Really? Current worldwide financial crisis notwithstanding, then?

My Lai Massacre?

I would think the best warriors would be paragons of virtue. But what do I know?
 

Drifterwood

Superior Member
Joined
Jun 14, 2007
Posts
18,678
Media
0
Likes
2,815
Points
333
Location
Greece
I would think the best warriors would be paragons of virtue. But what do I know?

It is well known that most conscripted soldiers will not shoot to kill. It is easier to let someone else do the dirty business of taking life. I believe these studies date back to the US Civil War.

Any decent army profiles their hardcore troops to find those who will kill without a second thought or can be easily trained to. Chivalry it ain't.
 

SilverTrain

Legendary Member
Joined
Aug 25, 2008
Posts
4,623
Media
82
Likes
1,329
Points
333
Location
USA
Sexuality
No Response
Gender
Male
It is well known that most conscripted soldiers will not shoot to kill. It is easier to let someone else do the dirty business of taking life. I believe these studies date back to the US Civil War.

Any decent army profiles their hardcore troops to find those who will kill without a second thought or can be easily trained to. Chivalry it ain't.

And these studies indicated that sociopaths were the best soldiers?