Do You Have A Moral Compass

[Vampyro]

Very well point prooven, but to throw you a curve ball about the "Baby Hitler theory", there's other aspects that could also be taken into consideration, say hitler's childhood was different. Maybe I'm going too much into detail about Hitler through all this.... however, hitler was very narcistic (hope I spelled that right), committing genocide against millions of jewish people, when he himself was half jewish. I've not studied too much into Hitler's younger years, but I'm pretty sure I remember reading about him having unpleasant experiences with the jewish side of his family... wich turned into a grudge insanely out of control. He also was a speed junkie, wich actually aided his ability to give such moving and powerful speeches to his people. But before I get too far off track, if hitler had been given a better life.. would he still turn out as narcistic as he was? Or is this point of yours based on the theory that everyone's life is predestined? With this we open up a whole other can of worms... is life predetermined or not? And that's not topic relavent so I'll stop right there and just ask you this. If someone from the future came back to assasinate you for becoming a genocidal dictator in the future, would you think this to be fair? Now knowing this new information, wouldn't you at this moment think that you still have a choice?

Now, to go to a different spectrum of this morality topic, a moral compass, being based within a human being, and we are a learning creature. And we come from different cultures, so your point on the different cultures having wars is very true, a HUGE part of morals is infact based on the certain culture and that specific society. The profound misunderstanding between our culture and that of middle east shows that. However, as contradicting as one's morals can be with anothers, I do not belive we are born with any "instinctual" morals. If anyone is familiar with infants and todlers, than you know full well that as soon as they start learning to move around and grab things, EVERYTHING goes in their mouth... so learning what to eat and not to eat has nothing to do with morals, however, when the kids get more mobile, they also get more destructive, in wich parenting/teaching should begin. A general statement of the morals, It's wrong to break something that doesn't belong to you, but infants and todlers don't know this, they see shiney keys, they see toilet, they put 2 and 2 together, and just think it's fun seeing something flush down the hole, they don't know any better. So in light of everything I've read thus far... I've come to this conclusion so far...

What each person finds right and wrong in a moral compass so to say, judges wrong things as things they would find unpleasant to have someone do to them (ie, you know it's wrong to break someone else's shit because you don't want your shit to get broken)

Given on that, it is an idea that possibly that's why Hitler thought it be morally right to genocide jews? Perhaps in his twisted point of view, having a possible unpleasant experience with his jewish side of his family gave him reason to think the genocide against ALL jewish people is right?

Another fun fact to show that morals can contradict, is you have 2 different cultures say, christian and islam, both have views on life that work for them, but when it comes to dealing with one another, some people of either side feel they are right, and feel the moral DUTY to try to CHANGE another's way of life. In my opinion, I find it wrong to try to dictate how someone should live THEIR life. Just as much as it's wrong for someone else to change how I think and feel by force. This includes those pesky Jehova's witnesses that go door to door.

[Vampyro]

Oh yeah real quick, another thing I belive molds an individual's moral compass, is the fact that there's consequences for everything, be it good or bad. So perhaps people determine what's right and wrong by what possible outcome they have. Like hitting someone is wrong, because there's a chance they'll slug you back. The person then determines that a certain action is wrong based on negative retaliations from his/her action. Once a structure is consistent enough, It eventually get's fixed in and becomes habit, culture, belief, and way of life.

[Paper Hearts]

Very well point prooven, but to throw you a curve ball about the "Baby Hitler theory", there's other aspects that could also be taken into consideration, say hitler's childhood was different. Maybe I'm going too much into detail about Hitler through all this.... however, hitler was very narcistic (hope I spelled that right), committing genocide against millions of jewish people, when he himself was half jewish. I've not studied too much into Hitler's younger years, but I'm pretty sure I remember reading about him having unpleasant experiences with the jewish side of his family... wich turned into a grudge insanely out of control. He also was a speed junkie, wich actually aided his ability to give such moving and powerful speeches to his people. But before I get too far off track, if hitler had been given a better life.. would he still turn out as narcistic as he was? Or is this point of yours based on the theory that everyone's life is predestined? With this we open up a whole other can of worms... is life predetermined or not? And that's not topic relavent so I'll stop right there and just ask you this. If someone from the future came back to assasinate you for becoming a genocidal dictator in the future, would you think this to be fair? Now knowing this new information, wouldn't you at this moment think that you still have a choice?

Now, to go to a different spectrum of this morality topic, a moral compass, being based within a human being, and we are a learning creature. And we come from different cultures, so your point on the different cultures having wars is very true, a HUGE part of morals is infact based on the certain culture and that specific society. The profound misunderstanding between our culture and that of middle east shows that. However, as contradicting as one's morals can be with anothers, I do not belive we are born with any "instinctual" morals. If anyone is familiar with infants and todlers, than you know full well that as soon as they start learning to move around and grab things, EVERYTHING goes in their mouth... so learning what to eat and not to eat has nothing to do with morals, however, when the kids get more mobile, they also get more destructive, in wich parenting/teaching should begin. A general statement of the morals, It's wrong to break something that doesn't belong to you, but infants and todlers don't know this, they see shiney keys, they see toilet, they put 2 and 2 together, and just think it's fun seeing something flush down the hole, they don't know any better. So in light of everything I've read thus far... I've come to this conclusion so far...

