The Instigator
Con (against)
3 Points
The Contender
Pro (for)
0 Points

most people know right from wrong.

Do you like this debate?NoYes+1
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 1 vote the winner is...
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 3/23/2015 Category: Philosophy
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 783 times Debate No: 72223
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (1)
Votes (1)




i am challenging my buddy Xxzefd to a debate about whether or not most people know right from wrong. i am not saying that objective morality does not exist. i do think that most people might know a little about right and wrong but not much as most peoples opinions on right and wrong change so much and every population contradicts almost every other population on moral issues. we even contradict each other. i think this is an open and shut case for me but my friend seems to think otherwise. im not going to take the time to capitalize every letter that needs to be capitalized. i will capitalize when it is helpful to the person reading it. there is no need to capitalize the first letter of every sentence. you know after a .? or ! that what follows is the beginning of a sentence. please do not judge grammar and punctuation as i am very under educated. that does not mean that i am less intelligent or that my views are automatically wrong as nothing you learn in school cant help you figure out anything about god and right and wrong. infact i would argue that education can warp a mind that would disprove theories about right and wrong and about god. dont know why i mentioned god as this debate has nothing to do with god.


i would have to say that most people do know what is right from wrong because it is a innate trait inherent in us all, well of course most except some sociopaths and or psychopaths who are insane and or seriously mentally ill. even atheists and agnostics like you and i have this innate ability! this of course nullifies the "wide scale" belief that morality comes from religion or belief in a diety or dieties. we all have this instinct to us and it is to just "know" right from wrong without question. we know to not kill because we know that murder destroys a persons life and can lead to life without chance of parole or the death penalty even if it didn't we wouldn't do it because we have a natural responsibility to co-exist peacefully. we know just alone by ourselves that rape is wrong. there is actually state and federal penalties to this specific wrong alone. hell there have been stories where what these wrongdoers do comes back to them in the same exact manner. i could go on and on about this. i know not to "rat" on someone because I know it's do i know? i know because i have the innate ability to distinguish between right and wrong.
Debate Round No. 1


it is an innate trait inherent in us all? what science is this based on? we have a brain that comes up with rules but the BELIEF that we all know right from wrong is purely dogmatic and there is absolutely nothing but evidence against it. i know when you sent that letter saying you would take the pro in this debate that we did not think alike. lol. we cant all be right about our moral views because we contradict each other. you have yet to come up with a single rebuttal for what im saying. you havent explained whether or not you believe it doesnt disprove free will and there has been no rebuttal. further more you ramble dogmatically about our knowledge of right and wrong without a single precept supporting your conclusions. what you are probably calling your premises are very weak premises that are in need of premises. i dont even think i need to say anything else but i will continue. you didnt even admit that most people are wrong about most precepts. well most people at one time thought it was righteous to rape women when the "god" you dont believe in ordered them to rape them or when their parents said it was ok to do so and forced them into marriage with you or when they spoke their minds as any abuse was then justifiable. cruel capital punishment like burning alive and hangings and tortures of really slow deaths of all kinds were once acceptable and now the same people (christians) believe that we should love everybody. the zen buddhists dont even believe in right and wrong. "there is nothing either good or bad but thinking makes it so." how can their be right and wrong without goodness and badness? if nothing has a bad result then what makes it wrong? if nothing has a good result then what is right? my point is that these people dont even believe in right and wrong.

