The Morality Crusade - is it a lost cause?

[KayTwee]

Quote by: Morality Games Genes are primary determinants of temperment, which influences behavior. For example, they exert strong influence on whether a person has an an aggressive or passive approach to life. Irregardless of whatever moral theories they affiliate themselves with, what a person judges to be good, bad, or evil (how they use their conscience) will depend much on the types of behavior they exhibit.

I agree with you that we can be genetically predisposed to certain temperaments, though I will add the caveat that we are never obligated by our genes to act in any particular way.

However, I strongly disagree with your first statement that a person's conscience is due to a mix of genetics and personal experience; our conscience is a function of our morality and our morality is learned behaviour.

[Morality Games]

Quote by: KayTwee I agree with you that we can be genetically predisposed to certain temperaments, though I will add the caveat that we are never obligated by our genes to act in any particular way. However, I strongly disagree with your first statement that a person's conscience is due to a mix of genetics and personal experience; our conscience is a function of our morality and our morality is learned behaviour.

A person's conscience is their sense of what is right and wrong, and yes, genes influence that from conception onward. There is no such thing as a behavior is completely enviromental or completely genetic.

[KayTwee]

Quote by: Morality Games A person's conscience is their sense of what is right and wrong, and yes, genes influence that from conception onward. There is no such thing as a behavior is completely enviromental or completely genetic.

The only way that genes influence a person's conscience is in the case of a serious mental disorder that prohibits their rational thought.

I don't disagree with you that behaviour is a function of personality and environment, but that has nothing to do with morality. Specific behaviours are not synonymous with specific moralities; people act against their own conscience all the time, that's why they feel remorse.

[Morality Games]

Since you won't just stop.

I agree with you that we can be genetically predisposed to certain temperaments

The logic of your position is unsound. If you agree that genes effect temperment, then how could you disagree they effect conscience? Obviously, an aggressive extrovert will develop a different idea of the morality of aggressiveness than a passive, introverted person. You insist morals are learned, and temperment certainly effects interpretation (learning) of sensory information.

If you manage to somehow persuade an aggressive extrovert to be Christian, then you might accomplish making them feel shame, which might induce them to channel their aggressiveness inward some of the time, which will make them sick. In contrast, if you make a passive introvert Christian, then you might accomplish making them feel pride.

Frankly, a more common reaction from a Christian aggressive extrovert would probably be completely overlooking the fact their behavior contradicts biblical precepts by looking outward, at other people, instead of at themselves.

[KayTwee]

Quote by: Morality Games Since you won't just stop. The logic of your position is unsound. If you agree that genes effect temperment, then how could you disagree they effect conscience? Obviously, an aggressive extrovert will develop a different idea of the morality of aggressiveness than a passive, introverted person. You insist morals are learned, and temperment certainly effects interpretation (learning) of sensory information. If you manage to somehow persuade an aggressive extrovert to be Christian, then you might accomplish making them feel shame, which might induce them to channel their aggressiveness inward some of the time, which will make them sick. In contrast, if you make a passive introvert Christian, then you might accomplish making them feel pride. Frankly, a more common reaction from a Christian aggressive extrovert would probably be completely overlooking the fact their behavior contradicts biblical precepts by looking outward, at other people, instead of at themselves.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but the whole purpose of this forum is debate. I don't agree with you, therefore I continue. If you don't appreciate criticism of your statements, maybe you're in the wrong place?

That being said, it occurs to me that you are commenting on morality as defined as one's conformity to rules of conduct whereas I was commenting on it as one's system of morals (as it is more commonly used) therefore moving forward I will eschew the general term "morality" in favor of a bit of specificity.. perhaps that will allay confusion. : )

Once again, I agree that genetics do play a part in how we act, but I still maintain genetics do not play a part in what we are taught and what we observe which is how we acquire our system of morals. How we act after the fact is indeed dependent on our personality which, of course, must be due in part to our genetic makeup.

As for Christians (and the disciples most other religions, for that matter).. it's my general opinion that they almost always overlook the fact that their behaviour contradicts biblical precepts and prefer to focus on what everyone else is doing. Rather ironic that, given that judgment should be reserved for the god they claim to serve, but it never seems to stop them.

[Morality Games]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but the whole purpose of this forum is debate.

Yes, but there is a reason why we aren't debating about whether or not it is possible for a square-circle to exist, that being it is unconstructive. When the watercoloring behind a person's thinking appears to be the function of genes is that they set us up to drift along in a fluid-like, floating free state, a feeling of hopelessness wells up within me.

I don't agree with you, therefore I continue. If you don't appreciate criticism of your statements, maybe you're in the wrong place?

I think you are reading too much into my lonely little statement. Criticisms of what I say don't bother me much one way or the other, as after years of online debating I have grown accustomed to the worst. What bothers be is that I feel obligated to keep talking in situations like this where I would prefer to just go away and do something constructive, like read Spinoza's Ethics (which I am staring at pretty hard right now).

Once again, I agree that genetics do play a part in how we act, but I still maintain genetics do not play a part in what we are taught and what we observe which is how we acquire our system of morals. How we act after the fact is indeed dependent on our personality which, of course, must be due in part to our genetic makeup.

You are under the false impression that people actually have a system of morals. Moral systems exist, but most people don't comprehend them as systems, and that is not the kind of influence they have on behavior. Ask anyone on the street, "What is the most attractive feature of your moral system?" and they'll go, "HUH?" How a child or newcomer to the faith interprets the various pieces of information they receive concerning the "Christian system" depends on the kind of character their genes endow on them.

'Character' is largely determined by genes (details overlooked and exceptions allowed, such as when the brain suffers damage), but the manner in which an individual expresses or represses their character is lagely a matter of enviroment. Hence, the 'character' of the human species in embodied in our genes, but our 'acting' depends on our specific conditions.

'Personality' is a view of the mind which aims to comprehend particular patterns in a being's style of sensing, perceiving, thinking, emoting, feeling, memory (they are likelier to remember good times or bad times?), how influential their instincts are, how all of this plays into their behavior, and things like that.

[KayTwee]

Quote by: Morality Games When the watercoloring behind a person's thinking appears to be the function of genes is that they set us up to drift along in a fluid-like, floating free state, a feeling of hopelessness wells up within me.

I'm sorry, English is my primary language but I have no idea what you're getting at there. Typo?

Quote by: Morality Games Since you won't just stop.

Quote by: Morality Games I think you are reading too much into my lonely little statement.

I don't think I did, actually.

Your initial statement belies a smidgen of hubris and I have to say, it borders on insulting. I am willing to give you the benefit of the doubt though as tone is difficult to ascertain in text.

Quote by: Morality Games Criticisms of what I say don't bother me much one way or the other, as after years of online debating I have grown accustomed to the worst. What bothers be is that I feel obligated to keep talking in situations like this where I would prefer to just go away and do something constructive, like read Spinoza's Ethics (which I am staring at pretty hard right now).

Please don't feel obligated to continue on my behalf, I'm more than willing to agree to disagree.

I would highly encourage you to pick up Spinoza in favor of debate; in favor of most things, actually. I spent 45 minutes last night fishing Bergson out of the tidy messes that are my bookshelves so perhaps we'll both benefit from this in some regard.

I will take your lack of response to my assertion that we were arguing separate definitions as your agreement with my conclusion on that point.