What each person finds right and wrong in a moral compass so to say, judges wrong things as things they would find unpleasant to have someone do to them (ie, you know it's wrong to break someone else's shit because you don't want your shit to get broken)

Given on that, it is an idea that possibly that's why Hitler thought it be morally right to genocide jews? Perhaps in his twisted point of view, having a possible unpleasant experience with his jewish side of his family gave him reason to think the genocide against ALL jewish people is right?

Another fun fact to show that morals can contradict, is you have 2 different cultures say, christian and islam, both have views on life that work for them, but when it comes to dealing with one another, some people of either side feel they are right, and feel the moral DUTY to try to CHANGE another's way of life. In my opinion, I find it wrong to try to dictate how someone should live THEIR life. Just as much as it's wrong for someone else to change how I think and feel by force. This includes those pesky Jehova's witnesses that go door to door.

What I was actually attempting was to remain detached from the argument yet show a few methods by which Naturalism can be debated and has been defeated. For example, without Humanism, humanitarianism doesn't really exist. Disallowing the right for private experience is contrary to philanthropy. Disallowing personal experience, one must murder baby Hitler and in doing that, they also violate the presumed natural rules of "good" behavior. Humanism does not always produce results which people could stereotypically categorize as right or evil, in a sense, Humanism is not concerned with what is stereotypically good or wrong, at all; Humanism simply demands the right to think.

[Vampyro]

What I was actually attempting was to remain detached from the argument yet show a few methods by which Naturalism can be debated and has been defeated. For example, without Humanism, humanitarianism doesn't really exist. Disallowing the right for private experience is contrary to philanthropy. Disallowing personal experience, one must murder baby Hitler and in doing that, they also violate the presumed natural rules of "good" behavior. Humanism does not always produce results which people could stereotypically categorize as right or evil, in a sense, Humanism is not concerned with what is stereotypically good or wrong, at all; Humanism simply demands the right to think.

point prooven, but i still think you're trying to set yourself up with a scenario that justifies you killing babies

But on a SERIOUS note, the hitler theory opened up so many doors and possibilities I couldn't resist asking certain things. I do like a good debate and getting into a bit of philosophy as long as it doesn't turn into an arguement. Still though, maybe I'm just not reading this right, It's still sounding this theory is based on a predestined path, that no matter what, Hitler is going to do what he's done. Based on predestiny, you are right then, you should kill Baby Hitler, that is... If you can be cold enough to put a blunt object through his cute innocent smiling face you baby murderer you! If ya ever find a time machine lets do this! I'll bring the camcorder and a bag of chips...

[Paper Hearts]

Still though, maybe I'm just not reading this right, It's still sounding this theory is based on a predestined path, that no matter what, Hitler is going to do what he's done.

Naturalism stresses that the chance for importance of individual experience is worthless. Humanism champions the importance of our ability to reason in individual experiences. Naturalism puts no weight in reason, at all. It is only through reasoning that one may arrive at the possibility of an all together different Hitler. Once one begins to reason, then they're no longer a naturalist.

Natural law demands that one mus'n't think; one must only react and one must react in the name of whatever present doctorine is considered to be natural law.

Do you have any idea what will become of you, if you think? You'll become a libertine.

[kellygrrrrrl]

I think we are all born innocent.

We learn to hate, we learn to fear, we learn to be angry, we learn everything.

I think Hitler's actions were learned.

Ideally he was trying to do good...somewhere in his fucked up skull.....he justified it with whatever reason he did.

Was it good?

No.

He was fluffed up with pride, power and speed.

His conscience was no longer on his side.

I think once you flip that swich, its hard to come back to earth...if you catch my vague drift.

He learned to feel the way he did through his life expieriences.

I'm sure somewhere sometime he felt guilt....

But pushed it way back down WAY Back down into a void....

[AstralCrux]

Well, that voice business only goes so far. In the same token, I've heard- if you do this, specifically like this, then you could in an almost guaranteed sense get away with theft. I think that, however, is mostly from me trying to come up with ways to prevent theft while working retail back in the day. I generally counter that crazy voice with- Karma comes back way to harsh there's no way I'd do that!

Then you get the "moral compass" going. You need to volenteer <sp> more and find ways to get off your lazy butt and help more people. That part is where I get into the most real trouble- I start helping so much that I start to forget about me. Usually, throws the priorities off for a while.

In short, the compass sucks! Learn to balance things on your own and tell the compass to take a hike. The way I see it- what happens with most people is that they pick one of these voices more than the other. Or maybe I don't get the full voice package in my head. (I hope I don't, 'cause I signed up for the esp package and it has bad enough signal.) Anyway, that's how it seems to work for people. I know extremely good people who were brought up handed everything and will do good in this world and I've seen the exact opposite. Then there are people like me who came from little and try for more. Or, those who came from little and became less.

Its a pile of forks in the road, and it all stems down to- do you believe in yourself. Stronger people pick what seems like a harder path, but both sides are hard in the long run. Choose the easy path and drop out of school, but in the end it makes things harder. Work hard at school and yes, you struggle, but it helps later for the next fork. Easy now makes for harder later.

Woah, sorry ya'll for the ramble. Must turn off voices in head. lol.