The Instigator
E_Colucci
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
Pricetag
Con (against)
Winning
21 Points

The Relevance of Morality.

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  
Vote Here
Pro Tied Con
Who did you agree with before the debate?
Who did you agree with after the debate?
Who had better conduct?
Who had better spelling and grammar?
Who made more convincing arguments?
Who used the most reliable sources?
Reasons for your voting decision
1,000 Characters Remaining
The voting period for this debate does not end.
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 1/13/2008 Category: Religion
Updated: 9 years ago Status: Voting Period
Viewed: 1,955 times Debate No: 1758
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (16)
Votes (7)

 

E_Colucci

Pro

I just finished reading a debate between you and Patriots 16-0.

I am under the impression that you do not believe in a "right" or "wrong", ethics, or morality. If this is true, I'd like to challenge you, as I believe there is a definite right and wrong.

If you decide to debate me, I thank you and hope to hear your ideas soon.
Pricetag

Con

This opening statement is bits and pieces from other debates that I used to argue my point:

Everyone justifies their own actions. They may use twisted logic such as Hitler who believed that Jews needed to be eradicated because he was heavily influenced by anti-Semites who painted Jews as the reason for Germany's ills. While their logic is flawed they believe themselves to be right. The majority of people obviously disagree with them. However, this does not mean that Hitler was right and it does not mean that he was wrong. It simply means he had a very dangerous idea that he justified and was able to justify to thousands of others (nazis). If we all can't agree on something that means it's not objective, it's subjective therefore, it can't be absolute.

Everything is subjective. They are NOT wrong because there is no such thing as wrong. Do you know the term moral relativism? That is what I'm talking about. In my mind what they did is awful, but it is NOT wrong. To say it is wrong would imply that we are working from an objective idea. There is no such thing as objectivity, it is all subjective. While I may think and the majority of the world will think that their action is horrible it doesn't mean it's wrong. There is no such thing as absolutism or objectivity. It is all subjective to one's own feelings and experiences.

Right and wrong are in their nature objective terms. They aim at making everyone agree with some idea or cause. They can be used for good or for evil, but are very dangerous terms. For example: Jews and Muslims are wrong for denying the divinity of Jesus. That idea has lead to the deaths of millions of people. Another example: It is wrong to question the (insert authority here). That idea prevalent throughout society has led to oppression, slavery, genocide, et cetera. However I will say I believe that Hitler was despicable in what he did, that I believe that the death penalty is a poor system. I use these terms because I want to express my personal feelings and thus not seem so arrogant as to know what is truly right or wrong. Who knows, perhaps at some point in the future a genetic disease will surface amongst the jews and the only way to save humanity is to kill them. My point is this, we can't judge people as right or wrong because we do not have the knowledge or the agreement amongst our people to do so. Right and wrong are dangerous terms and have been used and continue to be used by many to move towards an armageddon (Ahmadinejad in Iran being amongst them). So, I urge caution in using those terms and emphasize use of terms that show you're personal feelings but do not force others to feel the need to conform around them.
Debate Round No. 1
E_Colucci

Pro

E_Colucci forfeited this round.
Pricetag

Con

I'll take this part to answer the expected question of, "if there are no morals than what do I believe?"

Well I'll tell you. I believe, personally, in utilitarian ethics. We should do what makes the most amount of people happy. As I explained in the comments section this idea makes morals so fluid that they no longer really matter. What is moral is what we decide at the time is moral. That is pretty much how we work now. At one point in the old testament slavery and genocide were pretty much acceptable however eating pork or shellfish was an "abomination", according to Leviticus. My point is not that we should allow murder to run rampant or to allow rape to happen without punishment. That is not what I advocate. What I do advocate is that we distance ourselves from the kind of absolutes that morality advances. As I have stated before in other arguments and possibly this one as well that the use of morality has caused much murder, genocide, oppression, intolerance, et cetera. If we distance ourselves from such absolutes and instead focus on how to best serve our common interests than the world would be a much happier place.
Debate Round No. 2
E_Colucci

Pro

E_Colucci forfeited this round.
Pricetag

Con

Since I have nothing to work on from my opponent I will simply reiterate my point as a formality. I don't think that someone who didn't even debate can logically win. My point is simply this. We all have our own ideas of right and wrong. No matter how sick and twisted they can be, we have them. We also do not have an objectively proven higher power to mandate a set of rules for us. Therefore, there is no objective set of morals and cannot be one. We decide what is best as we have for centuries. Not what is moral as though we could have the knowledge to be able to objectively say we are right, but ideas that help society and the large majority can agree to and abide by. Notice the distinction, we should have ideas but not morals. In this way we stave off division and destruction by rivals who are mandated each by their own absolutes to rid the world of some made up evil (examples of these made up evils, jews, gays, communists, gypsies, Native Americans, all non-Christians, all non-Muslims, et cetera). I implore all to use ideas instead of morals to persuade others, it is much less dangerous and much more fair to all.

Vote for me, the only one who debated this topic, good day all.
Debate Round No. 3
E_Colucci

Pro

E_Colucci forfeited this round.
Pricetag

Con

Refer to my last post. I'm the only one that debated. This post has to be 100 characters long. Vote for me, good day.
Debate Round No. 4
16 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by Kleptin 9 years ago
Kleptin
It's too bad, I was hoping for a good debate.
Posted by Pricetag 9 years ago
Pricetag
Yea sure, just draft up a debate and challenge me. I'm too lazy to do it right now.
Posted by Redman 9 years ago
Redman
Pricetag, if you want I will start this debate again and we can have it. I do believe in a standard right or wrong. I have heard of moral relativism and the happy theory on the a majority's happiness. So, when you want to debate, if you do, let me know on the comments section.
Posted by Pricetag 9 years ago
Pricetag
I spoke too soon, I did not see that there is one round to go, perhaps she will show up for the last round.
Posted by artC 9 years ago
artC
Good deal. I can't wait. I think I made good points as well, lol. You did too though. It'll be interesting to discuss both of these subjects. I'm in a philosophy class right now called Applied Ethics, it's really interesting and we're discussing morality in a way right now.
Posted by Pricetag 9 years ago
Pricetag
After this debate is finished I'd be more than happy to discuss that with you. However, I don't want either myself or my opponent have an attack on two fronts. We also need to talk more about the whole atheism/agnosticism thing. I think you made very good points and I'm surprised that you didn't win.
Posted by artC 9 years ago
artC
Pricetag I would really like to talk to you about Heathenistic Act Ulitarianism. That's what you kind if sound like. There are some interesting cases to bring up in regards to morality with this philosphy and I'd be interested to hear what you think.
Posted by artC 9 years ago
artC
Well I'm lookig forward to it. I hope so too.
Posted by Pricetag 9 years ago
Pricetag
I really want to comment on that, but it could damage this debate so, I will talk to you more about it after this debate, because you hit something that I'd really like to talk about. I'm enjoying our discussion very much by the way. Hopefully they can set up that message system soon.
Posted by artC 9 years ago
artC
I guess I agree with you but I can't completely believe there isn't a universal right and wrong. If someone kills someone else and nobody finds out and the person who did it doesn't care and the murdered person didn't contribute to society or have a family. Was it wrong?

I think yes.

When I was five my mom and I were watching a movie where someone killed someone else and someone turned them in. My mom asked me if I would turn her in if she killed someone. She was joking. I actually thought about it, and then said yes. Because it would be wrong of her to do that.

I guess I think that if I could think that about my mom as a five year old there must be something to it. That story may not convey my point but it feels like a good explanation to me so I thought Id try.
7 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 7 records.
Vote Placed by Rob1Billion 9 years ago
Rob1Billion
E_ColucciPricetagTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Vote Placed by attrition 9 years ago
attrition
E_ColucciPricetagTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Vote Placed by 3DCrew 9 years ago
3DCrew
E_ColucciPricetagTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Vote Placed by gonovice 9 years ago
gonovice
E_ColucciPricetagTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Vote Placed by Lenfent 9 years ago
Lenfent
E_ColucciPricetagTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Vote Placed by Tatarize 9 years ago
Tatarize
E_ColucciPricetagTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Vote Placed by Pricetag 9 years ago
Pricetag
E_ColucciPricetagTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03