Does ethics implede social progress???

Question

please tell me being a muslim "does ethics implede social progree...???"

Answer 1

I don't think your being a muslim has anything to do with your question. However, I think the answer depends upon a person't definition of social progress.

I think that the lack of ethics impedes social progress. Lack of ethics weakens the family & that necessarily weakens society. Unethical people are generally manipulative and are looking out for #1 - and #1 only. They are greedy, they walk all over others. If they are in a position of authority or the top banana, they abuse it. They could care less about the people who work for the co except that they want them to work to the exclusion of a family life. So that they make outrageous sums of money, it isn't beyond them to reduce health coverage if they don't do away with it altogether. They rid their companies of retirement programs. They downsize leaving people w/o jobs at a time when jobs are hard to come by. The lack of ethics affects society in every way imaginable until it reaches the point where many people believe that that behavior and belief system is the norm.

Answer 2

Ethic is a cultural idea. It demands a specific form of behavior from the members of that culture. To some degree it may be considered a group survival mechanism gone haywire.
Unfortunately, the harder you focus your energy on ethics the more you become unethical. It is the main ingredient for social progress and continuity. If there is no 'standard tradition' then the society has no identity to itself.
While it would be nice to abandon both mass social structure and ethical code for a more naturalistic harmony, at this point we are too far in the development of this habit and only a cataclysmic disaster would create an environment necessary to start over.

Answer 3

You are confusing "social progress" with "social movements", or "social change". Abortion was invented hundreds of years ago, my dear. And when it was first invented, it was briefly accepted as good... before it was outlawed again for many years. Then in the 70s, Roe V. Wade made abortion legal in America, and other countries did the same, around the same time. People who are fighting for change like to use the word "progressive" because it has a positive connotation, whereas "change" or "different" doesn't ALWAYS have a positive connotation. You see, the way things are phrased can sway the public's opinion on it. ======================================... The rights of women and blacks is a truly progressive thing, I will agree. Hopefully, never again will they be discriminated on, belittled, or denied access to any rights allowed by non-minority males. Hopefully they are allowed all of the rights God intended for us to have, and hopefully they KEEP those rights! -------------------- However, I do not view abortion as progressive. I say this because abortion does 2 things: It kills a human life, and it reduces accountability while also wasting taxpayer money. The human life can be argued; however, the fact that it is selfish, and that the embryo will EVENTUALLY turn into a human, cannot be denied. Also, the fact that it wastes taxpayer money and reduces accountability cannot and has not been denied. Why do so many people fight for the right to have an abortion? It is "just in case", they say. Just in case a woman wants to have sex with an inadequate partner, but then not want to have to have to bear the child or the consequences that come along with it. Well, if we start making people think that we live in a society where unaccountability and failure is OK, then that viewpoint will transcend into areas we CANNOT fix! Abortion may kill the problem of unwanted pregnancies. But why do you think americans are falling behind in education? Why do you think we are becoming fatter and lazier? In my opinion, abortion, along with the permeating feeling of unaccountability and carefreeness, is making Americans put what they want to do, over what they need to do. ======================================...

Answer 4

I think I see what you mean. You're female and a Muslim, right? If you are, I think you're caught in a dilemma of wanting to be a modern woman and having to stay faithful or religious in what your religion demands.

These demands of Islam may be the ethics you are referring to. I am a Catholic but I lived in a Muslim country for almost six years. I noticed that Muslim women are rather conservative, both in the way they dress and in the way they carry themselves. They are modest and are not aggressive. I also read, just recenly, that the Quran designates the wife to being a "homemaker" and the idea of woman being equal to man is an idea not to be adopted by Muslim women because if they do, they would usually desire to work in offices and that would lead to the "brokenness" of the family.

Sticking to the demands of your religion may be what's acceptable for most Muslims. But there are also those Muslims who see the teachings of Islam in a modern-day context. Take for example Queen Rania of Jordan. She is a Muslim and a woman. Yet, she does not confine herself to her wifely and motherly duties. She also advocates eduacation for both boys and girls, as well as, defend the HUMAN rights of women. She does not neglect her duties as dictated by the Quran and she is still able to be a modern woman.

That said, ethics would only impede progress of whatever sort IF they are NOT understood in the proper context. When talking about ethics, we should see how they are best followed depending on the present circumstances. In that way, we cannot be condemned as unethical or morally unrighteous because we still stick to the ethics even as we do what we think ought to be done given a particular situation.

All the best!
Cheers! :)

Answer 5

First, I think, one must ask what is ethical and what isn't. I think it may vary by society. Is it ethical to use natural resources until they are gone? What about if you are starving - living in abject poverty? Are ethics different for rich and poor - and, should they be?

When the rich and/or powerful act in a manner to oppress people, damage families, strip the planet of her natural resources for their personal enrichment - that is unethical and impedes social progress by forcing a sub-standard (relatively speaking) life-style on anyone poorer or less powerful. When countries act unethically - they diminish all of mankind. Terrorists - wherever they are from and whatever their political grievances diminish us all by causing fearful living - even if the "terrorist" is just the bully at school. For isn't that where behavior is formed - ethical or otherwise - in our youth? Children raised with a sense of entitlement view ethics differently from children raised with a knowledge of their privilege and a sense to serve others.

Euthanasia, abortion, capital punishment - life and death ethical issues. Who are we hurrying along to death? The one who served mankind well, the one who never had the chance to serve mankind, or the killer who may repent and teach others the error of his/her ways? Who decides?

So - the larger question may be: What is the definition of ethics - and who gets to decide what is ethical and what isn't? Perhaps that is one of the reasons it is taught (not necessarily learned) at the university level.

Unethical behavior is the roadblock to social progress - for all religions, ethnicities, and countries around the world.

Answer 6

They can but there not supposed to. The problem is that we are adapting ethics to new scenarios that they haven’t been used for before and they are becoming vastly more complicated. Out dated ethical practices often hurt society.

Answer 7

Bigots may impede their own social progress.

Otherwise, not necessarily! Your rules of conduct are personal and whether you want to get along with others or not is up to you.