English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

11 answers

Murder someone. Remember that there is a huge difference between murder and self-defense. The death penalty is the latter.

2007-08-09 05:14:16 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0 1

I chose to answer this broader question rather than your other specific question(s) because I think it gets to the heart of the matter more directly. I think there are concievable times when it would be OK to kill, lie, etc. Though the moral standard is, by far, most often in effect. I think there are times when the "greater good" requires breaking ALMOST any moral rue.

The ONLY thing I can think of that would be wrong under any circumstances is blaspheming God, though perhaps that's more theology than philosophy. Since God is always right, saying he's wrong is always wrong.

But for an atheist, I'd probably have to answer "no" to your question. In fact, for an atheist, I imagine they'd say that all morality is invented in the first place, relative to various societies in different times and places, with no universal absolutes.

2007-08-09 12:17:53 · answer #2 · answered by Keep On Trucking 4 · 0 1

No, because someone could always threaten to destroy the world (and you know he has the equipment and his finger is looming over the button to do it) unless you did something. Now is there anything you could do that could make saving the world bad?

Abandon morals, and live according to the circumstances of the present. Morals is a method, a set guidelines. Guidelines restrict freedom, making the correct/best path sometimes unable to be reached, if you with hold the guidelines.

2007-08-09 12:28:54 · answer #3 · answered by lufiabuu 4 · 1 0

Our actions are neither right nor wrong. They are neutral, a series of arbitrary events we commit ourselves to. They cannot be deemed right or wrong until they are subjected to the judgment of those who are affected by them, or have observed them. In the same hand however, the capacity to judge is one of the few things that sets a clear divider between the Human Animal and the 'lower' animals. Since this is the nature of our being, or a part of it anyway, the status of our actions, whether morale lies in the action itself, or the assessment of the action is something that cannot clearly be defined. I can give you semantics, but I am afraid I have no truly good answer for this good enough question.

2007-08-09 13:19:36 · answer #4 · answered by Rick R 5 · 0 0

Certainly there are actions where I cannot think of any possible circumstances in which I would regard them as the right thing to do.

2007-08-09 12:31:42 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

Playing to lose.

2007-08-09 14:38:46 · answer #6 · answered by Phoenix Quill 7 · 0 0

Yes, having sexual intercourse with anything other than human.

2007-08-09 12:34:44 · answer #7 · answered by Veteranschoice 4 · 0 0

voting for Hillary

2007-08-09 12:52:23 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0 1

molesting a child

2007-08-09 12:14:59 · answer #9 · answered by laverew 2 · 1 0

There is one thing....I just didnt found it yet.

2007-08-09 13:40:15 · answer #10 · answered by CuriousG 3 · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers