What is the basis of our Moral Values?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Did I scare you guys ? :eek: sorry if I did !


Anyways , here I go with another query!


Apologies to the author if she feels I am being offtopic ( I feel that I am talking on the topic only ) !

Here's something that struck me when doing my weekend reading on a book on the fianancial events happening around!
Though in financial context , but as usual my habit of relating things forced me to relate this to life and thus in this thread.

Here is the text produced in original:
============
The point is ladies and gentlemen , that greed - for the lack of a better word -- is good! Greed is right. Greed works. Greed clarifies , cuts through , and captures the essence of the evolutionary spirit. Greed in all of its forms - greed for life , for money , for love , knowledge has marked the upward surge of mankind.
==================

Now a few questions:
1) Do you agree with the statement? Mark as strongly agree , agree , neutral , disagree , strongly disagree!
2) Is not it immoral as per you to be greedy?
3) Is the evolution caused by such greed good or bad ? Stable or unstable?

Another questions on the topic is this:
1) What as per you is sacroscant (answer keeping in mind whatever "moral" values you have ? What is o ne thing that is very important to you ? And what ways can you go to achieve that one thing! Can you be immoral in yourself to achieve that sacroscant thingy ?
2) Are morals restrictive ? In this sense are they against evolution? Progress ?:eek:


Pheww ! I ask so many questions! :)
 
Brahm ji,
Thank you for your post, really appreciate it. :)

Your post raises an important question- where does the onus for immorality lie- with the one who gives the wrong orders or the one who obeys it? Or both?

Regards,
Anju

brahmtewatia said:
anju, just to add more food to the thought(s)...

yudhisthir was asked by sh. krishna to speak a lie… "go to dronacharya nd inform him tht yr son is dead"… now because drona had a benediction tht unless he was shocked by the dead limbs of his son, he wouldn’t die. so he had to be shocked, but he wud not believe anybody except yudhisthir because he was known as vry honest and truthful.

therefore krishna asked yudhisthir to go nd say these lines, thereby asking him to do what was ethically wrong. so what is this? morality or immorality?

krishna is ordering, and yudhisthir says "how can i say lie?" yudhisthir seems to be disobeying the order of krishna. so what is this? morality or immorality?

but arjun, he rejected all morality and immorality. he accepted krishna's order. what wud you call this? morality or immorality?

i know different ppl will come up with different answers and thats very true (... as i've said always) to their perception and line of thought(s).

p.s : my answer lies somewhere above ;)
Click to expand...
 
anilsinghd said:
Here is the text produced in original:
============
The point is ladies and gentlemen , that greed - for the lack of a better word -- is good! Greed is right. Greed works. Greed clarifies , cuts through , and captures the essence of the evolutionary spirit. Greed in all of its forms - greed for life , for money , for love , knowledge has marked the upward surge of mankind.
==================
Click to expand...

Greed, the word itself seems obligatory with respect to the morals. Yes, you can justify, relate and valiadate all the things in this world with the word greed but the literal meaning of the word greed is quite obvious and generally everyone assumes greed in that sense ONLY.

There are some better words like - Enthusiasm for life, Need of Money, Desire for love, aspiration for Knowledge and so on .... can define them in a better way instead of attaching the word greed with each and everything.

It's the way we see life and we choose are ways differently and same is with the words we choose to say one thing or other.

The actaul meaning remains the same which is irrespective of all the words we use and the respective manipulations.
 
Last edited:
Anil,

It takes a lot of effort to put so much thought in writing these long posts to elaborate your point of view so well, thanks.
All the contributors to this thread have indicated that morality cannot be limited by time or source or interpretation, etc, etc...there are too many variables.
In reply to your point 3) When it is not "win-win", then compromise and cut your losses...:D

Regards
anilsinghd said:
1) No , following religion or adhering to customs does not make us moral , we evolve every second , we cannot live on the old structure , customs and traditions are something to be taken as foundation and to be built upon! Customise them for your age , life , situations!
2) Elders do help you in putting up a broad range of options in front of you! Use axiom of choice to pick up the best for yourself!
3) "Win-Win" (ohh , did i write that :D ) , Anju what if the win-win does not exist ? Or what if the other player does not want you to win at any cost ? :)
4) Basis of my morals values : My parents , my mind , my experiences in life , my thought process ( Did not Vijay summed it up all when he said that there is so thin a line between moral values and way of thinking ! , Correlation of sorts! )! Let me extrapolate Vijay by saying that there is also an unconscious feedback mechanism prevalent between your thoughts and actions! Actions will impact your thoughts as well and the vice versa is trivial!
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
...Aha! Moral values - morality, ethics, upbringing, culture...

So, as the question really asks is; what is the basis, and in which way should it be looked at-

Is it 'Black'?
...or is it 'White'??

Maybe it is the 'Grey' that counts....... :);):rolleyes:
 
shailendra said:
...Aha! Moral values - morality, ethics, upbringing, culture...

So, as the question really asks is; what is the basis, and in which way should it be looked at-

Is it 'Black'?
...or is it 'White'??

Maybe it is the 'Grey' that counts....... :);):rolleyes:
Click to expand...


I disagree strongly !!! :( Not with the post but with the length of it! :) !

Shailendra , please give us some insight , I believe you have a lot to contribute , don't be on the sidelines ;) like all the investors these days !

Time for the all important "all in" :) !
 
anjoo said:
Anil,

In reply to your point 3) When it is not "win-win", then compromise and cut your losses...:D

Regards
Click to expand...

Yours or mine ;) Am greedy you know :D


Well I know these kind of topics do not have conclusions , what i am looking for is a Q n A kind of thingy ! Let me know of what you think of my questions , how so ever trivial the replies are and would love more questions!

Strongly believe that the best we can do about these kind of topics is to ask more and more and think more and more so that when life in reality comes up with something "unthinkable" we are not all that under-prepared!


PS: And that is equally applicable to all others as well , more questions please and more answers as well! :)
 
Well, whoever is a better negotiator (and not more greedy) gets more...:)
Its called the socratic method in philosophy, to gain insight into a subject through questions..
And definitely, it is a great idea to present questions...will get back shortly with my list..
Regards
anilsinghd said:
Yours or mine ;) Am greedy you know :D


Well I know these kind of topics do not have conclusions , what i am looking for is a Q n A kind of thingy ! Let me know of what you think of my questions , how so ever trivial the replies are and would love more questions!

Strongly believe that the best we can do about these kind of topics is to ask more and more and think more and more so that when life in reality comes up with something "unthinkable" we are not all that under-prepared!


PS: And that is equally applicable to all others as well , more questions please and more answers as well! :)
Click to expand...
 
brahmtewatia said:
anju, just to add more food to the thought(s)...

yudhisthir was asked by sh. krishna to speak a lie… "go to dronacharya nd inform him tht yr son is dead"… now because drona had a benediction tht unless he was shocked by the dead limbs of his son, he wouldn’t die. so he had to be shocked, but he wud not believe anybody except yudhisthir because he was known as vry honest and truthful.

therefore krishna asked yudhisthir to go nd say these lines, thereby asking him to do what was ethically wrong. so what is this? morality or immorality?

krishna is ordering, and yudhisthir says "how can i say lie?" yudhisthir seems to be disobeying the order of krishna. so what is this? morality or immorality?

but arjun, he rejected all morality and immorality. he accepted krishna's order. what wud you call this? morality or immorality?

i know different ppl will come up with different answers and thats very true (... as i've said always) to their perception and line of thought(s).

p.s : my answer lies somewhere above ;)
Click to expand...

anjoo said:
Brahm ji,
Thank you for your post, really appreciate it. :)

Your post raises an important question- where does the onus for immorality lie- with the one who gives the wrong orders or the one who obeys it? Or both?

Regards,
Anju
Click to expand...

as per the conventional meaning of morality:

 [FONT=&quot]1. if it is sanctioned by krishna, then it is morality, otherwise the same morality may be immorality.
2. krishna is ordering, and yudhishtir is saying "how can i say lie?" this is immorality... he is disobeying the order of krishna.
3. but arjuna, he rejected all morality and immorality. he accepted krishna's order... this is morality. he was personally thinking that if i kill my brothers, cousins, this nd that + so many things... but being a true devotee, he understood tht krishna wants it nd he said "yes"... so, this is morality.

when your actions are approved by the supreme authority, it is morality... (just to remind you in btwn... i m not saying so... cos this refers to [/FONT]conventional meaning of morality) [FONT=&quot]if it is not approved by the supreme authority, it is immorality. therefore the so-called morality-immorality has no fixed position. when it is approved by krishna, even so-called immorality will be morality, and so-called morality will be immorality. that is what we practically see.

p.s. : refer next post for my take on morality :)
[/FONT]
 
Last edited:
my take on morality !

i believe that there is no absolutely correct moral system per se. without adopting a holier-than-thou stance, i wud say that rather then following the dictum on morality… it would make more sense if you sneak inside yr inner self… have a clean heart, open and adaptive mind, and be flexible… i guess you’ll catch yr best answers on morality.

morality isn’t always obedience to the law, as laws keep on changing all the time, as we evolve. as rightly said by anil above, where he has hinted morality to be an evolutionary adaptation. i concur with him to say further… we can still strive to create a good morality by deriving it from some basic, rational, axioms… here every individual will have its own definition of rational axioms.

to have a proper respect for ones self, you must be aware of your own moral and ethical values. yr moral and ethical values are what you, and you alone, believe to be what is right, and good, and true… very obviously, and very much influenced by your upbringing. many people can tell you what they think is right, and good, and true, but in the end you have to decide for yourself.

