The Instigator
AshleyFratangelo
Pro (for)
Tied
0 Points
The Contender
CamilaPerez
Con (against)
Tied
0 Points

No right or wrong answers in ethics

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 0 votes the winner is...
It's a Tie!
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 1/27/2014 Category: Philosophy
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 530 times Debate No: 44691
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (1)
Votes (0)

 

AshleyFratangelo

Pro

Ashley Fratangelo: Pro- There are no right or wrong answers in ethics.
I believe that there are no right or wrong answers in ethics because I feel that morals have lost their meaning. Societal groups today don't have much of an effect on individuals because now there are a lot more people becoming independent both on their views, feelings, and morals. What I mean by people becoming more independent is that people now-a-days are tending to go opposite of what society says is "correct." Society has become extremely judgmental with the way people look, act, etc,. Because if you look at social media, they are sending messages to children of all ages showing how they should look, talk, act, etc,. but some individuals today want to go against the social norm and do their own thing. But what is society to tell them what is wrong and right? Society is just being brainwashed by what the government and people in power want them to believe. Individuals today haven't come to agreement morally and ethically. If they had, why are people going against what is right? As people continue to grow and change with society, controversy will also grow within the groups and also towards groups already in existence. Social media does have an effect on society, obviously, but not everyone gets affected by what the media has to say. With some media, they want us to believe certain things, then we get the "rebels" that go against that but only because they feel that what the media is trying to get across is wrong. With this, I can say that this stand on this argument has a more subjective view on the topic. This has led to a grey area in a general view of beliefs. Because of the diverse groups that have evolved through society over time, there is no one group that is higher than the others. All of the sub groups throughout society have their own beliefs and ideas, but who is to say that they are correct over any other group? No group is superior to another and they cannot tell others what they are doing is right or wrong. Everyone has their own view on many different topics and because people have removed themselves from conforming, there are no right and wrong answers in ethics. Things aren't always what they seem and not everything is black and white. United States society today has a lot of bumps throughout it, and is not equal across the board on many ideas. With that being said I can argue that there are no right or wrong answers in ethics. Claiming that there is a right or wrong answer is ethics, I can't agree with that because of the way that society is today. I can't agree with that because of the "rebels" that exist in our society today. I also cannot agree with that because everyone is different, and society is not uniformed. Every individual is different in every way, they may think the same on certain ideas and topics but that doesn't mean they have conformed completely. Because of the lack of conforming, there are no right or wrong answers in ethics today. People have evolved into their own way of life.
CamilaPerez

Con

To claim that ethics has no right or wrong answers, is like claiming that there is no right or wrong conduct when it comes to social behavior or actions within a society. Ethics refers to a set of moral principles or values within its society that govern the particular group or culture. Without these principles, there is no value to the cultures laws or socially acceptable moral conduct. Depending on the society and its social norms that is considered correct, there are right or wrong ways to manage the peoples behavior and actions. The diversity of the beliefs of one group does not take away from bad or good intentions those beliefs may withhold. The term "right" can be defined by words like proper, just or good, and the term "wrong" is deviation from truth or fact, or not in accordance with what is morally right or good. Controversy in a society explains the differences amongst the different groups' beliefs, which means that one group thinks they are right over the other or wrong. It is difficult to come to an agreement because of their subjective stand against each other. If we are talking about social media, we can take a look at an example of a very controversial issue in America that is, body image. Tabloids, magazines, and television portray a woman's body image in a very specific and impossible way to even relate to. Children and even adults feel the pressure to mold themselves to look like these airbrushed specimen that they see everyday. Now if there are no right or wrong answers in ethics, that is also stating that all of this pressure to mold oneself in order to look like what the media portrays to be beautiful is not necessarily wrong but considered gray area? I find that to be a little disturbing considering the fact that a very prevalent and fairly unique disease amongst young women is eating disorders. Claiming that starvation and unhealthy habits amongst young women is neither wrong or right but gray all over seems to be confusing since this is one view of ethics within our society that is a very controversial and consistent issue within social media. Ethics has very much to do with the right or wrong governing of a societies laws, and whether those laws are right , depends on how good or bad that society is governing there citizens and followers. In order for a certain answer to a question in society to be good there has to be a counter part of that certain behavior proving it is good, distinguishing it from bad behavior or belief. It is necessary that rules of conduct show a right way of dealing with issues amongst the group so that positivity and morality is being spread amongst its society. As a society develops it may progress into a bad direction because of its unhealthy and wrong conduct that misleads people into thinking or doing something wrong. There has to be a distinction between the right or wrongness of an action in order to determine in which way a society should go to better its moral values. Yes every individual amongst a society is different but that doesn't take away from the fact that they could be wrong in the way they act or think because of bad actions that lead to wrong beliefs that turn away from positive progress.
Debate Round No. 1
AshleyFratangelo