many people in the past have thought that rape was ok. most people of one time call what we call rape acceptable. you can call different things by one name but they are still different and your doing something that is quite silly and pointless when you do that. if we change the definition of rape to allow for what we would have to call "justifiable" rape right now (as we consider the act rape) it doesnt change whether or not we are right in the act it just changes what we are calling it and means the exact same thing. some people change the definitions of words to make you think they are saying something that they are not i guess. and its pointless. no matter what you say, the meaning of what you say is all that matters. not the words used. if i were to say that healing people is wrong and my definition of wrong is actions that bring about good results then you would probably call what im calling wrong righteousness. and what i was saying was actually true by everyone but i made them think i was saying something that they disagreed with by using my own definition of a the word wrong. i could say a fish is a mammal and by mammal meaning the definition of fish but it wouldnt change the fact that a fish is the definition of fish. it doesnt change what it is. yes we have (for SOME time) called rape wrong but our definition of rape has changed so much that what was considered justifiable sexual intercourse is now considered rape so with our definitions rape has not always been wrong. now how can we know that "rape" is wrong while they think what we call rape is righteous? explain that one. unfortunately for you our moralities have changed much more than once. much more than a thousand times. probably millions of times. what percent of people can know everything when it comes to right and wrong? if you believe in moral progress you should believe that most people do not know right from wrong. every moral progress starts out with a handful of people who convince the their world of it. most people dont change on their own and have no premises for their moralities. if they have no premises their moralities are blind faith and they do not consist of knowledge therefore they do not know right from wrong. the conscience is proven to consist of vague reminiscences of precepts heard in early youth so it is never smarter than your mother father or nurse. Bertrand Russel in Why I A Not A Christian. it has also been proven that a lot of people use the part of the brain that deals with emotions when trying to determine right from wrong instead of the part of the brain that deals with reasoning. ever watched or read about "the science of evil" or "the experiment"? or anything about the brain? i doubt it.

hate to see a christian believing that people know right from wrong. those who believe we know right from wrong dont see a need to change anything. people like me disprove your "facts" about right and wrong.


To tell you the truth, morality is totally not based on science! Morality is purely self made! The best kind of morality is the kind that you know will benefit you the most the kind that is made up by you. Our sense of right and wrong; is my friend, self created or changed throughout our lives both consciously/subconsciously to go in accordance with our self interests. You are literally right now making decisions everyday on your own. What you do right is determined by you whenever however it may be. What is wrong is how the decisions you made went against the self interests of other people. Now that's whats wrong! Or wrong could just be a decision you know you need to make that requires you to make a "great sacrifice" of some sort that definitely has strings attached to this "wrong" decision you have to make. There is no such thing as "Ultimate Morality" it's a bunch of crap . There is only self made morality that works the best. People, even in my eyes, that need an "Organized Morality" like they do with religion, politics and other things need someone to give them a serious "Reality Check" so they can learn to work how "The World Works" and how to properly be "Apart of Society".
Debate Round No. 2


you said "to tell you the truth morality is based on science. im assuming you mean observation. but most people blindly accept their moralities at their mothers knee. their consciences consist of vague reminiscences of precepts heard in early youth as bertrand russell said and it has been proven if common sense didnt prove it. all of our parents believe differently so we have different moralities. now how can murder be right and wrong? how can rape be right and wrong? how can sex before marriage be right and wrong? if everything is both right and wrong then whats the point of a morality? i guess i can do whatever i want and you will say im right. infact you should say that so as not to contradict yourself.

you said " the best morality is the kind that you know will benefit you the most. ok so you do think i should do whatever i want and call it righteousness. the best kind of morality i think is the kind that benefits both you and the group or society if you will. i dont think morality should be as selfish as you seem to think it should be. apparently one of us doesnt know right from wrong. also you said morality is based on science and then you are saying we should make up our moralities. contradiction. the imagination is not scientific. its the exact opposite of observation. you also said " the best kind of morality is the one made up by you". so you actually think everybody making up their moralities is good? most people are not smart enough. to have a good morality you have to know what is fair. everybody disagrees on what constitutes a fair fight. do you stand them up when it goes to the ground? some say yes some say know because it puts grapplers at a disadvantage. some say anything goes and some want ground rules. i could go on alll day. to know what is fair for a human you must answer many questions no one is even trying to answer.

