Good and Bad.

Board index - World

Author	Message
Scarecrow Angel Cliché Catastrophe Age: 20 Gender: Female Posts: 351	July 24th, 2008 at 08:33am The Fantasy: I believe good and bad is all relative, it's all a difference of opinions and points of view. My thoughts exactly, only four paragraphs shorter. Scarecrow Angel: There is no ultimate 'good' and 'bad'. Good and bad are only concepts of what is usually beneficial or detrimental from experience. And what is a good thing to do varies from situation to situation. Another term for your sense of right and wrong is 'moral judgement' or 'morality', while the rules we have about right and wrong are called 'morals'. Morals do not come from an ultimate law that floats around in the universe, but rather, from humans. Basically, they are a combination of evolved instinct and learned knowledge of what would be best and worst for ourselves and those things important to us in a given situation. Our sense of what is good is not just based on what is good for us, but also on what is good for the people and things we depend on, as this affects us indirectly. Because what is good for us now (stealing) might not be good for us in the long run (a society full of crime), we need moral sense for ultimate preservation. Having ethical sense stops us from beating each other to death out of greed- because then, we would wipe ourselves out- probably a bad idea. When we can live in harmony with other people, our environment, and really as many other things as possible, we live much safer lives and build more secure futures. Of course, this is not always possible, and so what is 'good' in one situation may not be good in another. For instance, if you were starving, it might be a 'good' idea to kill an animal to eat, whereas when there is plenty of food around, this is considered a 'bad' thing to do. Guess I could have worded my post a bit more consisely.
TaintedxEyes. Amateur Author Age: 13 Gender: Female Posts: 233	July 24th, 2008 at 09:03pm I guess you just feel it. You know? >.< I sound like a priest.
Knees to the Floor. Grammar Guru Age: 14 Gender: - Posts: 4883	July 25th, 2008 at 02:02am I think it matters little. For instance, the main belief on murder is that it's wrong and a twisted thing to do. However, I, myself, as well as a couple of people I know disagree. We, or at least I, believe that murder is just another hobby that isn't so condoned as soccer or baseball. It levels things out. It's a good thing for me, but if you go ask most of the people in the government would say that it isn't appropriate. There is no good or bad. It's just what you make of it.
Scarecrow Angel Cliché Catastrophe Age: 20 Gender: Female Posts: 351	July 25th, 2008 at 03:07am Knees to the Floor.: I think it matters little. For instance, the main belief on murder is that it's wrong and a twisted thing to do. However, I, myself, as well as a couple of people I know disagree. We, or at least I, believe that murder is just another hobby that isn't so condoned as soccer or baseball. It levels things out. It's a good thing for me, but if you go ask most of the people in the government would say that it isn't appropriate. There is no good or bad. It's just what you make of it. Even within our own society killing does not always equal murder. Murder is the condemned act of killing, and (predominantly- I know some people disagree) does not include killing in self-defence, euthenasia, abortion, etc. It is however rather twisted to say that you believe murder to be good, since the very definition of 'murder' is an act of killing that you believe in circumstance to be detrimental. If you believe in killing in society you should just say that, rather than dragging a word like 'murder' into it, which would make you cognitively dissonant. It is only that you have a different definition of when it is wrong to kill. That said, I think most people would disagree with allowing unmonitered violence in society, as it would be much more unstable and dangerous in the long run. The point of morality, after all, is for indirect self-preservation and the preservation of that with which the moral identify. The vast majority of people have social morals, because society generally defeats the antisocial in the end.
zero; Fanfic Fanatic Age: 12 Gender: Female Posts: 1384	July 26th, 2008 at 04:30am It really depends with your own opinion. For example, this Christian guy thinks Gay Marraige is a wrong, a sin. But for other people, it isn't. But there will always be good and bad. There wouldn't be good without bad. There wouldn't be bad without good.
Mortiferous Fanfic Fanatic Age: 15 Gender: Female Posts: 1870	July 26th, 2008 at 10:00am Knees to the Floor.: I think it matters little. For instance, the main belief on murder is that it's wrong and a twisted thing to do. However, I, myself, as well as a couple of people I know disagree. We, or at least I, believe that murder is just another hobby that isn't so condoned as soccer or baseball. It levels things out. It's a good thing for me, but if you go ask most of the people in the government would say that it isn't appropriate. There is no good or bad. It's just what you make of it. America's government is probably going to go to the "bad". China will go to the "good".
jacky jules. Fanfic Fanatic Age: 14 Gender: Female Posts: 1302	July 28th, 2008 at 04:12pm ^^ It's all up to us what we think is good and bad. That is why this world is a mess.
jacky jules. Fanfic Fanatic Age: 14 Gender: Female Posts: 1302	July 28th, 2008 at 04:13pm From Hero to Zero.: It really depends with your own opinion. For example, this Christian guy thinks Gay Marraige is a wrong, a sin. But for other people, it isn't. But there will always be good and bad. There wouldn't be good without bad. There wouldn't be bad without good. Good point.
Mortiferous Fanfic Fanatic Age: 15 Gender: Female Posts: 1870	July 29th, 2008 at 01:28am Valo Ink.: ^^ It's all up to us what we think is good and bad. That is why this world is a mess. There is no hope anymore. This is what makes me cry; the human race has no purpose. We're at the top, and slowly killing ourselves because we want more. There is no more to us, and there never will be. We spend our time trying to get higher within our own ranks. When that is accomplished, what will we do? What can we do, we've left the others at the bottom of the ring. We have no more entertainment, so we strive to gain money and access to more entertainment. We waste our time. That's our purpose; we waste time until we die.
Scarecrow Angel Cliché Catastrophe Age: 20 Gender: Female Posts: 351	July 29th, 2008 at 02:44am ^ Geez, talk about over-generalisation... I don't think that's what the majority want, it's just that modern governments tend to seperate the ethical interests of different groups and act on them all seperately, so that it appears mindlessly chaotic when in fact the population is well aware of the consequences. I think your defination of what is good succumbing to evil is based on very abstract ideals, and of course these roles revolutionise with perspective. The things we protect becoem the things we utilise, and vice versa. Roles swap all the time, and it doesn't always entail ultimate chaos. Surely there are always losses, but I doubt the human race will keep let itself go unchecked to the point of self-destruction. Scarecrow Angel: There is no ultimate 'good' and 'bad'. Good and bad are only concepts of what is usually beneficial or detrimental from experience. And what is a good thing to do varies from situation to situation. Another term for your sense of right and wrong is 'moral judgement' or 'morality', while the rules we have about right and wrong are called 'morals'. Morals do not come from an ultimate law that floats around in the universe, but rather, from humans. Basically, they are a combination of evolved instinct and learned knowledge of what would be best and worst for ourselves and those things important to us in a given situation. Our sense of what is good is not just based on what is good for us, but also on what is good for the people and things we depend on, as this affects us indirectly. Because what is good for us now (stealing) might not be good for us in the long run (a society full of crime), we need moral sense for ultimate preservation. Having ethical sense stops us from beating each other to death out of greed- because then, we would wipe ourselves out- probably a bad idea. When we can live in harmony with other people, our environment, and really as many other things as possible, we live much safer lives and build more secure futures. Of course, this is not always possible, and so what is 'good' in one situation may not be good in another. For instance, if you were starving, it might be a 'good' idea to kill an animal to eat, whereas when there is plenty of food around, this is considered a 'bad' thing to do. By this standard, ethics largely sorts itself out in the end. How many times in history has society become anarchical, only to resort back to order? How many times has exploitation or environmental damage been pursued to the very edge of chaos, only to revert at the last minute? Society usually defeats the antisocial in the end, just as functionality defeats dysfunction. History will always proceed in trends.
Mortiferous Fanfic Fanatic Age: 15 Gender: Female Posts: 1870	July 29th, 2008 at 02:55am Scarecrow Angel: ^ Geez, talk about over-generalisation... I don't think that's what the majority want, it's just that modern governments tend to seperate the ethical interests of different groups and act on them all seperately, so that it appears mindlessly chaotic when in fact the population is well aware of the consequences. I think your defination of what is good succumbing to evil is based on very abstract ideals, and of course these roles revolutionise with perspective. The things we protect becoem the things we utilise, and vice versa. Roles swap all the time, and it doesn't always entail ultimate chaos. Surely there are always losses, but I doubt the human race will keep let itself go unchecked to the point of self-destruction. By this standard, ethics largely sorts itself out in the end. How many times in history has society become anarchical, only to resort back to order? How many times has exploitation or environmental damage been pursued to the very edge of chaos, only to revert at the last minute? Society usually defeats the antisocial in the end, just as functionality defeats dysfunction. History will always proceed in trends. You're very sure of yourself. However, I can't gelp but think that all this has happened. In order for Earth to re-sort itself, it will need to go into an Ice Age. That should at least tell you that society's order was not included in what I was talking about. Humans, in essence, have destrpyed themselves. As in, what do the majority of people aim for?
jacky jules. Fanfic Fanatic Age: 14 Gender: Female Posts: 1302	July 29th, 2008 at 05:46pm ^^ We've destroyed ourselves and the Earth but idiots are still doing the things they do. The human race has always been like this and no doubt it will continue on the way it is. There is always going to be murders and physco's.
Lyzzla Cliché Catastrophe Age: 15 Gender: Female Posts: 320	July 30th, 2008 at 08:15pm There was another board on here about morality and immorality, and the border between that. Most of the people on that board believed there were lines to be drawn...I argued that there was no immoral/moral, no right/wrong, and no good/bad. It's actually in this section somewhere, I do believe. I feel people choose to believe there ios a set good and bad because it eliminates the unknown elements and variables. If there is a right and wrong...they have nothing to fear morally because there is nothing unknown to fear, and you will be punished for doing what the common conception of right and wrong is. It's all about perception. Actually...There is a really good movie that shows how blurred right and wrong can be...it's called "The Last Supper". Watch it. It's good. =] Morality and Immorality. Border?--This is the board.
