Where/what is the line between right and wrong?

[kandymann12]

I simply don't think there isn't a fine line between right and wrong. it's so much hard to figure out what is right and what is wrong now. Too many people asking questions about everything and I guess you could think of that as somehow blurring the fine line between right and wrong. If say a man saw a friend or was there nearby when the man's raped a young girl, and that man's friend killed the girl, would he be a bad person or a good person?

He didn't take part in it, so he's not really wrong. Technically he isn't. But he is wrong because didn't stop to save the girl. Another example, a poor man stealing bread. It could be right or wrong, he could have stolen it and it'd be right because he needed it. Yet.....we still think of that person stealing as a thief, when all he did was try to survive. Get the drift? So, I ask you, pick a story, pick a lot of stories. And tell me where you would draw the right and the wrong. Tell us exactly what you think where the line of right or wrong should be drawn.

 

[2percent]

Right and wrong are points of view. There is no set standard.

 

[The Riddler_]

Guilt is the line, if you do something and feel guilt, its likely wrong, or just have that sense that your doing something wrong, that does it to. When doing something right, the best example for me to use off the top of my head is if it bring happiness it's right.

 

[Arya]

Let's see if I can clarify from my point-of-view.

It all depends on the intent of the person/persons doing the "act".

Is killing a man because he was about to kill your daughter/mother wrong? We know that his only intent was to save his family, so acceptably, it wouldn't be wrong.

That also has it's limits, though. Is killing a man because he spoke of your family in a rude way wrong? What was his intent? Simply to relinquish the anger that he felt for this man talking badly of his family. Is this wrong?

A life for temporary relief. Yes, acceptably, that would be wrong.

Like I said, it all depends on your intent.

 

[xtavie]

When doing something right, the best example for me to use off the top of my head is if it bring happiness it's right.

What about rape? It may bring you pleasure which can be assumed as happiness, but at the same time bring you guilt...

 

[Straggler]

There is no blurred line between two set answers, as there is no blurred line between true or false. People have different perceptions of right and wrong, and it can sometimes be difficult on the mind to classify something as right or wrong, but if you're going to think of a situation as right or wrong, there will eventually be a logical answer rather than right-sh/wrong-ish.

 

[Arya]

There is no blurred line between two set answers, as there is no blurred line between true or false. People have different perceptions of right and wrong, and it can sometimes be difficult on the mind to classify something as right or wrong, but if you're going to think of a situation as right or wrong, there will eventually be a logical answer rather than right-sh/wrong-ish.

You say that it can be difficult to classify something as right/wrong, yet you say that there is no blurred line? Explain yourself.

Some things are so to where there may be aspects of a certain act that could be considered right and aspects that could be considered wrong. It matters.

 

[p0oned y0u1]

There is no way to identify right and wrong without religion. It is ignorant to try. Religious standards are the only right and wrong in the world.

 

[Arya]

There is no way to identify right and wrong without religion. It is ignorant to try. Religious standards are the only right and wrong in the world.

I have no religion, and yet, I feel that it is wrong to murder a child without any reason.

Think before you type.

 

[p0oned y0u1]

Lol that was completely ignorant Arya. Tell me where did your "feelings" come from. Can you define them scientifically through evolution? No, you can't. Tell me where these "feelings" came from.

 

[yourmaster10]

p00ned, things can be logically right and wrong, you don't need a religious standard, esp. since christians believe killing homos, and killing ppl who don' listen to priests as right. So, you think before you act

 

[Arya]

Lol that was completely ignorant Arya. Tell me where did your "feelings" come from. Can you define them scientifically through evolution? No, you can't. Tell me where these "feelings" came from.

What I say isn't ignorant. You're choosing to insist that if you have no religion, you're a cold-blooded monster with no morals, values, or any consideration for any being but yourself. This is ignorant.

My "feelings" came from my personal experiences, my past, and my knowledge of too many different things. Religion doesn't define emotion, nor is it it's center point.

Like I said, think before you type.

 

[tubba lub]

All depends on your standards/how corrupt/evil you are/your opinion.

 

[p0oned y0u1]

What I say isn't ignorant. You're choosing to insist that if you have no religion, you're a cold-blooded monster with no morals, values, or any consideration for any being but yourself. This is ignorant.

My "feelings" came from my personal experiences, my past, and my knowledge of too many different things. Religion doesn't define emotion, nor is it it's center point.

Like I said, think before you type.

Explain to me how without some higher being you have feelings. I said no such thing that "without religion people are cold killers" explain that to me. I am saying you can't explain morals scientifically. so think before you type.

 

[Swan]

Guilt is the line, if you do something and feel guilt, its likely wrong, or just have that sense that your doing something wrong, that does it to. When doing something right, the best example for me to use off the top of my head is if it bring happiness it's right.

What if you're a sadist? Myself, I am not a sadist but consider situations of mental health.

Personally I find a lot of things amusing that others would find absolutely devastating - it makes life interesting. Where most people feel a sinking feeling about things such as someone dying on the news (Heath Ledger is a prime example) I find it interesting and in the case of famous people, a little irritating. For my current mentality, I don't feel much guilt if any - be it in things that I do or in things that others do.

As for what I would define as right and wrong, I draw that line where rationality meets irrationality - a prime example is the recent abortion thread. To be more specific, a fetus is not rational, therefore I see nothing wrong with abortion. Please don't reply to this particular issue, you're welcome to post in the abortion thread though.

I guess you can say I'm different from others, but even to me my mind is a curious one. The only way this affects me is my social status.

 

[Music Makes Me Pwn]

The view of right and wrong is subjected to the person himself. If someone believes what they are doing is for a just cause then they will go ahead and do it, even if it may seem totally wrong in another persons eyes.

 

[Arya]

Explain to me how without some higher being you have feelings. I said no such thing that "without religion people are cold killers" explain that to me. I am saying you can't explain morals scientifically. so think before you type.

I explained how in my earlier post.

Lol.

 

[p0oned y0u1]

I explained how in my earlier post.

Lol.

LOL no you didn't. You said "because I feel that way" and "because I see other people doing it". That doesn't explain anything. Where did the feelings come from? Morals are not needed to survive. If we went by survival of the fittest we would kill our neighbors and eat they young like animals do. Explain scientifically how you can have morals with science. If you believe in evolution that means there has to be some advantage and scientific explanation for morals. Which there isn't. Why do people in Africa eat babies and kill whoever they want? They haven't learned the morals you have. They obviously don't think the same way as you. So explain without religion how that can happen.

 

[Arya]

My "feelings" came from my personal experiences, my past, and my knowledge of too many different things. Religion doesn't define emotion, nor is it it's center point.

Apparently, you can read, so there really isn't any excuse for the arrogance that you're portraying.

Religion is needed for nothing.

 

[Swan]

Apparently, you can read, so there really isn't any excuse for the arrogance that you're portraying.

Religion is needed for nothing.

This is true. If you base your concept of right and wrong on religion you should learn to think for yourself.