Does justification = morality?

Abortion, euthanasia, genetic engineering, Just War theory and other such hot topics.

Moderators: AMod, iMod

Post Reply
Posts: 1
Joined: Fri Dec 01, 2017 8:37 am

Does justification = morality?

Post by Jonatron5 » Fri Dec 01, 2017 9:09 am

So I know this perticular topic, can be a very divisive passion inducing one, so i want to first take the time and ask everyone reading this to treat this topic/other peoples personal beliefs clinically, and with respect.

That being said my question is this.

I make a few assumptions for my question:
1. Free will exists
2. Morality "exists" in some form suffecient to effect the common person.(even if it's purely socital and indoctrinated, it still effects their judgement.)

3. decisions require justifications for their actions, be they logical, emotional, ideological, etc.

If a person's justification for abortion being morrally acceptable, is that "it is not a human being" , how is that a different moral position from a person killing someone of another race, with the justification that" they aren't human/ not the same as me".

If each individual is earnest in their belief the justification is the same.

I thought at first perhaps motivation for the action should change the nature of the moral position, but this seems to be very malliable.

For example

if the motivation for an abortion is that the mother would not be able to feed her other 5 children, then the decision is justified on the basis that it would be better to keep the 5 alive, than the one.

if the person killing someone of another race used the justification that, "His race is more numerous than the other and by eliminating members of the other race, there would be more food for his people.

Again if both are earnest in their beliefs, they both represent logically sound positions.

It seems wether this is morally acceptable or not, comes down more to your belief about the parties involved and and not by the justification or the action itself?

Posts: 3807
Joined: Fri Oct 25, 2013 6:09 am

Re: Does justification = morality?

Post by surreptitious57 » Fri Dec 01, 2017 11:42 am

Justification for a particular action for reasons of consistency has to be more about the moral position one has than anything else
Morality is not absolute and so there can be some variation just not so much that would invalidate the moral principle in question

Science Fan
Posts: 843
Joined: Fri May 26, 2017 5:01 pm

Re: Does justification = morality?

Post by Science Fan » Fri Feb 16, 2018 7:47 pm

Much of our morality is biologically driven, roughly 50%, which is heritable.

When you equate the anti-abortion position with racism, you are committing two errors: The anti-abortion crowd is linked to the racist crowd due to evolutionary biology, and the justifications people come up with to support these positions are basically just cover-stories for the underlying biological drives. It is also the case that the arguments you used in your example are distinguishable.

Why are people against abortion? It's based largely on tribalism. Typically, people who are against abortion are also against such things as homosexuality, pre-marital sex, any sex that does not lead to procreation, masturbation, pornography, and the use of birth control. I'm not saying that this is the case for every person who is against abortion, but, this is true generally speaking. What do these moral positions have in common? They promote higher birth-rates for one's tribe that also shares these views. They basically force people to marry young and start having kids.

Why are people racists? This is also linked to tribalism. One simply wants to promote one's tribe by harming the "enemies" of the tribe. Racism encourages one to mate within one's own "tribe," and also to promote policies that favor one's "tribe" against enemy "tribes." This is largely due to biological factors. Sometimes evolution favors breeding with members outside one's group, to increase genetic diversity, and, at other times, it favors inbreeding to strengthen the tribe. This is why we have basically across the globe people fairly divided between xenophobes and xenophiles. It's in our biology.

So, both anti-abortion crowd and the pro-racist crowd are united in the sense that they are usually those who are xenophobic and support their tribe over other people outside the tribe. However, these positions are not linked by any ideas that such people hold. People who are for abortion, on the other hand, are typically linked to xenophilia, as they see little need to expand their tribe, and consider themselves more closely associated with outsiders than those who typically oppose abortion.

If I argue that it is okay to abort a child because it is not a person, this is a true statement, factually. A fetus, especially in the first month, is not a person, it cannot live on its own outside the mother's womb, and merely having the potential to develop into a person is not the same as actually being one. On the other hand, if I say a person of another "race" is not a person, then I am denying reality, because the other individual is definitely a person. So, there is a consistent, logical argument favoring abortions and standing against racism, which is exactly opposite from your position.

User avatar
Posts: 8450
Joined: Thu Aug 09, 2012 6:45 am
Location: Narniabiznus

Re: Does justification = morality?

Post by vegetariantaxidermy » Fri Feb 16, 2018 8:01 pm

'Morality' is a religious concept. Like 'God', there is no such thing.

Posts: 2553
Joined: Tue Aug 09, 2011 1:34 pm

Re: Does justification = morality?

Post by Skip » Sat Feb 17, 2018 9:50 pm

Ethical systems are societal.
Every ethical system has a set of fundamental principles.
If you know what your principles are, you can make decisions on that basis.
You can evaluate new and emerging problems according to their compatibility with those fundamental principles.

Did you have specific questions on specific issues regarding abortion, murder, capital punishment or imperial conquest?
Each one can be answered - or at least examined - in light of a particular world-view and the convictions which arise from that world-view. They cannot be answered or even discussed by conflating them with one another.

User avatar
Posts: 4389
Joined: Sat Aug 08, 2015 8:10 am

Re: Does justification = morality?

Post by Greta » Sat Feb 17, 2018 10:23 pm

If sincerity is the marker of morality, then Stalin, Hitler, Mao and Mme Mao, Charles Manson and most terrorists are moral. If we have a morality that includes these people, it fails to successfully parse morality in a way that accords with that of most people.

If reality/life is seen as an interaction of order and entropy - growth, destruction and renewal - then people like those above who act as powerful agents of entropy are simply playing a destructive role like any other entropic force, be it a storm, drought, flood, volcano, earthquake, meteor and so on.

I suppose the rational response to such people would be acceptance that they will always exist and have a role to play, containment of the damage they can cause, and to otherwise avoid them like the plague.

Posts: 4504
Joined: Sat Jul 07, 2012 1:23 am

Re: Does justification = morality?

Post by Nick_A » Sun Feb 18, 2018 12:12 am

Hello Jonatron5

I hold a minority position as far as justification. First of all I distinguish between morality which are acquired conditioned beliefs and objective conscience which like consciousness is an attribute we are born with and can grow in their quality. Where consciousness is the source of our ability to distinguish between things, objective conscience is what allows a person to distinguish or “feel” objective value. Objective conscience is soul knowledge.

If you are curious read this link and how Plato distinguishes between learned morality and soul knowledge. Read the opinions that lead up to Plato’s assertion that these opinions are acquired while soul knowledge is a natural condition for our essence.

Morality can be justified since it is an opinion but soul knowledge is either felt “remembered” or suppressed as is normal for modern society.
Plato realises that all theories propounded by Cephalus, Thrasymachus and Glaucon, contained one common element. That one common element was that all the them treated justice as something external "an accomplishment, an importation, or a convention, they have, none of them carried it into the soul or considered it in the place of its habitation." Plato prove that justice does not depend upon a chance, convention or upon external force. It is the right condition of the human soul by the very nature of man when seen in the fullness of his environment. It is in this way that Plato condemned the position taken by Glaucon that justice is something which is external. According to Plato, it is internal as it resides in the human soul. "It is now regarded as an inward grace and its understanding is shown to involve a study of the inner man." It is, therefore, natural and no artificial. It is therefore, not born of fear of the weak but of the longing of the human soul to do a duty according to its nature.
The modern way is to reject objective conscience and only accept conditioned morality. From that perspective anyone can justify anything. We create our own reality so just do whatever feels good and consider that sufficient justification.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests