Do you think that there are any ideas on ethics that are constant? I've noticed that ideas of right and wrong tend to vary drastically from one place to another and from one time to another.
Do you think that there are any ideals that are actually true and constant?
Thanks in advance for all opinions.
2006-06-12 10:03:07 · 6 answers · asked by thenetnomad 3 in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
That's a very good question. Are morals relative? Even the ones we think are basic--Thou shall not kill, Do unto others as you would have them do unto you,Don't put that in your mouth;you don't know where it's been!--can be violated if one feels he/she has just cause, and whichever society that individual happens to exist in has differing opinions on whether or not his/her actions were justified.
I suppose the only ethical constant I can think of would be the 5-second rule. Unless it's an Oreo. Then all bets are off.
2006-06-12 10:09:47 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
No. There is no objective morality, what we believe to be right or wrong depends on the society we live in. Many people believe in God because the idea that right and wrong are constant gives them comfort.
2006-06-12 11:30:54 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
The pretence of objective morality is useful for the society as we know it to function. However, personally I cannot see how there can be any objective moral truths. Even if there were, there would be no way to decide who should count as a competent judge.
2006-06-12 12:03:28 · answer #3 · answered by xerox-hands 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
squishing Larrib together will alway spell Lamb.
and that a descriptuion of Me.
as seen
fearless to reveal this about scripture
WINNER=2391414518=38=11=2=b
b=a DI stitched together
Larrib=Lamb
SLAIN=SIL A I IV
DI=IIII I
then Rev.17.14 reveals the BIBLE ITSELF wants Me the live like a KING. so it appears A LARRI with IIII I . fullfills the prophesy of the Lamb who was SLAIN rose up and won his war to become the KING OF KINGS AND LORD OF LORDS. but evil kings and queens opposed any new kings. so 119147=KING as their response to Revelation about Larrib. an innocent man in extraordinary circumstances as an orphan oppressed by his country.
god as its summed up god=7154=17=8=h thus god in heaven shows if you complete the bodies of h,n shows heaven is the funeral of his father and He is god as the first in heaven as h and his one arm-ed grandfather is the n. and they call him Larry TODD S. at the age he a v(Five) and search the calandar months for h and see another description of Him. Thus it was said only over time could real true god be proven to be one man only. and any voices you hear in your head after His death is just some sucker pretending to be god. but really a usurper to the throne of heaven.
thus at five years old i found i was god in heaven. not god jehovah but god in heaven. Jehovah god =e thus second in heaven is He. But I AM as the god in heaven who is first.
so don't say I got GOD because at five I was god.
2006-06-12 10:08:11 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Yes.
Ethics change because they were based on 1/2 truths.
Truth, however, is solid today, tomorrow and for ever.
2006-06-12 10:16:15 · answer #5 · answered by Uncle Thesis 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I think the old "Golden Rule" will always apply. Do unto others as you would have them do unto you", and perhaps, "Don't do unto others what you would NOT want done unto you." Works for me.
2006-06-12 10:06:39 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