[FONT=&quot]in short, we can assign moral value only to our actions… rather than being judgmental nd passing-on the lecture to the audience. once you change the course of your life to line up with your highest values you become a much happier person and it is much easier to respect yourself thereby creating “the best” example of morality in/for yr own self.[/FONT]
 
anjoo said:
Brahm ji,
Your post raises an important question- where does the onus for immorality lie- with the one who gives the wrong orders or the one who obeys it? Or both?
Click to expand...

Let's not look at history! As many ( after the recent financial mess) have started saying , past is no indicator of future/present ( regression is crap , there is no long run!)

Let's look at the present , do we really believe that anyone obeys anyone? :) I want all to digg deep on this one! Really , do we really obey anyone , Do not we obey ourselves!

For any rational person , its foolish to blindly follow , so I am game for taking responsibility of every action of mine ! Hence my answer , the owness of morality and/or immorality lies on me! :) No one else !
 
anilsinghd said:
Let's look at the present , do we really believe that anyone obeys anyone? :) I want all to digg deep on this one! Really , do we really obey anyone , Do not we obey ourselves!
Click to expand...

we do obey others, but only if it touches yr soul nd by doing so, you are in fact obeying yr inner-self... tht is what i've said in my above post... "have a clean heart, open and adaptive mind, and be flexible… i guess you’ll catch yr best answers on morality".

... nd for this statement of mine, i dont have to look beyond... i'm myself an example on JL... many good samaritan's out here on JL wud surely concur. :)

p.s. : he he he... i'm going to deep on morality... need a break ;)
 
Hi Anjoo,

Very thought-provoking and brain-storming thread indeed, which raises n number of questions !

Here I want to give an example which depicts my take on this - lately, I watched a movie 'Eklavya -Royal Guard' ... its kinda newer version of Eklavya episode, I won't go in detail here but the movie gives one very important message about morals! A must watch as par me ..

So according to me, Moral should be the acts that agreed by your inner-conscience but make sure you be honest with the conscience that must be your primary responsibility!

Follow your inner-conscience, stand for what you believe and be clear in thoughts, thats what morality is all about for me ... one shouldn't accept what other ppl , religion, holy books preach at first place ... but introspect, process n consult with your conscience and then follow your heart ! Gud and Bad, True and False all are relative terms!

Be Yourself, Believe in Yourself and Be Honest with your inner-conscience! Period . :)



Rock on
Jit
 
Last edited:
Anju , may I request you to summarise and conclude the topic if everyone is done! :)
 
anjoo said:
Well, whoever is a better negotiator (and not more greedy) gets more...:)
Its called the socratic method in philosophy, to gain insight into a subject through questions..
And definitely, it is a great idea to present questions...will get back shortly with my list..
Regards
Click to expand...

anilsinghd said:
Anju , may I request you to summarise and conclude the topic if everyone is done! :)
Click to expand...

anil, i dont think that this topic is done, yet... at the same time i was wondering as to why we did'nt receive any response from any of the sr. members?

it seems only we two/few here are well versed with our state-of-the art definition of morality :D:confused: or is their anything more tht meets the eye? wud appreciate further views from the senior members.
 
My take on morality (though not very fond of the term, would rather try to instill 'discipline' in my kids ..:)):

I agree with this nobel laureate on this:

“I know only that what is moral is what you feel good after and what is immoral is what you feel bad after.”
- Ernest Hemingway

I know, one call pull out a 'laundry list' of whole lot of nasty stuff, what you feel good after...but then its upto ones discretion and wisdom..you know what I mean, dont you?
 
Last edited:
poonam said:
My take on morality (though not very fond of the term, would rather try to instill 'discipline' in my kids ..:)):

I agree with this nobel laureate on this:

“I know only that what is moral is what you feel good after and what is immoral is what you feel bad after.”
- Ernest Hemingway

I know, one call pull out a 'laundry list' of whole lot of nasty stuff, what you feel good after...but then its upto ones discretion and wisdom..you know what I mean, dont you?
Click to expand...

Hi Poonam , pretty simple and pretty nice definition through the quote , thanks for sharing.

Not to start my mathematical and finance fantasies ( which all of you are so fed up of :( ) , but would you agree that "after" is probably a long run which has stood the test of time. ( My only arguement in favour of this is that i want to reduce the fluctuations on the temporal axis ! :) )

Agree or you have something to counter ?

Regards,
Anil
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top