Is morality a social construct?

Is morality a social construct?

Other urls found in this thread:

youtu.be/KCwG13K7TAo
twitter.com/NSFWRedditImage

are you?

yes

It's called manners. Either you have it, or you are trash as a person.

Yes. Better fuck your mom now.

I think many morals are social constructs, but some come from our evolution.

Prior to society, I imagine we had really basic morality like don't kill your kids, don't be a traitor to the tribe, provide for your family, etc.

*BRRAAAAAPPP*

No, but your paternal figure is.

What are 'manners' ?

If you go to a third world country, the concept of a queue is non-existent. If you say to the natives, have some manners - they will look at you like a crazy person.

yes, except western morality which is based on calculus science and bacon :3

Yes, but that doesn't really matter.

The idea that something is invalid because it's a "social construct" is absurd and leads only to a decline towards savagery.

Yes, so is clothing and language.

Morality is literally a majority agreement. Anything else that attempts to stipulate what is moral already assumes it has the majority.

Ethics are another matter since they can be measured without factoring morality. As it concerns the individual alone.

For example pedophilia could be moral if the majority agree it is ok, but it would still be unethical since it violates the child's agency or lack there of since they arguably can't make an informed choice on the matter.

Some of it is

There is a lot of philosophical controversy on the subject and no consensus as of now

I think that the basics are necessary for us to exist as a species though or else we would have killed each other and our kids long ago

not true
dont take Sup Forums banter as reality

Not social but religious, our beliefs give us ideas and rules to live by as to achieve the greater goal in said belief like heaven. It's like a reward system but I'm ok with it since I'm religious

and that is part of the reason why they remain third world countries

tell me there's a thread/subreddit for this

Morality exists in nature via the common understanding that things go better if we work together. Which is a tribal behavior. If it doesn't benefit or endangers the tribe then it gets pushed out of practice or acceptance. This could include the understand of working with other tribes if there is mutual benefit.

Do these people think the bottom of their shoes are clean, and that seats are self-cleaning?

Scum. Subhuman scum.

I prefer to keep the thread on-topic.

DUDE NIHILISM LMAO

Yep I agree with that 100%.

To be honest though who cares if it's a construct or not, if it's worked for hundreds of years in the past it's not going to stop working

Some are, some are not.

...

>women sitting in this position

I think everything is a social construct...or could be construed that way after enough 'dorm room' banter and "reasoning."

OP I heard that gravity was a social construct so try that and report back.

Kek

Objectively speaking, there is no meaningful event; so yes, morality is entirely a construct of the mind.

This is actually the FIRST rule of their own rule book, there for everything they say after that, patriarchy, oppression, etc is fake too. What a relief!

>he fell for the gravity meme
sad

They're presenting
you're a beta cuck if you don't fuck them

It only works because nature favors balance. If more and more practices or beliefs that are unfavorable to the species are introduced there are two outcomes.

Either the species does what it needs to to stop and remove these unfavorable practices or beliefs, or the species eventually ceases to exist having destroyed itself. Either way balance is achieved again.

Which is why we have ethics as a sounding board to help identify things that are unfavorable even if the majority of the species goes nuts.

in a legal sense yes, in an objective sense probably a mixture of social constructs and the evolution of the human mind to create successful and stable societies.

>fell
kek

>A woman can't safely do that in Berlin or Cologne any more

it's dem timbs

Religion is a social construct though.

