When does morality start to die?

[Samildanach]

I was musing today about morality and its relationship to wealth and comfort.
It seems to me that societies which are for a better word poorer or maybe less developed but NOT destitute (ie where everyone has a basic level of living) seem to be relatively highly moral societies. Everyone needs to come together and pool resources if they want to accomplish any larger projects and because of this 'forced cooperation' a more moral societal structure develops.

However if you look at the other two extremes

1. A destitute society, people are so desperate for resources that they often ignore morality altogether (not necessarily out of choice) because necessity demands it ie people who rob and kill for resources.

and

2. A highly wealthy society where traditional morality begins to fail because people have so much their minds turn towards doing exactly what THEY want and f!"k anybody else, it leads away from societal cohesion as well which leads to moral fragmentation.

So what happens when EVERYONE has so much wealth (as standards of wealth are increasing across the world) that collective morality is abandoned altogether?

[tinybear]

Morality dies when everybody thinks he/she has an inalienable right to do and say whatever he/she pleases.

[Athena]

Quote by: tinybear Morality dies when everybody thinks he/she has an inalienable right to do and say whatever he/she pleases.

Thank you tinybear. However, I also agree with Samildanach that this is most apt to be the case when social order is destroyed by lack of resources or an abundance, and it is also destroyed when cultural contact destroys the culture of indigenous people. We seriously need to be mindful of this when we attempt to impose our culture Muslim countries. Cultural contact that changed the way of life of indigenous people on the islands, in Africa or Australia, or US devasted social order of these people, and this causes their families of fall apart and the whole fabric of their societies unravels, and this can be so disorientating to individuals that they die, they just loose the will to live and die. It is really a terrible thing.

We should have been mindful of the economic componet when using economic warfare to destroy the USSR. When communism in the USSR collapse the struggle for survival unleashed some terrible immorality, and I wonder how moral it was for us to cause this?

During the 1970 when I had the "meaningful experience" of poverty that I thought white, middle class people could not have, those who made and enforced laws became my enemy. I experienceed black humor, that is a morbid humor. I think someone misunderstood my earlier explanation of this, because I said when I returned to college, I realized I was black. I didn't mean I am genetic of the black race, I meant that experience of poverty so changed my perspective, I could see how WHITE my college education was. It is like middle class white people are in a fantasy they call reality. Oh yes, there is relationship between money and morality. Middle class morality is exactly that, middle class.

[Samildanach]

Indeed....I also wonder what causes morality to form in the first place. I am hypothesising it is forced co-operation but any insights anyone else has would be good.

[underbear1]

When does morality start to die?

I believe it happened January first 2001, a new president and his Nazi henchmen ushered in that era.

[G. Adams]

Quote by: Samildanach I was musing today about morality and its relationship to wealth and comfort. It seems to me that societies which are for a better word poorer or maybe less developed but NOT destitute (ie where everyone has a basic level of living) seem to be relatively highly moral societies. Everyone needs to come together and pool resources if they want to accomplish any larger projects and because of this 'forced cooperation' a more moral societal structure develops. However if you look at the other two extremes 1. A destitute society, people are so desperate for resources that they often ignore morality altogether (not necessarily out of choice) because necessity demands it ie people who rob and kill for resources. and 2. A highly wealthy society where traditional morality begins to fail because people have so much their minds turn towards doing exactly what THEY want and f!"k anybody else, it leads away from societal cohesion as well which leads to moral fragmentation. So what happens when EVERYONE has so much wealth (as standards of wealth are increasing across the world) that collective morality is abandoned altogether?

It is the death of the community that, in my opinion, has caused the collapse of individual morality. In the past, if you stole or got violent without a good reason, the gossip would go around and your reputation would be in tatters by the end of the week. The could cost you your job, your business, your family etc You could pretty much have to move away from your town and join another, not a great experience when you move to a new community that doesn't yet know or trust you.

These days, there's no community, so you don't have a reputation, so you feel free to be an ass. You can see how this works when people get into new communities, like a tight office situation. They change themselves to match the new group, and they don't do things out of line that result in them being ostracised from the group. However, outside of the office they are still assholes.

[Osborn F Enready]

Morality dies when you attempt to project YOUR morality onto another BEING.

Morality is different to all individuals.

[tinybear]

Morality is a uniform standard. Once uniformity is gone, there is no longer any agreed moral standard and, by definition, morality dies.

[Osborn F Enready]

Morality can only be UNIFORM in the individual, or in small collectives with membership BASED ON THOSE MORALS. (religion, cultism, etc.)

There is no such thing as a "universal moral standard" like there is a "unified standard of weights and measures".

Why is that? Because weights and measures are creations of man that have no "fundamentalist" extreme, and it is mutually beneficial to all to be able ot use weights and measures for trade and pricing. Morals on the other hand, are based in upbringing, conditioning, teaching and indoctrination. They are as diverse as the day is long, and there will NEVER be a uniform standard for morals and/or "right and wrong" since we are all FAR to diverse, unless we can ALL accept that people are individuals, and that is where the line of "morality" should be drawn.

Morality is only valid to the holder of said morals.

[underbear1]

Quote by: G. Adams Quote by: Samildanach I was musing today about morality and its relationship to wealth and comfort. It seems to me that societies which are for a better word poorer or maybe less developed but NOT destitute (ie where everyone has a basic level of living) seem to be relatively highly moral societies. Everyone needs to come together and pool resources if they want to accomplish any larger projects and because of this 'forced cooperation' a more moral societal structure develops. However if you look at the other two extremes 1. A destitute society, people are so desperate for resources that they often ignore morality altogether (not necessarily out of choice) because necessity demands it ie people who rob and kill for resources. and 2. A highly wealthy society where traditional morality begins to fail because people have so much their minds turn towards doing exactly what THEY want and f!"k anybody else, it leads away from societal cohesion as well which leads to moral fragmentation. So what happens when EVERYONE has so much wealth (as standards of wealth are increasing across the world) that collective morality is abandoned altogether? It is the death of the community that, in my opinion, has caused the collapse of individual morality. In the past, if you stole or got violent without a good reason, the gossip would go around and your reputation would be in tatters by the end of the week. The could cost you your job, your business, your family etc You could pretty much have to move away from your town and join another, not a great experience when you move to a new community that doesn't yet know or trust you. These days, there's no community, so you don't have a reputation, so you feel free to be an ass. You can see how this works when people get into new communities, like a tight office situation. They change themselves to match the new group, and they don't do things out of line that result in them being ostracised from the group. However, outside of the office they are still assholes.

Speak for yourself MY COMMUNITY is stronger than ever. But I won't go into further details because any mention of something gay derails this forum's threads.

[phoenix_fire]

Quote by: Osborn F Enready Morality dies when you attempt to project YOUR morality onto another BEING. Morality is different to all individuals.

Be careful. That's how things like genocide are justified.

[SoccerfreakAB2]

Quote by: Osborn F Enready Morality dies when you attempt to project YOUR morality onto another BEING. Morality is different to all individuals.

Bingo Ozzy, we all have our own projections of what a good life is for ourselves and for humanity. Pushing it on someone is the breakdown in all justification for any single or universal moral duty.

[SoccerfreakAB2]

Quote by: phoenix_fire Be careful. That's how things like genocide are justified.

He said it ends when you push your morality onto others (i.e. genocide).

[G. Adams]

Quote by: phoenix_fire Be careful. That's how things like genocide are justified.

No, that's how genocide is ignored. It takes the opposite of such tolerance, in cultural imperialism, that justifies genocide.