Right or Wrong - who determines that? - Page 5

Originally posted by: Gauri_3

hey cb, uss key liye we'll need to convince him that god exists😉  badey log ki sab baat mano per yeh naheen mano...kyoon bhala...kyoonki apna thinking use kiya aur kuchh aethists key books padhey.  phir bhi bol raha hai ki jo leaders boley woh hee sahee😆😆😆  am i the only one noticing the juxtaposition here😆

😆😆..juxtaposition...?. kaafi taqleef hui hongi na.. 😆😆

Originally posted by: shrutichopra

Hey!

I just chanced upon the Debate Mansion and it seems like a very my kind of place.

One question that gets me thinking every single time is that we(the people of the world) say a particular thing/path is 'right' while the other is 'wrong'. But who determines this? Who distinguishes them and why do we take things as acceptable and unacceptable? What makes the human psyche think in such a manner and how 'right' or 'wrong' things really are?

Many might say it is the society that decides but then again who is this 'society' and how do they decide? And if that is answered why do they decide? why is such a power vested in the 'society' and not merely in an 'individual'?

Would love to see the debate and opinions on this!

Shruti

Welcome to DM ,

Great topic 👏

I haven't read all responses so I don't know if someone already written all these points.

What I think ....right/wrong are basically related to morals . and for morals there  no one need to decide ......like numbers they just exists . To say one , one no authority is needed it is simply known. That is the reason , we see similarities in values /the concept of right and wrong among people of different societies or countries  in almost every time period of history.

A child need to be protected and be loved by parents this concept doesn't need to be decided by any single authority same way stealing is bad ..this fact again well understood in every society , region or era .  we tend to make laws rules one way or another for the betterment of society for preservation of human race. May be all these are part of our own instict or part of an ultimate truth , which is clearly percieved by people just like the perception of day/ night , perception of heat / cold.

Edited by Morning_Dew - 16 years ago

Originally posted by: Morning_Dew

Welcome to DM ,

Great topic 👏

I haven't read all responses so I don't know if someone already written all these points.

What I think ....right/wrong are basically related to morals . and morals simply there  no one need to decide ......just like numbers they just exists . To say one , one no authority is needed it is simply known. That is the reason , we see similarities in values /the concept of right and wrong among people of different societies or countries even in almost every time period of history.

A child need to be protected and be loved by parents this concept doesn't need to be decided by any single authority same way stealing is bad ..this fact again well understood in every society , region or era .  we tend to make laws rules one way or another for the betterment of society for preservation of human race. May be all these are part of our own instict or part of an ultimate truth , which is clearly percieved by people just like the perception of day/ night , perception of heat / cold.

 welcome to dm morning_dew... veri nicely put..😊😉

Originally posted by: chatbuster

actually sati and such was also the morality of the era. in fact, high morality.

not really.  it was more a ritual like child marriage.  certain norms/rituals get tied to female morality over time like widows not getting remarried, north indian married women observing karwa chauth etc.  if they do not follow certain norms/rituals, society doesn't consider them women of virtue.  that's how i see it.

Edited by Gauri_3 - 16 years ago

Originally posted by: qwertyesque

😆😆..juxtaposition...?. kaafi taqleef hui hongi na.. 😆😆

not at all if one has had three years of french😊  my apologies agar tumhey samajhney mein taqleef hui hai toh😉😛

Edited by Gauri_3 - 16 years ago

Originally posted by: Gauri_3

not really.  it was more a ritual like child marriage.  certain norms/rituals get tied to female morality over time like widows not getting remarried, north indian married women observing karwa chauth etc.  if they do not follow certain norms/rituals, society doesn't consider them women of virtue.  that's how i see it.

how's that not tied to morality? people doing it as a ritual, fine. but why? somewhere it must have fed in to someone's sense of doing the moral/ right thing.

Originally posted by: qwertyesque

[

 welcome to dm morning_dew... veri nicely put..😊😉

Thanks Qwerts 😊.... What I feel there are some illusions of changes in concept of right and wrong over the period of time... for eg. some people might aruge about freedom of women in past and in present. Though if we analyze it , it is same , women were considered precious ...... need to be protected , keeping in mind all the dangers in outside world , they were protected by their men..... what I believe that intention ws never bad... it was never to supress women. same way now women can go out freely and work freely only because now we have protection available out of our houses.  concept is still same . Take away all sexual harrasment laws and other protective laws and see how many of us would like to send our daughters outside. 

Physical relationship before marriage was not allowed back then in almost every society...... basic moral or basic reason ......avoid any situation where a woman or her child  be abondoned in a society which back then was not capable of taking care of them so for the benefit of child specifically and women generally it was not accepted. Now in parts of world where , social asisstance is available and specially with positive paternity identification, it is much easier to support a child and mother........ rules become lenient. rules change...but purpose remain same and that is the moral value a right thing   ..😊

Originally posted by: chatbuster

how's that not tied to morality?

it shd not be tied to morality but religious leaders did tie it to morality...why....to control the masses by supressing the women. and creating norms that pressurized the male folks to force their women into performing those rituals.  shaving the heads of widowed women is one such ritual that became a norm in earlier times.

people doing it as a ritual, fine. but why?

because of societal pressure.  they did it so that they were accepted by the society.

somewhere it must have fed in to someone's sense of doing the moral/ right thing.

no, not doing moral/right thing but doing it so that they r not shunned by the society.  for example, not so long ago, live-ins were strict no no in indian society.  they still r but to a lesser extent now.  what is so immoral about live ins when compared to marriage.....they miss the ritual of saat phere, or norm of certifying the marriage in the court.  society creates all the hoop la that one has to face if they opt for a live-in relationship as opposed to getting married no matter how committed and how much in love they r.

Originally posted by: Morning_Dew

Thanks Qwerts 😊.... What I feel there are some illusions of changes in concept of right and wrong over the period of time... for eg. some people might aruge about freedom of women in past and in present. Though if we analyze it , it is same , women were considered precious ...... need to be protected , keeping in mind all the dangers in outside world , they were protected by their men..... what I believe that intention ws never bad... it was never to supress women. same way now women can go out freely and work freely only because now we have protection available out of our houses.  concept is still same . Take away all sexual harrasment laws and other protective laws and see how many of us would like to send our daughters outside. 

Physical relationship before marriage was not allowed back then in almost every society...... basic moral or basic reason ......avoid any situation where a woman or her child  be abondoned in a society which back then was not capable of taking care of them so for the benefit of child specifically and women generally it was not accepted. Now in parts of world where , social asisstance is available and specially with positive paternity identification, it is much easier to support a child and mother........ rules become lenient. rules change...but purpose remain same and that is the moral value a right thing   ..😊

sure. moral value a right thing. but whose set of morals a right thing?😛😉

as for how certain moral things got started, it's nice to have all that history.😛 but shld we care about what the conceptual origins were or should we be concerned about the practical implications today? and some of those implications are that people do go around killing each other, each thinking they got their concepts right. dont look like people got their morals real clear 😉

i feel not lying, stealing, cheating, killing etc r no brainers. they r pretty much universally accepted. questions arise when one is forced to accept what the leaders and/or society is preaching related to stuff that falls in the grey area...like rituals and norms.... that may be accepted in one society but not in the other. the rituals/norms r mostly driven by religion and/or socio-economic and educational status of a society. that's why they vary across the globe and they change over time as a society evolves.