Pro

Correct, there are no right or wrong answers related to the social behaviors that people choose to take in a society. People regardless of their social status, group involvement, etc., people are going to choose to do what they like. Like mentioned previously, there is no higher group or power that owns the right to tell someone what they are doing is wrong or right. That"s why I stand by my decision and argue that there are no right or wrong answers in ethics. People are able to choose and do as they wish, given that we live in a free country. If we lived outside of the United States, I could understand why you would argue that things people do are right or wrong, black and white. But I disagree because what people choose to do, and what goes on in society is very grey. Society isn"t black and white as people would like to think. Throughout the beginning of your argument it is just based on definition of words. Relating to the topic of social media regarding body image. There is no right or wrong approach to this controversy. The social media is going to continue to put ideas into the minds of younger people, but what I am arguing is that the people of the society are going to either choose to listen to what the media says or disregard it. And i am arguing that there are no right or wrong answers in ethics, or moral, because that is true. If people choose to follow the idea and continue to grow with what the media is pushing on people, then who am I to tell them that is wrong or right. Im arguing from the side of the people and their decisions. Not necessarily what is persuading or deterring the people of the society to make the decisions they choose. Correct, the media telling people to mold to look a certain way is definitely a grey area. The media is in no control of the decisions people choose to make from what they state. The media is just there to express what is the new "mainstream" but its what people do with that, that make my point acceptable. Now regarding the eating disorders, social media isn't telling young girls or guys to stop eating to look thin or look a certain way. Social media is expanding its opinions and like mentioned many of times, its what the individual chooses to do. Social media isn't wrong for putting these ideas into young peoples minds, but its also not right for making people believe they have to live up to a certain standard. Its a grey area. Another major topic in today's society is gay marriage. The question is should it be legalized throughout the country, or not? Allowing gay marriage or not allowing gay marriage is another perfect example of a grey area. Gay marriage is legalized in certain states but not others. Now who am I, or anyone else to say that two people of the same sex don't have a right to get married? In my opinion I feel that if two people want to get married and are happy together let them. With your argument of there being right or wrong answers in ethics Im guessing you would argue why its not acceptable. But a question for you would be, who said that certain religions have the right to discriminate against others of different sexual orientations? Just because they live outside a religious norm, that doesn't mean that their marriage is wrong or right. If they choose to do that, so be it.
CamilaPerez

Con

It is very important in our society that our beliefs are diversified, one of the greatest accommodations our country holds is freedom of speech and religion. This right is one of the most important factors in making decisions and passing laws. In order for our system of democracy to function, the branches of our government make, enforce, and interpret laws that apply to our needs and rights. These branches decide whether or not one law should be passed or not and whether this law protects our rights against mistreatment and misconduct. Our whole government system is based on the rights of morally acceptable and fundamental goals that the system strives to withstand for the most fair operation of the system. If the system was based and manipulated by the unstable, vastly shifting ideas and decisions our society tends to make these days that constantly shift our thoughts of our society, our government would fail to dictate regulations that are necessary to protect us.
On the subject of gay marriage, types of groups have their own view of what is right or wrong about it. The sides that are making the most noise on this heated debate are the Christian groups that believe Gay Marriage and homosexuality is wrong, and on the other side there are the homosexuals that want and need the right to love and marry who they want. How one party, the Chrisitan party gets its reasoning for discriminating the rights of these human beings is ethically wrong. Gay marriage has been considered as unorthodox in most religions. Unfortunately, it is legal in only 14 states in the U.S and is still being criticized hitherto by many people. The main factor in ruling out a homosexual in being wrong is that its not part of the norm or seeming as if homosexuality was some sort of taboo. This unhealthy criticism of homosexuals is demeaning and disrespectful to these human beings that are only trying to function in society as well as their (judgmental) neighbors. Like heterosexuals; who most Americans claim to be, homosexuals are only giving in to their natural emotion and feelings for another person when they want to marry a person of their same sex. The only difference between the two is the attraction to a certain sex. Now, there is constant abuse the homosexual community faces when being held against certain rights they have, they cannot just do whatever they please (which is get married in their own church or community.) This disturbing idea that two people cannot do what others do as a vow of love and commitment, a tradition that is heavily important in our society and is considered normalcy amongst only one part of our society, they cannot do simply because of their own beliefs is extremely wrong, there is no gray area. These people cannot just choose to do what they want because the unfair laws set against them. It is simply unjust and wrong to think like this, and to claim that the party that bashes the homosexual community is neither wrong nor right is unreliable and corrupt. The questionable and deceptive belief that Christians tend to hold is that homosexuality is considered a mortal sin. The question of moral and ethical value Gay Marriage has, is complete nonsense because homosexuality is not a belief or a moral standing, it is simply a natural circumstance in a lot of humans. It is easiest to describe the debate with moral relativism since it describes how there are deep and widespread moral disagreements on most sensitive topics. Accepting the differences and uniqueness of others is essential to functioning as a community and society and toleration of differences should be enforced in natural law, and that the right way to handle the Gay Marriage situation.
Debate Round No. 2
AshleyFratangelo

