Morality Is Often Harmful

[Rayschism]

I have come to personally hate morality.

It is often used to hurt people.

It often goes like this:

You did something that makes me feel bad in some way so now I get to hurt you to correct your behavior to help myself feel better.

When atrocities and crimes against humanity are committed, the person who is committing them thinks they are doing a good thing. At the risk of a Godwin, Hitler wrote in his book Mein Kampf making many allusions that killing Jews are a good thing, and Stalin did think so too. Che Guerva, Pol Pot, all dictators like them believe they are doing a good thing.

The Antifa people and other Trump opposers are eroding our Constitutional rights and liberties (as in manspreading and personal pronouns in NTC here in America and in Canada bills C16 and the Anti-Blasphemy bill are prime examples. They think they are doing.

To take away a successful person's money and give it to somebody "less fortunate" are good and moral things. To some people.

Fred Phelps and his Westboro Baptist Church sheer utter crap about hating Homosexuals is another example. Christians who hate atheists and discriminates against them to no end do it in the name of their own morality

There are many examples that can be used to show just how much crap Morality actually is, because a lot of it is just an excuse to hurt people.

And I despise this excuse to no end.

 

[sdelsolray]

It's not a perfect fit, but you are describing the Brazen (or Brass) Rule, or perhaps the Iron Rule, from Carl Sagan's compilation:

"Golden Rule: Do unto others as you would have them do unto you.

Silver Rule: Do not do unto others what you would not have them do unto you.

Brazen (Brass) Rule: Do unto others as they do unto you.

Iron Rule: Do unto others as you like, before they do it unto you.

Nepotism Rule: Give precedence in all things to close relatives, and do as you like to others.

Tin Rule: Suck up to those above you, and abuse those below.

Tit-for-Tat Rule: Cooperate with others first, then do unto them as they do unto you.

-Carl Sagan from Billions and Billions"

 

[Bronzeage]

If you are going to trash other people's morality, you should present your own, if for no other reason than to set a good example.

 

[bigfield]

I have come to personally hate morality.

It is often used to hurt people.

It often goes like this:

You did something that makes me feel bad in some way so now I get to hurt you to correct your behavior to help myself feel better.

When atrocities and crimes against humanity are committed, the person who is committing them thinks they are doing a good thing. At the risk of a Godwin, Hitler wrote in his book Mein Kampf making many allusions that killing Jews are a good thing, and Stalin did think so too. Che Guerva, Pol Pot, all dictators like them believe they are doing a good thing.

The Antifa people and other Trump opposers are eroding our Constitutional rights and liberties (as in manspreading and personal pronouns in NTC here in America and in Canada bills C16 and the Anti-Blasphemy bill are prime examples. They think they are doing.

To take away a successful person's money and give it to somebody "less fortunate" are good and moral things. To some people.

Fred Phelps and his Westboro Baptist Church sheer utter crap about hating Homosexuals is another example. Christians who hate atheists and discriminates against them to no end do it in the name of their own morality

There are many examples that can be used to show just how much crap Morality actually is, because a lot of it is just an excuse to hurt people.

And I despise this excuse to no end.

You made two contradictory claims:

1. People do harmful things because they genuinely believe they are doing good.
2. People invent excuses to justify the harm they inflict on others.

Which of these behaviours are you attributing to the examples you've given?

To take away a successful person's money and give it to somebody "less fortunate" are good and moral things. To some people.

"Some people", such as Humanists.

 

[PyramidHead]

If morality is crap, you have no basis to complain that it's harmful. When you say "x is bad because it harms people" you are making a moral judgment.

 

[fast]

If you are going to trash other people's morality, you should present your own, if for no other reason than to set a good example.

You made that up

 

[Rayschism]

You made two contradictory claims:

1. People do harmful things because they genuinely believe they are doing good.
2. People invent excuses to justify the harm they inflict on others.

Which of these behaviours are you attributing to the examples you've given?

To take away a successful person's money and give it to somebody "less fortunate" are good and moral things. To some people.

"Some people", such as Humanists.

They are not contradictory. <snip>

All atrocities, and all crimes against humanity are committed because the people or government that are committing them think they are doing good.

 

[bigfield]

You made two contradictory claims:

1. People do harmful things because they genuinely believe they are doing good.
2. People invent excuses to justify the harm they inflict on others.

Which of these behaviours are you attributing to the examples you've given?



"Some people", such as Humanists.

They are not contradictory. <snip>
All atrocities, and all crimes against humanity are committed because the people or government that are committing them think they are doing good.

You also claimed that morality is often "just an excuse" to hurt people.

Which is it? Do evildoers believe they are doing good or are their claims of righteousness just excuses?

 

[Rayschism]

They are not contradictory. <snip>.

All atrocities, and all crimes against humanity are committed because the people or government that are committing them think they are doing good.

You also claimed that morality is often "just an excuse" to hurt people.

Which is it? Do evildoers believe they are doing good or are their claims of righteousness just excuses?

<snip>

And you present a false dichotomy.

 

[Bronzeage]

If you are going to trash other people's morality, you should present your own, if for no other reason than to set a good example.

You made that up

I would hope so, but it's still a valid idea. I notice it went unnoticed.

 

[bigfield]

You also claimed that morality is often "just an excuse" to hurt people.

Which is it? Do evildoers believe they are doing good or are their claims of righteousness just excuses?