True morality is simply holding uprighteousness as a foundational virtue and guiding principle, too many posts focus on the image and the mental construct of manners within society. Morality is in the intention of the act, therefore bad manners can be considered offensive and degrading to society as a whole, yet we've found that behaviour is often acquired and learned without being intrinsically innate to our existence as human beings, therefore ignorance, nonchalance and even subversiveness can be considered as mere reactions or revolutions towards an established constructed dogmatism; in essence, behavior and essentially juding behavior which doesn't directly affect one personally can be a superficiality of the perception of its occurence within society, which is a personal construct within a framework. Morality having a sense of omniscient righteousness within the intention in a course, versus a determined judgment and perspective, serves as an inner guide of righteousness because for what you know, one might be held in the highest regard by who matters most and disdained by the majority that follows each other often not always within the righteous path but more often within an agreed principle to function or be perceived, so in other words to find a compromise, I would say, it's moral to be sensible enough to view morality as a social construct worthy to be held in regard without affecting truthfulness of ones very own being. /long winded post

If you're a gaytheist, then yes. If you're a religitard, then no.

good
obscenity laws exist for a reason

>having a discussion of morality and not deciding on a working definition before the debate

wew lad

No one ever drinks with me :(

> principles concerning the distinction between right and wrong or good and bad behavior.

wew lad did you crack open a dictionary

Morality is a will to power construct.

>third world country

Thanks for proving his point.

No. It's decreed by God according to the laws of nature.

>good
>bad
>right
>wrong

That bitch has a nice pussy imo

> differences in perspective based on the principles that make up morality

friend have you ever taken a course in the subject?

Yes.
What does it change?

>falling for the college jew

next you'll say a degree in this shit means anything

>posting creepshots of highschool girls

M

>Hitler: Christianity is the basis of the entire morality of Germany
youtu.be/KCwG13K7TAo

can someone remove this guy's leg from the picture, it kinda ruins it.

not at all but morality has a definition friend and it is evident from the definition that the principles you choose to work with define right and wrong. You evaluate moral principles on a few criteria such as usefulness in moral problem solving, universality ect

>you will never fuck your girlfriend after a tough day at school

O

to you

Just crop the pic yourself, casual-sama.

savagery is a social construct.

Morality is a spook.

Shit teir pussy, m8

Of course it is, read Hobbes.

It's a contract that we implicitly enter into with each other.

There are so many contradicting intuitions on right and wrong that you stall right out the gates though

what is rightness and what is wrongness? how do we sense these things and decide which is which?

people get so eager to have the argument that they don't even check to see if the terms they are debating make any sense at all

No it's scientific.

If you fuck shit up then there's no incentive for me to not fuck shit up. So then there's a greater risk of us both dying.

The only thing holding society together is our needs and because we've got a good military and nukes.

It's a bit late for morality now so who cares.

There are probably some people here that can do it effortlessly, it would take me like 15 minutes to do that, time better spent shitposting.

I just told you what is moral is right what is immoral is wrong. Morality is principles concerning the distinction between right and wrong or good and bad behavior. Morality exists because that is what our laws and society are based around. Whether or not these moral principles are "correct" or not is another question entirely.

Obviously.

Insofar as we're discussing sociocultural values yes, morality is mostly fabricated -- but the foundation undergirding these constructed moral platforms are universal senses of intuition that are innate to all human beings. Care, fairness, liberty, loyalty, authority, and purity are the six foundations, and these can be observed in a myriad of ways, but it's easy to extract these universals using basic computer modeling on large groups of people over many different societies, where patterns will emerge.

What's interesting is what happens when culture and morality are degraded and "secularism" appears. Depression, nihilism, and degeneracy plague the society. The group loses its cohesion and impetus, which is happening all across the West.

Nietzsche says that when God dies, an individual is stripped of their illusions and left with one thing: What is left inside. Either a person is an ubermensch or an untermensch -- and the most frightful thing a man can do is peak inside his being and realize he is the latter.

"He who fights with monsters should be careful lest he thereby become a monster. And if thou gaze long into an abyss, the abyss will also gaze into thee."

Speaking more broadly of the West, it must decide its telos and direction: Will it fall to the false song of globalism and capitulate to decadence, or will it gaze angrily into the abyss and make the darkness cower?

...

Yes morals are simply what you believe and how you act. In Saudi Arabia it's moral to stone a women to death for cheating while even back in the Wests conservative days you just divorced her and she got ostracized from Society. Morals are based on who you grow up with, your parents and your peers and education if you got one.