Pro

With the three branches of government: judicial, executive, and legislative they do make up the laws regarding safety for society. But what they also do is create laws and punishments that for instance favor the "rich, white male." An example of the government making laws to favor the dominate white male of the country would be the issue between cocaine and crack cocaine. Crack is considered the poor mans drug where cocaine is considered the white wealthy mans drug. What the government has created is a law that states a man caught with possession of crack is going to receive a more harsh punishment than a person found with the same amount of cocaine. This is a prime example of why the government has created such controversy between the citizens of the United States of America. Just because people have elected them into congress and into power who are they to say that someone with crack should receive a harsher and more unfair punishment than someone caught with cocaine? What they have created is a mess, and they were not given the power to decide what is wrong or right, ethically, in our society. They believe they have the right to tell us, when in reality it is based off of the individuals feelings and what they want to do they are going to do. Because as a united nation, we are not united in our ideas, therefore there are no right or wrong answers in ethics. In order for there to be a differentiation between right and wrong, our society needs to come together as a whole. You talk about the Christian society and how they are making the most noise on gay marriage, but did god himself come down from wherever he may be and say to them, you are the ones that are in control of people"s decisions even when it doesn"t affect your life? I highly doubt that. Just because religious groups read about it and practice, and study it, that doesn"t make them in charge of everyone"s beliefs in this nation. The thing about gay marriage that blows my mind is that how is it that two people getting married can bother strangers so much that they feel the need to broadcast, embarrass, and degrade those people who are madly in love with each other? Even with that being said, those people of those religious groups are able to fight against what they believe in. In this generation we find this quite unsettling but no one here has the authority to say what they are doing is wrong or right. Back to the crack, cocaine example, yes the government has made that law and stated the consequences for possession of those drugs, but they have no right to say that a law should be created where both individuals are treated unfairly. But they have the right to express how they feel because of freedom os speech. I guess what I'm trying to ask is who told the government and the representatives of states that they are the people who are right and wrong and who differentiate between the two? Just because they are in power, it doesn't mean they are ethically correct or incorrect. There are definitely no right or wrong answers in ethics and morals. Society doesn"t rule the world. It"s the individuals that rule their own lives.
CamilaPerez

Con

If we were to let people do as they please just because they have moral disagreements and no one has the power to say or act upon it, then the arguments stand pointless in the first place. If we took a path toward moral relativism, then we are not only avoiding important discussion, and decision making, but we are also disregarding the immoral beliefs of violent characters that take party in society everyday. Ethics does not only offer a better direction of angling sensitive issues like, gay marriage or body image. Ethics also offers some answers on who to solve these issues and to help alleviate tension amongst opposing parties in these scenarios by making them think about how their opponents feel and how to better handle the arguments.
You are mostly referring to people who practice dogmatism, and that is in no way a helpful way to solve any issue in society. Dogmatism only attempts to offer less elaborate thinking upon important issues, like the ones mentioned. Dogmatists tend to rely not their own impertinent opinion when handling arguments and only assert there own troubles and opinions toward important arguments. Without empathy and reason, dogmatists avoid critical thinking and with that they can create a barrier against any sort of objective reconciliation. If our society were to let relativists, and dogmatists run how we make decisions, we would be letting a lot of guilty people slide and a lot of innocent people suffer by letting people do as they please. Again, i believe that in order for our society to strive and make the bed decisions for it, is to have some confines in judgement and behavior based on a ethical and moralistic scale. Having ethical integrity does not make our society unfair, it only makes it more appropriate and easy to live in a place where moral values are placed upon our beliefs and laws. The justice system works to provide comfort and sustainability for the present and the future, and that is what is most important when having to make decisions for our system. Corporation of the people and the government is necessary and helpful, but degrading and criticizing the rights and wrongs in not what I'm arguing. I am arguing that in ethics, there will be right and wrong answers to how one will go about deciding what is right for mankind. I stand by that I'm ethics and our system of government, there cannot be all gray area, or else the system fails.
Debate Round No. 3
AshleyFratangelo

