Is one person's moral opinion as good as another's?

well the truth thought can be used as it benefits everyone, no one loses out from telling the time. Yet lying about other things can advantageous to one party and so the cirumstances would say it was ok to lie, such as fraudsters, the gains out weigh the moral implications and so the morals are lost. I'm not saying this is how i work as such, but i'm sceptical of people who say that they couldn't morally do something, until they are faced with that situation how do they know?
 
Leopardess said:
I am writing a paper.......

The question is: Is one person's moral opinion as good as another's?

....
Click to expand...

No.

Just take look at the book/movie, Lord of the Flies. Even though it's fiction, the examples are there and can seen in many everyday life situations.


_____________________________
 
Last edited:
125gJoe said:
Just take look at the book/movie, Lord of the Flies. Even though it's fiction, the examples are there and can seen in many everyday life situations.
Click to expand...
Or the movie Alive, a true story. Sometimes morals can go out the window if the circumstances are altered, no matter what your normal personality is.
 
Its a tricky question. Are one person's morals "as good as" someone else's?

I'll have to answer yes. I think there really is only one moral set. There's a right and a wrong thing to do in every situation. A person's ability not only to see that morality but also to live by it varies from person to person.

Now you can look at it a little differently and say that a peron legitimizes their own morality by what they can live by. Someone can rationalize stealing food to eat because they're hungry with no other way to get food. Someone else can't because they're not hungry enough.

Its still morally wrong to steal the food regardless of the situation but the two different viewpoints can offer convincing arguments because of their circumstances. In the end, your personal circumstances shape the morals you live by so two people from two backgrounds may have conflicting morals. They are still, however, both valid morals because of the experiences that shaped them.

In this sense, one person's morals are certainly just "as good as" someone else's.
 
There are 2 different concepts here: Morals, as in Truth; and morals, as is cheating on a test. Morals, with a capital M, are not defined by the individual, nor the society. morals, lower case, are the behaviors of individuals. Are some individual behaviors better than others? Yes. That means those individuals have Morals, while others may not. It's not a matter of individual judgement. For example, individual judgements WILL change, based on circumstances. Does that change to overlying Moral? No, merely their interpretation and behavior. Defining what those Morals are, versus morals, well, that I won't touch.
 
I think we need to define what you mean by "as GOOD as".

Does the question refer to being as IMPORTANT as, or as MORALLY CONSCIOUS as, or as MORALLY 'GOOD' (meaning the opposite of evil)????
 
hmmm..... got me thinking more... when someone's morals ARE indeed questioned, such as for murder, the person stands on trial. Now the circumstances involved, whether it be an mentally and physically abused mother, a homeowner who's home was invaded, or a gang member protecting his or her turf...... it's often up to the jury to judge those morals...
 
Wow, this is one of the most interesting questions I've come across in a long time. I bet your paper will be one hell of a read when done. :)

As for my thoughts on the question, I think one person's moral opinion can be "as good as" another's with my definition of "as good as" being equal in value. This doesn't mean one's moral opinion is necessarily "right" or "wrong" but only the opinions themselves are of equal value or merit. Then things get interesting because one's moral opinion has no value unless it is judged as being "right" or "wrong".

Given that twist, my formal answer must be I don't know. :)

Peace...
 
Reading the question over a few more times, and if I had to answer "yes" or "no", it still stands as a "no" (for me).

Moral opinions are very different. Just like 'opinions' in general...


What's the nationality of your instructor? I'm curious...


_______________________
 
Tomm, you said:

"Its a tricky question. Are one person's morals "as good as" someone else's?

I'll have to answer yes. I think there really is only one moral set. There's a right and a wrong thing to do in every situation. A person's ability not only to see that morality but also to live by it varies from person to person."

You are getting at the heart of the issue, but I feel that your supporting statements contradict your first statement of "Yes." You make the inference that some people cannot see the "truly" moral decision..so how can their morality be equally as decent as one who "does see the truth"?

As for how to define "as good as"...I believe it is being given in all of the senses that Ms. Bubbles lists.

Regarding the nationality of the teacher, she's Canadian, eh.

I wish I could share with you some of the texts because it would really help on some of the points where the conversation is leading astray from the principles of morality that we're covering. Also be careful to distinguish between a moral decision and an opinion. They are two very different things. I realize I should have used the term "moral decision" instead of "opinion" in the title, but c'est la vie.

BUT, if anyone is interested in an "fascinating read" (fascinating only if you like that kind of stuff), some of the texts that are helpful are:
Weston, Anthony. A 21st Century Ethical Toolbox. New York, Oxford UP: 2001
Rachels, James. The Elements of Moral Philosophy. New York, McGraw: 2002
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
AquariaCentral.com
Top Bottom