CloseClose

 Encyclopedia.com -- Online dictionary and encyclopedia of facts, information, and biographies
Close window

RE: explain how you are moral

A video response to jezuzfreek777 (you are welcome to debate this with me): I stand for a UNIVERSAL ethic (applicable to all of mankind), that is teleological in nature. This means that I judge an action to be right or wrong based on the consequences of this action. The basic idea (which is secular) says that what I do to somebody matters to that somebody. If I punch somebody in the face, this person is going to experience pain. So for the person receiving the punch it is a negative experience and therefore wrong. We all share the same common traits...we wish to experience pleasure or happiness or in short positive experiences. And we want to avoid negative experiences. So I have to take that into account in my day to day life. I will try to give others as much positive experiences as possible, and as little negative experiences as possible. I also take into account the animals, because they share this trait with us as well. This is just an abridged version of my ethics, it is really more complex. But this is how I think ethics can be applied universally without God. We all share these traits and respecting these traits or preferences is a given for any ethic as far as I am concerned.

Related articles from HighBeam Research

A moral 'contract' nurtures a school.(Features)(Learning)(K-12)(Interview / Ted And Nancy Sizer)
WILD WEST TALE WITH A MORAL; PUPILS GIVE THEIR VERDICT Top Class Ofsted inspectors who visited earlier this month heaped praise on the school council, created four years ago to give pupils a say in the running of the school. Here some of the school council members explain what they like best about being a Manor Park Primary School pupil.(News)
If president does his job well, he should be left alone; Let voters decide The Republicans, the Clinton-haters and the media want President Clinton to resign. Why not allow the voters to decide? David Goldberg Milwaukee; Infidelity not cause for resignation Rep. Mark Neumann (R-Wis.) states in the Aug. 27 Journal Sentinel that President Clinton should resign because of the impact he has had on our children. As a mother of three, I thought I might share with Neumann the impact the president has had on my children. Clinton made it possible for me to stay home with my new baby for two months and not have to fear losing my job. Clinton also made it possible for me to stay in the hospital longer then 24 hours after a difficult birth. Both of these legislative victories were not supported by Neumann's Republican Party. I have also expressed to my children that Clinton has an admirable environmental record, unlike Neumann, who has never seen a wetland that wouldn't be enhanced by a strip mall. But I suppose the hardest political reality that I would have to explain to my children is Neumann's public comments concerning homosexuals and how he would never knowingly hire one. That, coupled with the recent vote by Neumann and his Republican colleague Rep. F. James Sensenbrenner against legislation that would protect federal workers from losing their jobs because they are gay, is very hard to explain. How do I explain bigotry to a child? So, Mr. Neumann, this Midwestern, middle-of-the-road soccer mom doesn't feel that Clinton should resign because of his marital infidelities, because the effects of that human failing are far less unsettling to my family than your voting record and haunting public comments. C.L. Marshall Milwaukee; Perceptions differ over conduct Perceptions of acceptable behavior vary between generations and locations. For example, if our president, his current problems and our Constitution were in place in Brazil, citizens would amend the Constitution and re-elect their president to a third term by acclamation. Public and private morals are often at odds. Fifty years ago, our Puritan background and folklore had masturbation causing blindness. A lifelong personal poll suggests the great majority of us have lied about our sex lives. If the law can question us on this subject, then to quote Charles Dickens, "The law is a ass." Mix some sin and a bad law together and what's the worst thing we can get? Kenneth Starr. This person has stuck his nose and the law where they should not go. He has diminished the presidency, and he has trivialized the law worse than O.J. Simpson's trial. Perhaps the future will require us to hire older presidents with lower libidos and testosterone counts. Trouble is, the president might be taking his daily nap when something important happens. Gerald Wilson Milwaukee; Wrong message sent about Clinton I am disappointed in Eugene Kane's remarks in his column "Before you close book on Clinton, think Simpson" (Aug. 20). I note Kane's faith has been shaken by the president's own recklessness allowing him to get caught. I can only assume that as with the other questionable practices of this administration, it's all right if you can get away with it. Furthermore, if you do get caught, claim ignorance, lie or blame it on someone else. What is at issue here is the violation of the public trust and pattern of dishonesty. The message that the Clinton legacy will leave for future generations is that lawlessness in and of itself is not at odds with acceptable behavior and personal responsibility in this country, only getting caught is. A complete admission of the president's behavior and the acceptance of the subsequent disciplinary action would do more to restore the tarnished image of the presidency domestically and abroad than placing the blame on the Justice Department's appointed prosecutor who got us the truth and the system of checks and balances that governs him. We are long overdue to relearn an old-fashioned concept that seems to have fallen out of favor lately, if you pay attention to the polls. As individuals, we make conscious decisions regarding personal behavior, are ultimately responsible for them and should accept the consequences resulting from them. David A. Bowen Mequon; How about another investigation? Since President Clinton was elected in 1992, the people have seen countless investigations into several matters. Having spent $50 million, we have learned that the president was unfaithful to his wife and family. We also know that he was unfaithful to the American people because he lied about his private affairs. When spending $50 million and running six years of investigations, it would be expected one would find more damaging violations than infidelity. The world now knows that our president is not totally perfect and that independent counsel Kenneth Starr is a very good investigator. I would suggest that we now send Starr to Iraq to investigate the mess over there. Maybe we will get more value out of the next $50 million we spend on an investigation. Frank August Menomonee Falls
Coping mechanism for executioners: Moral flexibility
G-RATED
Close

For your enjoyment and convenience, YouTube videos are automatically associated with content at Encyclopedia.com. Because videos come directly from YouTube, we cannot endorse their accuracy, content, or quality. However, we hope you find them useful or entertaining while using Encyclopedia.com.

More YouTube videos About these videos

Close window