A New Morality

[Belisarius]

My Great uncle was over for dinner tonight, and he mentioned something about society being worse off than it ever had been during his time, we discussed this at length, looking for the cause, but there was nothing that we could really pin it down on, I proposed that it's because the modern worldview has no solid morality, as opposed to the christian moral system that was dominant in the past, he didn't really agree with this(probably because he think's I'm bemoaning the decline of Christianity as he still thinks I'm a Christian whereas he's an atheist). What I was really getting at is that science doesn't give us answers to moral questions, and there really isn't a defined moral system that accompanies the modern worldview. This is causing violent and abhorrent acts which in turn causes fear which in turn causes isolation and more abhorrent acts. You used to be able to hitchhike, but now it's either too dangerous, or everyone believes it is too dangerous because of fear. I think this explains the resurgence of evangelical Christianity and increases in the use of hard drugs, in the face of a moral vaccum many rush to Christianity, and many abondon morality and rush to drugs. A new moral system must emerge, and I think it's going to happen in Europe first as Europe holds a thoroughly Western, scientific worldview, whereas Christianity still lingers significantly in the United States. I think the choices are rather narrow, Western society has had too thoroughly disproved Christianity for it to return in force, at least in Europe, Islam has a fighting chance of dominating Europe. There are so many muslims in Europe and they seem to be the only ones with a strong moral system, and everyone is afraid to challenge it for political reasons. Otherwise a completely new system will emerge, it will have to be something solid, and universal, but also something reasonable and scientifically acceptable. I think we should discuss in this thread what this new moral system might look like.

[spoon]

I don't believe that you can point to the secularisation of the western world (whole world?) and say that is the cause for the "decline of morals". First off, what exactly do you mean "decline in morals"? We have things like the geneva convention setting out the universal rights of man, governing bodies like the UN that try to enforce these rights on a global scale. Women have equal rights with men. Racism is almost a thing of the past. Sexual orientation isn't a moral issue anymore (or it is becoming that way). All of these things have happened in the last half century, most of them have become a big force in the last decade. Violent and abhorrent acts are occuring, as you said, but they've been occuring througout all of history. Remember, if you're holding christianity up as a moral standard: The crusades, the salem witch trials, racism, sexism, persecution of homosexuals - all have beeen justified at some point (or still are) through the "moral virtue" of the curch. But why does it seem now that we're seeing a decline in morals? I'd say that the mass media coverage of everything and the hysteria that it tends to promote is a big culprit of this. Violent acts that have been occuring throughout every society in history are suddenly being thrust at us. We're only just realising that this sort of thing goes on everywhere. Sure, 200 years ago it might not have happened as much, but the population of the world has risen a good few billion since then. Immorality has always been around, but the ability to turn on any channel and see it straight away in realistic colour and sound hasn't. But yes: if you're looking at the actions of everyone through the perspective of christianity the world does seem to be an immoral place. Homosexuals are allowed to be members of society, premarital sex is promoted, everyones getting drunk and taking drugs, no-one goes to church, everyone works on the sabbath, everyone takes the lords name in vain. But when you take christianity as a moral judge away all of these things cease to be immoral. Some of them, like taking drugs that you mentioned, are poor personal choices if overdone, but can you really argue that inhaling some THC is an immoral act? Justification of secular morality coming up, but its my better half's 21st today so I've gots to go. -spoon

[AirRick101]

Morals, even if they are relative for the current generation, are based in the long term desire for survival. To keep the peace is one way of ensuring survival. To do anything to make sure you are not outcasted will ensure your survival to a higher degree than if you didn't. This is why organizing a rebellion usually results in risk of bloodshed due to shedding one's attachment to staying alive. I don't truly know if morals can be scientificially explained, but in a biological sense, the survival theory can. Whatever creates the overall pleasure over pain is the moral standard at most of the time. But I'll just live with the layman defintion that morals is as long as you don't hurt anybody.

[Seeker]

I should hope that any new system of morals would be based on kindness, understanding, tolerance, and respect for ones fellow man. Now that I think of it, isn't that the basis of most religions? Perhaps society is moving away from religion and its various gods, however, has the above basis changed? Do not all men we consider good and moral follow the basic concept? There has always been lawlessness and men who are hostile and tend to disrupt society, but they are in the minority. I guess what I am ultimately saying here is that morality and religion are not one and the same. Religion incorporates and codifies morality, but if religion were to totally disappear from the earth, morality would remain.

[Alric]

I think spoon has the right idea. The no more bad stuff happening now than there used to be. We just hear about more often. With tv, radios, newspapers and the newest big thing, the internet, you just see a lot more of it. 200 years ago, if someone slaughtered an entire town and eat their bodies no one would have heard about it, and if they did hearing "another town got attacked" isn't the same as "856 people got killed today..." then they go into a lot more details and even show pictures.

[Belisarius]

Originally posted by Alric I think spoon has the right idea. The no more bad stuff happening now than there used to be. We just hear about more often. With tv, radios, newspapers and the newest big thing, the internet, you just see a lot more of it. 200 years ago, if someone slaughtered an entire town and eat their bodies no one would have heard about it, and if they did hearing \"another town got attacked\" isn't the same as \"856 people got killed today...\" then they go into a lot more details and even show pictures. I said this at first too, but my uncle didn't agree with me. He said that people don't only seem more dangerous, but are more dangerous. I'm not saying he's god or anything, but when you look back into history acts of violence generally occured between societies, not within them. The moral standards within those societies were pretty strict, and there was much order within them. Even revolutions occur between different classes, but the violence today occurs between people of similar classes, and religions. It's not only violence, but a distrust of other people, even when they're similar. Maybe it's because society is so fractured that noone can tell if the person you're talking to has similar beliefs and values. Maybe it isn't a lack of a moral system so much as a lack of a single moral system as we change from the old religious system to a new humanist system that is really already in place and just waiting for the old system to die.

[Roller]

Originally posted by Belisarius when you look back into history acts of violence generally occured between societies, not within them. Maybe you should take a look back to Medieval Britain.

[insanejester]

Originally posted by Belisarius I said this at first too, but my uncle didn't agree with me. *He said that people don't only seem more dangerous, but are more dangerous. *I'm not saying he's god or anything, but when you look back into history acts of violence generally occured between societies, not within them. *The moral standards within those societies were pretty strict, and there was much order within them. *Even revolutions occur between different classes, but the violence today occurs between people of similar classes, and religions. *It's not only violence, but a distrust of other people, even when they're similar. *Maybe it's because society is so fractured that noone can tell if the person you're talking to has similar beliefs and values. *Maybe it isn't a lack of a moral system so much as a lack of a single moral system as we change from the old religious system to a new humanist system that is really already in place and just waiting for the old system to die. this is quite incorrect... all thoughout history, there has been rape, murder, and barbarism abroud... if that weren't the case we would have never needed police....

[Belisarius]

Originally posted by insanejester this is quite incorrect... all thoughout history, there has been rape, murder, and barbarism abroud... if that weren't the case we would have never needed police.... Actually police have only been around for a couple hundred years.

[insanejester]

Originally posted by Belisarius Actually police have only been around for a couple hundred years. But there has always been a need for some type of inforcement... whether it was soldiers of the kings and what have you, or actual police...

[bradybaker]

The Romans watched slaves kill each other and get eaten by tigers in giant collesseums for entertainment, they ate until they threw up...then ate some more, and had massive orgies. How's that for morality?

[InTheMoment]

Originally posted by bradybaker The Romans watched slaves kill each other and get eaten by tigers in giant collesseums for entertainment, they ate until they threw up...then ate some more, and had massive orgies. How's that for morality? When in Rome...

[AirRick101]

People who believe police is the basis for morality are very naive. Someone at my church asserted this, and I was frankly disappointed. He was pretty old, and should have known better than that. Not a real good philsopher, from my take. Morality is based on people's subjective opinions about every possible outward event that crosses the line of personal violation or not. Now, people's values may differ, but it's all in a common drive toward survival. Morality is established when people agree to stick to certain actions or not, thus spawning the golden rule. Our ability to imagine other people's experience during a time of violation is manifested in what we acknowledge as conscience, and is our personal judge as to what we should do or not. Morality is defined from growth and is developed depending on the generation we live in.

[insanejester]

Originally posted by AirRick101 People who believe police is the basis for morality are very naive. Someone at my church asserted this, and I was frankly disappointed. He was pretty old, and should have known better than that. Not a real good philsopher, from my take. Morality is based on people's subjective opinions about every possible outward event that crosses the line of personal violation or not. Now, people's values may differ, but it's all in a common drive toward survival. Morality is established when people agree to stick to certain actions or not, thus spawning the golden rule. Our ability to imagine other people's experience during a time of violation is manifested in what we acknowledge as conscience, and is our personal judge as to what we should do or not. Morality is defined from growth and is developed depending on the generation we live in. Ok but the thing about that theory is there will always be conflicting ideals on what is an isn't moral depending on the society or group of people you converse with... which is what leads to conflict in the first place... the desire for one side to prevail over another...

[Awaken4e1]

Originally posted by Belisarius Actually police have only been around for a couple hundred years. What do you think Knights were?

[Belisarius]

Originally posted by Awaken4e1 What do you think Knights were? Local warlords in an alliance with a more power ful worlord.

[Awaken4e1]

Originally posted by Belisarius Local warlords in an alliance with a more power ful worlord. They were the Police of the day...'The Knights creed...to protect and serve...'

[Leo Volont]

Originally posted by Belisarius My Great uncle was over for dinner tonight, and he mentioned something about society being worse off than it ever had been during his time, we discussed this at length, looking for the cause, but there was nothing that we could really pin it down on, I proposed that it's because the modern worldview has no solid morality, as opposed to the christian moral system that was dominant in the past, he didn't really agree with this(probably because he think's I'm bemoaning the decline of Christianity as he still thinks I'm a Christian whereas he's an atheist). What I was really getting at is that science doesn't give us answers to moral questions, and there really isn't a defined moral system that accompanies the modern worldview. This is causing violent and abhorrent acts which in turn causes fear which in turn causes isolation and more abhorrent acts. You used to be able to hitchhike, but now it's either too dangerous, or everyone believes it is too dangerous because of fear. I think this explains the resurgence of evangelical Christianity and increases in the use of hard drugs, in the face of a moral vaccum many rush to Christianity, and many abondon morality and rush to drugs. A new moral system must emerge, and I think it's going to happen in Europe first as Europe holds a thoroughly Western, scientific worldview, whereas Christianity still lingers significantly in the United States. I think the choices are rather narrow, Western society has had too thoroughly disproved Christianity for it to return in force, at least in Europe, Islam has a fighting chance of dominating Europe. There are so many muslims in Europe and they seem to be the only ones with a strong moral system, and everyone is afraid to challenge it for political reasons. Otherwise a completely new system will emerge, it will have to be something solid, and universal, but also something reasonable and scientifically acceptable. I think we should discuss in this thread what this new moral system might look like. I think it was H.G. Wells, an atheist, who during a lucid moment suggested that Western Civilization had no morality left except what was from the Inertia of Traditions left over from Catholic Civilization, and that with each generation, that inertia of Morality would lessen.. as you have noticed and pointed out. No, I do not think Europe will have any special Moral Vision first. Europe, after all, was first reject Moralty, and through widespread Free Masonry has been the most in the forefront of rejecting morality. The Free Masons in Europe are far stronger than anything the Protestant Community has in the United States. And I think you far over-estimate Christianity in America. For one, Protestantism is more dispensation against Religion and Moral Influence than it is an actual positive Religion. Forgiveness of Sin is too over-emphasized to for Protestant Christianity to be considered a positive moral influence. You can't tell people they are unconditionally forgiven of Sin without then supposing they might consider using that moral loophole. Simply examine the Morality practiced in the American Bible Belt, which also is referred to as the White Trash Belt. Incest, drunkeness, spousal abuse, petty theft. those are the poor Protestants. We know what the powerful and rich Protestants must think, since America's record for Business Practices and its inclination for Militarism is clear enough on the record. But yes, I do doubt that any old Revelation could reassume much force. But all it would take is a new Revelation. Look at the Our Lady of Guadelupe Phenomena of 1521. In just the next 10 Years over 10 Million Mexicans converted to Catholicism. This was not the work of Spanish and Portugese Priests (who did have to come to the New World in droves in order to keep up with the demand for the Initiatory Sacraments) but it was the work of the Native American gentleman who had received the Vision and was its chief advocate. Which is not to say that people simply believed in an empty story. Our Lady actually did visit those Peoples, and actually did support them with Miracle and Revelation, even to this day. Centuries of Prayer to Our Lady of Guadelupe are not continued from vapid and sterile force of habit only. People experience providential Miracles. What if the World in general were to experience another Miracle in the order of Our Lady of Guadelupe. Fatima in 1917 came close. Portugal was then experiencing an Anti-Clerical Socialist Revolution (those darn Free Masons again), when Our Lady of Fatima presented the most spectacular Miracle in Human History -- the Miracle of the Sun. People from 500 square miles around saw the Sun gyrating and dancing in the sky, flashing colors and seeming to crash in toward the earth. The effect of the Miracle of the Sun at Fatima was to stiffle the Revolution. Spain would have a bloody Civil War. Portugal would stay serenely Catholic and would be the one European Nation to remain completely clear of World War II. But the European Press, well under the control of the Masons, was able to isolate the Miracle to within the Portugese borders. If the World is to be saved by another Revelatory Miracle, we would have to have an actual Free Press, and not a Media Monolith that is monitored by any Secret Organization dedicated to the collapse of any and all World Regulatory Powers and Moral Influences (which are considered bad for business).

