Fandom Forums - View Single Post - Is it possible for man to live a moral life without religion?
View Single Post
Old 07-12-2010, 07:01 PM   #77
El Topo
RNB's Avatar
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Pennsylvania
Age: 21
Posts: 1,169
Thanks: 3,293
Thanked 1,887 Times in 822 Posts
RNB is a jewel in the roughRNB is a jewel in the roughRNB is a jewel in the roughRNB is a jewel in the roughRNB is a jewel in the roughRNB is a jewel in the rough
Re: Is it possible for man to live a moral life without religion?

Originally Posted by Miburo View Post
I dunno. I can rationalize and argue the virtues of stealing for the individual doing the stealing. If they feel the rewards are greater than the risks, and take pride in their abilities as a thief, then why shouldn't they steal? It's something they take pride in doing, and something that they obtain happiness from.
You can earn the same amount of money and pride doing other activities that are less risky. In the long run, making a career out of theft is not a good idea for anyone who lives in the United States.

Yeah, you're right in that the risks may make it less rational. But there are instances where the risks are greatly diminished for various reasons, that aren't all that uncommon or extreme. I'm sure I could research the security measures used in stores and get away with shoplifting without much risk of getting caught if I really put the effort into it.
You could do that, or you just earn the money and then buy the item you want. The latter way means you don't have to lie about where you got the item from and other stuff like that.

Don't get me wrong. If it is rational to steal in an instance, then it is moral. I just would like to point out that this is pretty unlikely.

And I'm sure a lot of people would rather have their property be safer over being able to steal. But I'd bet there are people who would rather steal and protect their own property themselves. That's more of a difference in priorities between people.
There probably are people that would rather steal. Whether it is better for them to do so, especially for a whole lifetime, is a moral question.

I think an objective morality should apply in all circumstances, even if they're extremely rare. Otherwise it would only really apply to a current societies way of living, instead of universally among all human beings. That's why I think it has to be kept vague, and only applied contextually like you said earlier.
The morality itself should be vague, but I am saying that if people want generalizations then one has to think of what a common context would be. I think we can definitely tell the person that murder is wrong.
"Nature loves to be hidden."

- Heraclitus
RNB is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to RNB For This Useful Post:
Law&Order (07-13-2010), Miburo (07-12-2010)