I really need to be doing things...

[avevale_intelligencer]

...but I can't let this go. Someone (whom I won't name because I don't know if they want their LJ and FB identities linked) just quoted on Facebook:

"Morality is doing what is right no matter what you are told. Religon is doing whatever you are told no matter what is right."

As an example of the statement that sounds good without at any point touching on truth, I don't think that can be bettered, and it shows up how insidiously persuasive a nice jingly Wildean paradox can be--I almost found myself nodding sagely at it for a second. But good grief, morality is *all about* what we're told--morality is tribal. And as for the stupid, facile old canard about religion being mindless obedience, I don't even need to bother refuting that, do I? I'm sure I've done it before, anyway, and I haven't got the spare computer time right now.

So, let's compose some nice jingly Wildean paradoxes.

"Bacon and eggs are tasty without being healthy. Muesli is healthy without being tasty."

See how it works? You have a try. See how convincing you can make any old rubbish just by balancing two phrases one against the other.

I'll check back tonight. I may award points.

Comments

[pbristow.livejournal.com]

If the tribe all agree that "grab all you can and devil take the hindmost" is the right way to do things, then that is a part of the morality of that tribe... However much another tribe (or you, or Zander) may look on aghast.

Morality shifts and changes with history, as people's understanding of what is real and what is important and how they interact changes. To a medieval European, it was immoral to let a witch live; to a modern European, it's immoral *no*t to let them live. Both could give you strong arguments as to why; The main difference is simply that we (generally) no longer believe the witch's actions or existence will do any significant harm.

[catsittingstill.livejournal.com]

We disagree, then, on what morality really is. That's okay--nebulous words like "morality" are often hard to pin down. But it's important to be aware who means what when they use the word.

It's true that wrong beliefs about the physical world often mean the action that looks like producing the least harm at the time turns out to be what I think of as immoral--causing more-than-the-least-harm. This is why I think learning the truth about the physical world is, in some ways, a moral issue. Not bothering to try risks mistakes--honest mistakes, but made out of laziness about learning about the real world--that hurt people.

[pbristow.livejournal.com]

Agreed on the not-bothering-to-try-to-learn point... Provided the person in question has got as far as *realising* the connection between learning the truth and doing the right thing. =:o}