Scarecrow Angel Cliché Catastrophe Age: 20 Gender: Female Posts: 351	July 31st, 2008 at 04:28am Blut: You're very sure of yourself. However, I can't gelp but think that all this has happened. In order for Earth to re-sort itself, it will need to go into an Ice Age. That should at least tell you that society's order was not included in what I was talking about. Humans, in essence, have destrpyed themselves. As in, what do the majority of people aim for? [/font] How have we destroyed ourselves? Certainly we are on the road to environmental destruction, and in terms of our society people do suffer. But the Earth has suffered worse, and we aren't at an irreversible stage just yet. People always panic at times like these, and it is that panic that helps to rectify the situation- just look at what the scares about global warming have done. In parts of Australia it is now illegal to water your lawn, or to manufacture appliances that burn through an excess of energy to create greenhouse gases. As for the majority, at least on this continent, people are well aware of global warming. Society has adapted so that it is even popular, or a trend, if you will, to be an environmentalist. Trendy people go vegetarian, hippy or green, or become activists for animal rights and saving the rainforest. You never see people walking about with plastic bags anymore, lest they be judged. Even our standards of virtue have changed to include environmentalism as something the moral person strives for. ...So I wouldn't count on Armageddon just yet.
Lyzzla Cliché Catastrophe Age: 15 Gender: Female Posts: 320	July 31st, 2008 at 05:45pm Scarecrow Angel: Blut: You're very sure of yourself. However, I can't gelp but think that all this has happened. In order for Earth to re-sort itself, it will need to go into an Ice Age. That should at least tell you that society's order was not included in what I was talking about. Humans, in essence, have destrpyed themselves. As in, what do the majority of people aim for? [/font] How have we destroyed ourselves? Certainly we are on the road to environmental destruction, and in terms of our society people do suffer. But the Earth has suffered worse, and we aren't at an irreversible stage just yet. People always panic at times like these, and it is that panic that helps to rectify the situation- just look at what the scares about global warming have done. In parts of Australia it is now illegal to water your lawn, or to manufacture appliances that burn through an excess of energy to create greenhouse gases. As for the majority, at least on this continent, people are well aware of global warming. Society has adapted so that it is even popular, or a trend, if you will, to be an environmentalist. Trendy people go vegetarian, hippy or green, or become activists for animal rights and saving the rainforest. You never see people walking about with plastic bags anymore, lest they be judged. Even our standards of virtue have changed to include environmentalism as something the moral person strives for. ...So I wouldn't count on Armageddon just yet. I think armegeddon for us will be a natural part of evolution. I don't think it's as right away as people are trying to make it out to be, but I do think that earth is prepared for the terrible things it's inhabitants are bound to put it through. In another 5 million years...I'm doubting you'll even be able to tell that humans exsisted. [/spam]
fool's paradise Ink Slinger Age: 14 Gender: Female Posts: 840	August 1st, 2008 at 03:10am The way I see it, things are bad if they hurt someone. If you're not hurting anyway, it's not so bad.
Bells. Fanfic Fanatic Age: 15 Gender: Female Posts: 1071	August 3rd, 2008 at 10:01am I think if somebody has worked hard to built something up, be it their confidence, house, church, whatever, and somebody else goes and destroys it - that's bad. Because you're practically saying you have no respect for those people who have worked so hard. It's easier to tear things down than build them up. Good is when you make somebody feel good/happy. In my opinion.
Missing Wings. Cliché Catastrophe Age: 14 Gender: Female Posts: 492	August 4th, 2008 at 02:46am miszsmilez21: I think we look at things, the way we were raised, Ever since you're a little kid your parents tell you 'No tha's bad!' and you grow up thinking that, and then you enter school and they tell you what's good or not so you take in all of this and make into your own perspective, or at least that's how I think about it. Without good there wouldn't be bad. withtout bad there wouldn't be good. My views exactly. And once we graduate school we also add in our own experiences.
Lyzzla Cliché Catastrophe Age: 15 Gender: Female Posts: 320	August 5th, 2008 at 05:37pm Dasha: I think if somebody has worked hard to built something up, be it their confidence, house, church, whatever, and somebody else goes and destroys it - that's bad. Because you're practically saying you have no respect for those people who have worked so hard. It's easier to tear things down than build them up. Good is when you make somebody feel good/happy. In my opinion. So beating the shit out of your best friend's worst enemy is good, or bad?
ZoeePea Fanfic Fanatic Age: 16 Gender: Female Posts: 1904	August 5th, 2008 at 06:22pm ^ very bad. the good thing to do is do what's going to make the most people happy and cause the least harm and damage. =] Violence will always be bad because you're hurting someone.

Options
Go back to top