What has higher probability, an immoral person becoming moral or.....?

Question

On issues of moraltiy ethics,
Which scenario has a higher chance of transition.

An immoral person will transform their lives into improved morals, or it is more likely a moral person will lose values and become immoral?

Thank You for answering.

By immorals I am referring to envy, greed, lust, hatred,).

I know immoral sounds a bit stong, perhaps vice and virtue, lust, or sins in religious circles not crimes like they used to be. To add more to hypothethic, Consider someone incarcerated - in Jail, odds bettter maybe an offender or ex offender would seek to improve their morality, ?

Answer 1

I think there is a higher probability that a moral person will lose some ground and slip in some area.

I think immoral people are far less likely to gain a sense of morality.

Answer 2

Neither has higher probability to become its' opposite. It's an extremely variable situation, depending on circumstances, the individual's personality makeup, whether or not the moral or immoral stance was freely chosen in the first place. Our life experiences lead us to our various decisions in life, and not all decisions are the right ones for whatever situation necessarily. But I'd say, on the whole, a moral person's existence would be a more rewarding one, as the immoral person would probably spend a lot of their time looking over their shoulders. I don't know that they'd sleep as well at night, having to constantly juggle their vices. Whereas, with purity of mind, comes peace of mind! One need not worry that their "slip" is showing!

Answer 3

I believe that it is much easier for a moral person to become immoral than the other way around. Ofcourse each person may argue weather or not their actions appear immoral or moral. In todays society there seem to be alot more things fueling immoral actions like greed, than there are fueling good moral actions. I think more people in todays society just dont care enough to follow a good set of morals. It seems that those who are immoral and get away with it without consequences are almost in a sense, winning in the game of life. A moral person doesnt seem to gain as much than an immoral person. I think this is why a morally right person may be persuaded to the other side and thus, an immoral person to then change their ways to good. (Applying to your description of immorals.)

Answer 4

If you consider the reality of what human beings are naturally like, then you realize that to transform into a moral person is the more difficult of the two. We are naturally inclined towards immoral thoughts which lead to immoral actions and decisions. To gain moral values and higher morality in character, we need to change from the inside out. We cannot do that of our own volition, we need God's help to make that transition.

Answer 5

Immoral person becomes moral and a moral person becomes immoral most probably in hindi movies only. In reality they are what they are for a reason and one life is not good enough to eradicate the karmas of the past life.

It's not that people don't want to change themselves but we live in a world which is not condusive to let us uplift ourselves easily.

Answer 6

Morality is the question that arises between people who have ethics which are incomprehensible to other people. There is no such thing as immoral people but there is crime. What is crime is contingent on the morality of a people in a time and a place. In our western thinking democratic agreement is the formal moral process. In theocratic monarchies it is the beliefs formed from the interpretations for contingent conditions in the substance of their experience. The Incas, for example, believed in human sacrifice and human breeding as ethical acts.

Morality is an ever progressing philosophical development that rises to higher levels of abstract thought so that envy, greed, lust, hatred etc. have comprehensible foundation in the formation of individual spiritual phenomena. The concepts 'end in itself' and 'it as means to an end' come into being clarifying these social-spiritual phenomena.

Consider the relations of trust and peace. If I have defect in myself which destroys trust in me, then likewise my sense of peace goes with it. My understanding for honesty diminishes. Trust in the sense for competency and reliablity for correct action is a different form of the Judgment, but with that one defect I would lose that other sense as honesty and competency have a relation in certainty. If I am a leader and this defect is onset after my establishment as leader, then as a leader I would become immoral (prejudice), but not by necessity criminal. Would morality then change as the leadershp changes.

The progression in moral development is the history of philosophy, then philosophy for history.

The probability changes as philosophy grows, but contingent conditions which are known for their randomness determines as much as wisdom does.

Answer 7

An immoral person becomming moral, as none of us are moral anyway, no not "one". We are only "counted" as moral positionally, not that we are, we try but we fail, the test is in the "trying" and in that builds the character to become moral, always a continuing quest and goal.

Answer 8

we all have some of those traits anyway. I am a hateful person if someone offends one of my kids, so we are all naturally immoral, and I think temptation is easier to follow than becoming better, but there are so many people becoming better I hope it goes that way. I am a good Christian and think of others and feel like I am better than worse.

Answer 9

I was initially inclined to say obviously it's easier for people to become worse, but I feel like there has to be some sort of balance being maintained between the two or the world would fall to pieces.

Answer 10

Today's society tends to reward envy, lust, greed and hatred, so it is more likely that a moral person will be led into temptation.