Pro

Okay so you bring up a good point relating to violence, now the violence aspect we can discuss another time, but what we need to evaluate and understand is that during the premeditated violence that may occur due to whatever the situation relates to, the acting prior to the violence are not necessarily right or wrong ethically. This is because during that time where there is anger building up and adrenaline starting to pump, their actions and thoughts are not necessarily right or wrong. That is because they are the only person that is feeling those emotions during that time, so as an outsider who am I to say that what they chose to do during that time of anger prior to the violence is right or wrong. Let"s say that two people get into an argument on the street. One person decides to pick up a garbage can and throw it into the street. What that person did to that garbage can is relating to their feelings. I cannot tell that person what they did to that garbage can was right or wrong, because in the heat of the moment there are no right or wrong answers to ethics. I also feel that in the heat of the moment in many situations, morals will tend to go out the window. This might not be the case for everyone, but for the most part it does happen. People don"t always think straight and we understand that as a society. But what we try to do is criticize and judge people based on their ethics. Those people that get judged are being discriminated against because they are the "odd" people in society. Just because they choose to live outside of the social norms, that doesn"t mean that they are deviant, and it gives no one the right to criticize their decisions. By you saying that our society needs ethical integrity because it makes society more appropriate, what you are forgetting to realize is that not everyone chooses to conform to society. So with your statement you are suggesting that everyone needs to conform for society to become an easy place to live in. This world isn"t an easy place to live in, and its not because of society, its because of the struggles that individuals face everyday of their lives because people of certain social groups, powers, religious backgrounds, and races that decide that they are the most important people in society and that they have a right to tell the non conformers that what they choose to do ethically is wrong because those individuals don"t want to conform. That is why society isn"t an easy place to live in. People struggle every single day trying to fight the battles and unfairness of society, and most people don"t even realize that there are people out there trying to just get by day by day without all of the negativity surrounding them, but its hard. If you wanted society to become and easy and enjoyable place for people to live in then you would have to understand that telling people what they are choosing to do is either right or wrong is the incorrect approach. People need to learn from their own experiences. We as society cannot just pave a road for every individual. There are no right or wrong ways for someone to live their life.
CamilaPerez

Con

Justifying someone's actions or thoughts based on the freedom this country gives the leaves no moral ground for what those actions or thoughts may result in. Anger,resentment, and built up adrenaline are very general negative emotions that usually never result in a positive circumstance. These negative emotions are usually identified with dangerous people, like kidnappers, murderers and just overall evil people with bad intentions. Now if society were to justify any evil and immoral acts because of negative emotions, we would let criminals act as they please without any repercussion. This is why we have jails and courts systems two evaluate the wrongs these aggressive these people could commit. Using the analogy of the garbage can being thrown on the street, say the situation were to escalate and one person winds up murdering the other because things just get out of hand. Someone innocent dies and the other is let off because of the freedom of his uncontrollable behavior. Not being able to tell that person is wrong for committing murder is inexcusable and goes against thorax integrity this if try bneeds to protect its civilians. These "odd" people with usually abnormals beliefs can have very dangerous and violent intentions that raise a threat to society, it then becomes the responsibility of the government officials to take charge and to protect its citizens from further danger. There's I'd a huge difference between moral and creative integrity that needs to be correctly differentiated. People with questionable moral integrity are usual a threat to society because they don't believe in safe and moral behavior. People are given the right believe what they please in a creative or religious sense, but there's a fine line between a citing aggressively unjustly upon those beliefs or just practicing your beliefs in a harmless manner, which is acceptable and warranted.it is understandable that people tend to make mistakes andgetouti decontrol but when those mistakes and uncontrollable behavior leads to unforgivable and dangers situations , that behavior must be punished because it is wrong. The struggles people go through Ina daily basis are inevitable factors of life that all humans experience, those struggles cannot justify immoral or unethical behavior.
Debate Round No. 4
1 comment has been posted on this debate.
Posted by Philosobot 3 years ago
Philosobot
Was this a school assignment, to debate a classmate on debate.org on this topic? I just saw lots of posts with this subject and most of the users seemed new.
No votes have been placed for this debate.