question one what are we? the questions that this is asking are are we spiritual beings that have free will or are we physical beings that do what we do because something is causing us to do it. the answer to this will determine whether or not criminals deserve to suffer. some dont believe in free will and some do so how can they both know right from wrong. also this is asking how smart are we. do we know right from wrong is the next question that is included in what are we. some think we know right from wrong while smart people dont think we do as we all contradict each other which proves that belief wrong. the other questions i can think of right now are what are we in relation to each other and why are we here. what are we in relation etc. is asking are some less deserving than others and stuff like this and everybody disagrees. some peoples moralities dont follow that racism is wrong because blacks and others are less deserving than we are. i dont agree but clearly most people dont know right from wrong. and most people in the past were racist. they contradict us. you still have yet to comment on the contradictions ive brought up. why are we here determines what we should do with our lives. then you have to prioritise morals and that is difficult for most to do as they fumble around and screw it up and once again they all contradict each other which you have no rebuttal for apparently.

you say morality is to go along with our self interests. i want many things that i shouldnt do what i have to do to acquire them. your basically saying i should be a sociopath. you havent mentioned others once in telling me what a morality is about. if everyones morality was about self interest there would be chaos because everyone doing whats best for themselves would create chaos because there is a conflict of interest. that means conflict cruelty and many other things that most of us dont want here in america. are you from another country? you say wrong is what goes against the self interest of other people. everybody has different interests and moralities so your saying i have to treat people according to their moralities or im wrong while i should do what serves my interest which is a contradiction. how can i do what i want and what someone else wants. conflict of interest as ive stated. you say there is no ultimate morality. that means we do not know morality as we are never finished learning so we do not know all of right and wrong. i agree and think you for supporting the con side.

ok dude. you said something about morality in politics. when any topic arises most people have every possible answer to the question is this policy right or wrong and why. they give every possible answer to any question. clearly we dont know right from wrong when it comes to politics because we cannot agree on whether or not a politician is good or bad. if we dont know good from bad we do not know right from wrong. you say we need oganized morality but you also say the best morality is the one made up by you. contradiction.


after reading the arguments of Con and after careful observation of your argument in R3 i will attempt to provide you my rebuttals which might prove my points. For one I said "to tell you the truth MORALITY is NOT based on SCIENCE"! Morality is purely a philosophical concept. There is even evidence i have from that shows that morality cannot be taught using Science. But yes you do prove a point that by saying: "MOST people blindly accept MORALITIES at their mothers knee." And yes of course we have free will and this means we can make up our morality throughout time consciously and subconsciously. We can choose to do whatever we want but we must make sure to "Work how the World Works" or this leads to our "EVENTUAL FALL" from those we have hurt due to the violation of their self interests and STABILITY that we took away due to wronging them. We have to make sure that our morality measures up to our own personal standards of living. Is our morality "SAFE" and is it "STABILE" if your morality is purely based off someone elses then you are nothing more then a follower of a systematic form of control. If your morality does not go in accordance with your self interests then it's just SYSTEMATIC CONTROL designed to punish yourself at the benefit of others. Selflessness is as wrong as Selfishness, so you have to know where to draw the line. Some people cannot operate their own lives without a "Instruction Manual". Hell even some people that have an "organized morality" still somehow get themselves into excessive amounts of trouble with family and other strangers due to their inability to know how to control themselves; such people totally fail at keeping themselves stable. They do not know their place, or how to "play their cards right".
Debate Round No. 3


my apologies for thinking you said morality is based on science. sometimes i skip a word when reading and dont know ive done it. its been happening ever since the accident. your right. morality is a philosophical concept. a philosophical concept that everybody disagrees on. the majority of peoples moralities have changed so much that not one precept has been permanent. we are constantly changing and our moralities are one hundred percent different than some of the majorities of our ancestors. we would not agree with them on one issue. you think we know right from wrong today. but so did our ancestors. they didnt know slavery murder misogyny and things like this were wrong and we too dont know what we are doing wrong. most of us dont anyways. we still hate gays unjustly. we still take birds that can fly around the world and place them in tiny cages to spend their lives singing to themselves and smelling their own crap. and walking in it. horrible things happen to animals in captivity because they cant call cops so they might as well be slaves. i could go on all day about the things we are doing that i think are wrong but you would disagree and argue i dont know right from wrong.