However most society's place a very high value on Human life so there's something in our genetics or just how the human brain works for pretty much every society to have the taking of human life to be the biggest Crime.

Minus Papua new Guinea where cheating is seen as the worst crime you can do in a society.


I'll say yes and no to that

Why would God create a superior Aryan race?

Why would God want eugenics and the elimination of genetic diseases when we are all created in his image?

I really don't see Jesus saying all Christians are equal but fuck niggers. Or If you were crippled with a genetic disease aka a demon back then Jesus would of treated you as his equal, not a subhuman or a genetic black spot on your country

The superior mix totally in my opinion would be a Atheistic country with a heavy cultural Christian state and a very nationalistic, brotherhood type of country.

Yes but in the same way mathematics and the economy are. It has a purpose, a use. Morality is a fucking tool. The instant it becomes a liability it should be disregarded.

>Femspreading

RRRRRRRRREEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE CLOSE YOUR FUCKING LEGS I CAN SMELL YOUR PUSSY FROM ALL THE WAY HERE

Reminder that moral relativism is the foundation of kikeish thinking and the root of all modern ills in the West

>logic is the foundation of kike thinking

i can't be fucked to read plato

why is moral relativism "false" or "wrong?"

Of course they are. That doesn't mean they serve no purpose, though.

Awesome, thanks bro! :)

saved, have some of my folder

did you get past the nihilism part in Nietzsche where he talks about moving on without god and focusing on a life of self determined purpose?

because killing somebody in cold blood for no reason is always wrong

Morality is a meme.

It's unfortunate that so many people have never taken the time to think about why morals exist and how they came about. People are so fucking stupid.

I explicitly mentioned becoming an ubermencsh -- a poet of morality

Did you misread?

because we decide it is

i'm not against having natural morality (ie people are capable of knowing good and evil from heart), but rationally speaking they are not objective or neither true.

if in a way, if our purpose is to have a society, then doing things conducive to such society is desirable and hence actual morality, but that does not make it objective or set in stone

relativism is argued to be a realist position in some circles

where moral intuition is a real force within ourselves, but each self differs in important ways, thus liberty is the only way to satisfy the most people effectively

Because relativism basically says nothing matters, and applying that to your morals means nothing is good nor evil, and there is no shame in being a self-serving detached vacuous nothing with no regard for higher attainment or fulfilment.

I would argue it is evolutionary based as a society that was okay with such a thing would collapse as people would just kill each other for shits and giggles and thus their genes would not be passed on

And how is any of that "wrong?"

Society influences morality and morality influences society. We must have morals in order to be good people. We must have as many good people as possible in order to create a high-functioning and high-quality society.

I also believe morality is evolutionary for the same reasons. People who couldn't live in society would be purged by natural selection at some point. Also means that atheism is unnatural as well.

Every thing is a social construct. Without social constructs we would all be running around living in caves and kidnapping women to breed. Social constructs are what created society and each one exists for a reason attempting to destroy social constructs is an attempt to destroy society and render us all mindless animals.

probably just read too lazily

thought you were trying to preserve the idea of god as the source of moral intuition

You can choose to believe it if you wish but when it infects a people to a great degree the only result will be lethargy and decay

I'm well aware of the consequences that spreading Enlightenment thinking can do with society, but we're here on Sup Forums, there's no reason to not speak out the truth.

I honestly think religiosity is a function of IQ, the lower the IQ the higher chance that people will have a pantheon of lesser gods, as you get higher monotheistic, higher yet you reach a mixture of atheism and theism

Ethically, yes. Morally, not always.

Though that being said there is no benefit to the act and arguably detrimental so it is something that would eventually be made immoral.

Unless you reach a point where the society is unable to reverse having it moral and we all kill each other out because of it.

Yes

something being a social construct doesn't mean it's bad or wrong
seconds and meters are a social construct should we abandon them?