Why not bad for the sake of being bad?
2007-10-20 04:00:09 · 4 answers · asked by Matthew T 7 in Arts & Humanities ➔ Philosophy
If there is no reward of punishment, what is the motivation?
Isn't the "right thing to do" the same as "being good"? That makes it sort of circular, doesn't it?
2007-10-20 04:23:53 · update #1
I'm pretty sure that "to be good for the sake of being good" means absolutely nothing. It is much like saying, "my couch is blue because it is blue." It provides you with no more information than the statment, "my couch is blue."
People act in "good" or "bad" ways for a reason. To claim that the reason for their actions is simple "goodness" or "badness" avoids the real question of why people do what they do.
2007-10-20 04:31:17 · answer #1 · answered by Kristian D 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Well, I think that there is no set "right" or "wrong", but we conclude a solution that seems right from what we've learned is right/wrong by those we know, what we feel emotionally, and what seems like it'd cause the most pleasure/least pain for others, sometimes ourselves. I think we do what is bad because we don't' want displeasure for ourselves (such as getting in trouble) and think we can get away with it (such as lying aboot something bad you did). It does seem to be full circle.
2007-10-20 09:27:52 · answer #2 · answered by ♠I Did My Time♠ 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
To me it means that you should be good because it's the right thing to do. I also believe that one can have just as much fun being good as they can being bad. You're certainly likely to end up with better (and more) friends.
2007-10-20 04:11:12 · answer #3 · answered by Rick 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
it means you have no expectation of punishment or reward for your actions. bad for the sake of being bad means...FUN!!
2007-10-20 04:07:04 · answer #4 · answered by amanda c 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