we have wars and conflicts with our friends all the time because we do not know right from wrong. with every conflict their is at least one person in the wrong. if one wasnt wrong then there would be no conflict. other countries think we are wrong and we think they are wrong. this is why we fight. if most people knew right from wrong there would be no war. you think the people in other countries who fight us think they know they are wrong? bull squirt. the majority of people i dont think would fight if they knew their country was wrong. and lets look at the moral stupidity of the past. a "perfect" god once commanded the destruction of cities and the killing of men women and children so the israelites could live there. and this god was perfect at one time and still is today actually. you told me that. also look what we did to the indians and the blacks? if that stuff was wrong then they didnt know right from wrong because they all thought they were right. they thought they knew right from wrong so how do you know you know right from wrong. people are credulous and want to believe they know right from wrong. people generally believe what they want to believe. thats why believers are always aking "have you heard the good news". lol i have yet to see you make a point. just blind faith coming from you but ill keep reading. i expected a challenge. if i lose it will only be because of my grammar.

how is making up a morality knowing right from wrong? you said we have free will and we can make up our moralities over time. free will doesnt prove we know right from wrong and you failed to make a point here also. what a shocker. but making up our moralities isnt learning whats right from wrong. imagining is the opposite of observation. without observing and learning how can you come to know what is right from wrong? thats just making up what we want to believe is right and wrong. if we were righteous our lives would be much harder because the right way is always the hardest way. most of our past has been nothing but countries locking people up for stealing and going to other countries to steal land and money legally. its the same thing yet one is said to be right and one wrong. or was at least. humans think they know right from wrong. but clearly they dont as they all contradict each other. explain to me how murder can be right and wrong. if it isnt then most dont know right from wrong as they disagree on every other precept. if it is right and wrong then there is no point of morality because whatever we think is right is right. guess ill come rape your wife and put your kids on the black market for money because it would benefit me after i convince myself that its righteous. and in your opinion it will be because whatever we think is right is right. there are people who would have said this is ok in the past and you say they know right from wrong so i guess if i wanted to do that i could in your opinion. your wrong for speaking your mind i guess because people in other countries kill for that if it goes against what they believe and they think they are well within their rights.

you have still failed to provide a single rebuttal. if you win i will assume that most people on this site are biassed and just wanted you to win so they voted for you. this is the biggest win in a debate i have had yet on this site and ive debated with teenagers before. i have more points to prove but not enough space. ill leave you with this. how can most know right from wrong when their are thousands of different combinations of moral precepts and when maybe 5 percent of people agree with each other being the closest thing to a consensus? you know what. im done here. clearly i have won and there is no need to continue this debate.


Ahhh it friend! This has even me convinced. What if morality or our "sense of right and wrong" is an illusion? I ask this question because for one there is so many problems in this world. For instance, you have a VAST MAJORITY of the HUMAN RACE a "SLAVE" to "RELIGION"; and these people cannot even see the "right and wrong" in the own religious belief systems. they destroy and degrade one another all for "God" and gaining entrance into "Heaven". these people do not have a "morality" or a "sense of right and wrong". many see themselves as good people who are "righteous" but in the eyes of people like you and i they are "violent sociopaths/psychopaths". those that run our legal system do not have a "morality" or a "sense of right and wrong" they just get paid to push paperwork and get paid to either lock someone up, kill them or "let them go". the "truth" is just a "punchline" to them! the one's running or government and corporations and law, medical and military complexes do not have a morality or a sense of right and wrong. yet they see themselves as "outstanding citizens" who are righteous and have a "morality" or a sense of "right and wrong" what these people fail to understand is that they just are just like everybody else who lives off a "SELF MADE MORALITY" which is nothing more, nothing less then a "ILLUSION". this debate was a hard one but nevertheless entertaining!
Debate Round No. 4
1 comment has been posted on this debate.
Posted by steffon66 2 years ago
thanks for voting salam.morcos
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by salam.morcos 2 years ago
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 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:30 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro conceded.