/cult/ - culture and media

What is the morally correct way to interact? is it alright to do certain things? should morality be disregarded entirely?

This questions are strange and almost meaningless to me. The answers to them are like "oh it depends on the situation".

I'm mostly interested in whether there are things you believe in or disregard that contradict societaly norms and stuff like that!

Well I'm all up to post-humanist/post-genderism stuff like abortion-rights, artificial uterus, In vitro fertilisation, cloning, genetic modification, body modification, cyborgism, etc.
All this things are like the boogieman of medicine ethics; it's extremely hard to discuss this topics cuz people are either scared or religious or never searched about the topics before or just repeat everything the TV says. That's ok, changes are hard and sometimes things don't change at all.
My problem with this is that all this technologies are being developed outside of the public eye, outside of any democratic discussion, are being pushed or censored by medic authorities and big corps. Cyborgs are scary, but not the cyborg parts that Google sells. Cloning and genetic mods are bad, but its ok to do with plants and make giant monoculture genetic modified soyfields, its ok to make soykaf cultured hamburgers (everybody loves burgers right?).

*also, this thread should be in /psy/ or /feels/

>how your personal sense of morality and ethics stack against the rest of wider society

well the main difference is I think almost nothing is inherently wrong, my reasoning is that if the American revolution (or any other war) was justified (and most people think it was) then lying, cheating, stealing, murder, etc cannot be inherently wrong because war requires all those things, they can only be wrong if they are not justified

>does the whole "we are all connected in the wired" thing ever really affect your choices?

I think the fact that we’re all connected is where morality comes from in the first place, I want you to do well because, assuming you also act morally, it will benefit me too

(imo) "morality" is just humanity's way of projecting what they like and dislike and what they're comfortable and uncomfortable with onto a false objectivity so we don't have to deal with the fact that something that affects us as strongly as emotion cannot always be simplified into one answer. of course I like the idea of being kind to others, keeping others in a good mood, and all other sorts of sappy bs, but I don't pretend that doing so is any more of an objective necessity demanded by the gods than any other doing. as for my subjectivity I don't really care what happens so long as me and people I care about are content.

Just have honor. Don't betray your friends, and be honorable to your commitments toward the people you care about. That is the only spook that should exist. Honor.

The only valid moral is to never snitch ever, even if it is against your own interests.

I don't know if these are "morals" per se, but this is how I go about my interactions with others.

Try to make everyone happy. When there is trouble and you are forced to pick a side, let your commitments and responsibilities lead the way. Your decisions depend on the decisions you've made before. Your future is where your past will lead you to.

Morality and ethics begin and end in my feelings as I feel them either first hand or through empathy. Things that don't make me feel anything and don't seem "out of place" (consistency) for me have no moral value and there's no ethical guidelines on them.

The above statement is necessarily true for any individual, and the idea that there exists any morality or ethics other than the sum of these individual ones is a misinterpretation of reality, or rooted in other, previous misinterpretations of reality. The whole thing exists to avoid certain bad feelings in a society that the people creating these morals and ethics have experienced.

>>2556
>The only valid moral is to never snitch ever, even if it is against your own interests.
I also think "be nice" and "do what a good person would do" are valid morals, but in terms of concrete things yes snitching is the only absolute

>>2561
eh, I'd say it's still subjective. I can understand the opposition to snitching; it hinders others' freedom. however, you could say its no different than simple respect or being nice or whatever. it's something many people dislike, but you cannot logically explain why it is objectively wrong without your argument being no more than a persuasive essay.

>>2562

I think you should go back and reread the first post
>So, I'm guessing that most alice' aren't normal people and I'm not either, so I was wondering about how your personal sense of morality and ethics stack against the rest of wider society.

The question is how the /cyb/ people here specifically attempt to interact with the world morally in our high tech low life mentality. At least that is how I read the post. I think you are misunderstanding the point of the responses, I and nobody else here ( I hope) is trying to make deep philosophical arguments to back up our moral/ethical claims. Nobody in this thread has done that, and nobody in most of philosophical discourse has done so in a way that has yet to satisfy everyone.

I do still think though that the 'have honor' and 'never snitch' are core tenants that set the community here from the everyday Joe on the street.

>>2563
fair point. guess I was thrown off by the use of the denotative language. reminder that I as well as most users of anonymous image boards am an autist who cannot follow any degree of pragmatism. ;)

>>2562
sure, but neither could you about most things.
When you get right down to it basically nothing is really "pure logic", even what we mean by that is up to interpretation.
Like, I can't tell you a purely logical reason to get out of bed in the morning. There's not even really a good reason to believe that you exist: "I think therefore I am" is circular reasoning.
Morals should be practical and as such we shouldn't bother with whether they're purely logical or not, what matters is if we think they're good morals.

>>2568
yeah but what you're missing is that i'm a nihilist and I don't think I exist

this might just be a semantic point and a little unrelated but, are morals always linked to your actions e.g. if I spend all day thinking about good moral behavior but don't actually do anything particularly good, would it still be fare to call me or anyone like that a moral person?
and what about the reverse, if I'm donating to charity and helping old ladies cross the street but the back of my mind I'm a real prick, what then?

>>2570
if you act an asshole but are good at heart you're probably a self conscious person who views seeming cool as more important than integrity. if you're a cool person who's an asshole at heart you're probably a self conscious person who views being liked by others as being more important than integrity. either way all it is is slightly more layered morality. wether either is good or bad is subjective and depends on individual values.