[Belisarius]

Originally posted by Leo Volont+--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Leo Volont)</div> <!--QuoteBegin-Belisarius My Great uncle was over for dinner tonight, and he mentioned something about society being worse off than it ever had been during his time, we discussed this at length, looking for the cause, but there was nothing that we could really pin it down on, I proposed that it's because the modern worldview has no solid morality, as opposed to the christian moral system that was dominant in the past, he didn't really agree with this(probably because he think's I'm bemoaning the decline of Christianity as he still thinks I'm a Christian whereas he's an atheist). What I was really getting at is that science doesn't give us answers to moral questions, and there really isn't a defined moral system that accompanies the modern worldview. This is causing violent and abhorrent acts which in turn causes fear which in turn causes isolation and more abhorrent acts. You used to be able to hitchhike, but now it's either too dangerous, or everyone believes it is too dangerous because of fear. I think this explains the resurgence of evangelical Christianity and increases in the use of hard drugs, in the face of a moral vaccum many rush to Christianity, and many abondon morality and rush to drugs. A new moral system must emerge, and I think it's going to happen in Europe first as Europe holds a thoroughly Western, scientific worldview, whereas Christianity still lingers significantly in the United States. I think the choices are rather narrow, Western society has had too thoroughly disproved Christianity for it to return in force, at least in Europe, Islam has a fighting chance of dominating Europe. There are so many muslims in Europe and they seem to be the only ones with a strong moral system, and everyone is afraid to challenge it for political reasons. Otherwise a completely new system will emerge, it will have to be something solid, and universal, but also something reasonable and scientifically acceptable. I think we should discuss in this thread what this new moral system might look like. I think it was H.G. Wells, an atheist, who during a lucid moment suggested that Western Civilization had no morality left except what was from the Inertia of Traditions left over from Catholic Civilization, and that with each generation, that inertia of Morality would lessen.. as you have noticed and pointed out. No, I do not think Europe will have any special Moral Vision first. Europe, after all, was first reject Moralty, and through widespread Free Masonry has been the most in the forefront of rejecting morality. The Free Masons in Europe are far stronger than anything the Protestant Community has in the United States. And I think you far over-estimate Christianity in America. For one, Protestantism is more dispensation against Religion and Moral Influence than it is an actual positive Religion. Forgiveness of Sin is too over-emphasized to for Protestant Christianity to be considered a positive moral influence. You can't tell people they are unconditionally forgiven of Sin without then supposing they might consider using that moral loophole. Simply examine the Morality practiced in the American Bible Belt, which also is referred to as the White Trash Belt. Incest, drunkeness, spousal abuse, petty theft. those are the poor Protestants. We know what the powerful and rich Protestants must think, since America's record for Business Practices and its inclination for Militarism is clear enough on the record. But yes, I do doubt that any old Revelation could reassume much force. But all it would take is a new Revelation. Look at the Our Lady of Guadelupe Phenomena of 1521. In just the next 10 Years over 10 Million Mexicans converted to Catholicism. This was not the work of Spanish and Portugese Priests (who did have to come to the New World in droves in order to keep up with the demand for the Initiatory Sacraments) but it was the work of the Native American gentleman who had received the Vision and was its chief advocate. Which is not to say that people simply believed in an empty story. Our Lady actually did visit those Peoples, and actually did support them with Miracle and Revelation, even to this day. Centuries of Prayer to Our Lady of Guadelupe are not continued from vapid and sterile force of habit only. People experience providential Miracles. What if the World in general were to experience another Miracle in the order of Our Lady of Guadelupe. Fatima in 1917 came close. Portugal was then experiencing an Anti-Clerical Socialist Revolution (those darn Free Masons again), when Our Lady of Fatima presented the most spectacular Miracle in Human History -- the Miracle of the Sun. People from 500 square miles around saw the Sun gyrating and dancing in the sky, flashing colors and seeming to crash in toward the earth. The effect of the Miracle of the Sun at Fatima was to stiffle the Revolution. Spain would have a bloody Civil War. Portugal would stay serenely Catholic and would be the one European Nation to remain completely clear of World War II. But the European Press, well under the control of the Masons, was able to isolate the Miracle to within the Portugese borders. If the World is to be saved by another Revelatory Miracle, we would have to have an actual Free Press, and not a Media Monolith that is monitored by any Secret Organization dedicated to the collapse of any and all World Regulatory Powers and Moral Influences (which are considered bad for business).[/b] If God wants to send a miracle to revitalize our morality then he will send one so big that the media cannot minimize it.

[Leo Volont]

Originally posted by Belisarius If God wants to send a miracle to revitalize our morality then he will send one so big that the media cannot minimize it. Yes, Catholic Prophecy now speaks of just such a Miracle... see my most recent Post... Modern Miracles, Guadalupe, Fatima.

[Awaken4e1]

Originally posted by Belisarius If God wants to send a miracle to revitalize our morality then he will send one so big that the media cannot minimize it. Very True...'The Manifestation of The Sons of God'...And every Eye shall see Him!