<snip>

And you present a false dichotomy.

You say that evildoers are aincere in their belief that they are doing good.

Making excuses is not sincere.

Explain to me what you mean when you accuse people of being simultaneously sincere and insincere in how they justify their actions to themselves.

 

[fast]

You made that up

I would hope so, but it's still a valid idea. I notice it went unnoticed.

I don't know that ideas are the kinds of things that are valid or invalid, but to me at least, it seems a good idea, and I'm all for good ideas; it's just the notion that it's obligatory that nags at me.

 

[sdelsolray]

This one appears quite angry, but I'm not sure why. I doubt he/she truly understands his/her anger either. The passive-agressiveness and projection might be a clue.

 

[Valjean]

Quote Originally Posted by Rayschism
To take away a successful person's money and give it to somebody "less fortunate" are good and moral things. To some people.

Maybe we should think of it as taking some of a rich person's hoard of money, grain, or whatever; which he has no need of and would never miss, for others who definitely do need it, thus benefiting society as a whole. Presumably it's the society: people, infrastructure, laws, courts, &c, that klkenabled the man's wealth in the first place.
If we're going to live together happily, it's probably best if everybody pulls together for the common good, and tries to make sure everyone's needs are met.
As they say: Taxes are the price one pays to live in a civilized society.

 

[Valjean]

I think many evildoers are unaware of the results of their actions, and quite a few are likely sociopaths who simply don't care.

 

[braces_for_impact]

I think the reality of the situation is that some people that are doing bad things actually think they are doing good deeds. As far as I can see this is irrefutable. We see it all the time. We also see people that know they aren't really doing any good for anyone but themselves and don't care. It's a mix.

This is one reason philosophy studies ethics of differing types. Virtue ethics, Stoicism, Consequentialism, Deontology, Hedonism.

We have only really been doing ethics for a few thousand years, and (somewhat arguably) it seems we are making progress. People have differing views on the goals of ethics, and how to reach those goals. Some people honestly don't care beyond themselves or perhaps their family, or a simply determined to get theirs while they can.

I can relate to your OP. Sometimes it's maddening to see people doing evil things and claiming to do good. Whether it's keeping women subdued in cloth bags and calling it good, taking away people's healthcare and calling it good, or hating homosexuals or other races and calling it good, people never seem in short supply of justification for their actions. Alternatively, people can actually do good things for very bad reasons, which to me is it's own pernicious type of evil.

People on the thread have called upon you to clarify your thinking some. Try not to be offended. They're not merely trying to be argumentative, but want clarity and wish to stimulate you to think some. Honestly, I wish more people gave ethics and morality more thought. There might be less evil in the world if more people did so. I myself am no expert, only a autodidact in philosophy, simply out of interest and just having an introspective nature.

 

[Rayschism]

So do you think you're doing good in being argumentative?

And you present a false dichotomy.

You say that evildoers are aincere in their belief that they are doing good.

Making excuses is not sincere.

Explain to me what you mean when you accuse people of being simultaneously sincere and insincere in how they justify their actions to themselves.

If you want a historical example, the Cherokee Trail of Tears. When the Cherokee were taken off of their land they were forced marched and many died. The primary reasons was because it was good for them, for the Cherokee to learn about what it is to be an American, and for the people who took their land, to do so.

In a modern example, NYC is heavily fining people for manspreading and not using people's personal pronouns because feelings are what are important, and it's important to protect people from having bad feelings of some sort, often being annoyed or offended by a penis or a bad word.

On some campuses they have things like safe spaces and speech codes, and you can't fly the American flag because some things offend people.

In Canada there are things like C16 and the Blasphemy bill because, once again, people must use other people's pronoun's.

And all these things are good things, according to the people who support them.

 

[Rayschism]

Quote Originally Posted by Rayschism
To take away a successful person's money and give it to somebody "less fortunate" are good and moral things. To some people.

Maybe we should think of it as taking some of a rich person's hoard of money, grain, or whatever; which he has no need of and would never miss, for others who definitely do need it, thus benefiting society as a whole. Presumably it's the society: people, infrastructure, laws, courts, &c, that klkenabled the man's wealth in the first place.
If we're going to live together happily, it's probably best if everybody pulls together for the common good, and tries to make sure everyone's needs are met.
As they say: Taxes are the price one pays to live in a civilized society.

Stealing for the common good is what all tyrannical regimes do.

And why stop there. Why not take away people's firearms so they can't defend themselves when we take their money for the common good?

 

[ronburgundy]

When atrocities and crimes against humanity are committed, the person who is committing them thinks they are doing a good thing. At the risk of a Godwin, Hitler wrote in his book Mein Kampf making many allusions that killing Jews are a good thing, and Stalin did think so too. Che Guerva, Pol Pot, all dictators like them believe they are doing a good thing.

It gets even more dangerous, when leaders believe they are doing a "Great" thing.

 

[Rayschism]

When atrocities and crimes against humanity are committed, the person who is committing them thinks they are doing a good thing. At the risk of a Godwin, Hitler wrote in his book Mein Kampf making many allusions that killing Jews are a good thing, and Stalin did think so too. Che Guerva, Pol Pot, all dictators like them believe they are doing a good thing.

It gets even more dangerous, when leaders believe they are doing a "Great" thing.

Liberals and conservatives and Christians and everyone else too. When you get past all the carp, it's all the same thing.