The Philosophy Discussion Forum

I will start this off by giving my sense of what morality is. Morality is KNOWING in a specific situation what is the "right" choice of action and what the "wrong" choice of action. There would of course be the meta rule, in any situation, the right choice is to make the right choice for that situation and the wrong choice s to make the wrong choice for that situation.

We are still free to choose. In addition to morality, there may be other factors involved (not in the moral dimension) which influence our decision about the choice of action. We must of course accept responsibility for our choice of action, the consequences.

What is right and wrong based on?

What if we don't accept responsibility?

MikeNovack wrote: ↑Sun May 24, 2026 4:24 pm I will start this off by giving my sense of what morality is. Morality is KNOWING in a specific situation what is the "right" choice of action and what the "wrong" choice of action.

Uhm, that doesn't seem like a winner. A framework (or countlessly many frameworks) of principles and traditions and practises beliefs and so on directed towards values, and persons and things that we value, would probably be more in line with what morality actually consists in.

Such frameworks, while no doubt very useful for deciding, probably don't count as sufficient evidence for knowing. Unless you adopt a very relaxed set of rules for what knowledge counts as. But as a rule of thumb, if one person can "know" that X is bad in any and all cases, while another person can simultaneously "know" that X is not bad in every case, then somebody has got their concept of knowledge in a twist.

morality is a way to justify your actions or condemn the actions of others...

-Imp

Sorry, perhaps In wasn't clear enough. Knowing vs doing. However, by "knowing" I probably would be including "encoding of feelings" << siding with Hume, ultimately our actions/non-actions will be because oi feelings.>>

BTW --- I would argue that you (all humans) first learned about morality, that there was a right way and a wrong way to do things, starting very early. I think the first three were when you learned there was a right way and a wrong way for elimination (you were "toilet trained"), a right way and wrong way for your body (you were taught ton wear clothes), and a right way and a wrong way to eat. More or less in that order.

There is a right way and a wrong way to wash dishes. But that's not morality.

MikeNovack wrote: ↑Tue May 26, 2026 11:18 pm Sorry, perhaps In wasn't clear enough. Knowing vs doing. However, by "knowing" I probably would be including "encoding of feelings" << siding with Hume, ultimately our actions/non-actions will be because oi feelings.>>

BTW --- I would argue that you (all humans) first learned about morality, that there was a right way and a wrong way to do things, starting very early. I think the first three were when you learned there was a right way and a wrong way for elimination (you were "toilet trained"), a right way and wrong way for your body (you were taught ton wear clothes), and a right way and a wrong way to eat. More or less in that order.

Your description of knowing takes you further away from knowledge and how to know it at every pass.

Your description of morality has less and less to do with what is morally right or wrong.

The question "what is morality" is somehow getting less answered with each answer.

MikeNovack wrote: ↑Sun May 24, 2026 4:24 pm Morality is KNOWING in a specific situation what is the "right" choice of action and what the "wrong" choice of action.

What is the criterion of rightness?

the underlying moral question: how should one act? depends on scale...

following the law is usually the correct action; if the right action is the correct action legally, you usually don't have to contend with a metaphysical question... the wrong action usually causes harm or is overtly illegal

going to hell for jaywalking or the hospital for blindly running into traffic...

-Imp

Janoah wrote: ↑Thu May 28, 2026 5:23 pm

MikeNovack wrote: ↑Sun May 24, 2026 4:24 pm Morality is KNOWING in a specific situation what is the "right" choice of action and what the "wrong" choice of action.

What is the criterion of rightness?

There is no "rightness," only avoiding wrongness as much as possible. We're all living in a dungeon called "the universe". We've all been condemned to live in this place. The best we can do is try to coexist peacefully with each other as best as possible. When one of us decides that the only answer is to purge the world of another, then we're not living in the reality of our condition. We're all in this dungeon together. We're all equally screwed. That is the only reality worthy of considering.

Impenitent wrote: ↑Sun May 24, 2026 8:27 pm morality is a way to justify your actions or condemn the actions of others...

-Imp

That sounds accurate to me.

It's a subjective judgmental concept most often used for religious contexts.

Gary Childress wrote: ↑Sat May 30, 2026 4:25 pm We're all living in a dungeon called "the universe". We've all been condemned to live in this place.

Okay, that's one perspective.

Here's another one. We're living in a highly creative space (whatever-it-is). We can seemingly create with our thoughts as well as our actions. It appears that everyone can do this, so there is a tremendous flood of creations that we are all swimming in. It is helpful to discover how to create our own 'seaworthy boats' or learn to fly. One of the best things to do with this experience is (likely) to enjoy being and doing our best (whatever-that-is) within it (whatever-it-is).

Lacewing wrote: ↑Sat May 30, 2026 4:58 pm

Gary Childress wrote: ↑Sat May 30, 2026 4:25 pm We're all living in a dungeon called "the universe". We've all been condemned to live in this place.

Okay, that's one perspective.

Here's another one. We're living in a highly creative space (whatever-it-is). We can seemingly create with our thoughts as well as our actions. It appears that everyone can do this, so there is a tremendous flood of creations that we are all swimming in. It is helpful to discover how to create our own 'seaworthy boats' or learn to fly. One of the best things to do with this experience is (likely) to enjoy being and doing our best (whatever-that-is) within it (whatever-it-is).

That's true. It is my perspective.

Gary Childress wrote: ↑Sat May 30, 2026 4:25 pm

Janoah wrote: ↑Thu May 28, 2026 5:23 pm

MikeNovack wrote: ↑Sun May 24, 2026 4:24 pm Morality is KNOWING in a specific situation what is the "right" choice of action and what the "wrong" choice of action.

What is the criterion of rightness?

There is no "rightness," only avoiding wrongness as much as possible. We're all living in a dungeon called "the universe". We've all been condemned to live in this place. The best we can do is try to coexist peacefully with each other as best as possible. When one of us decides that the only answer is to purge the world of another, then we're not living in the reality of our condition. We're all in this dungeon together. We're all equally screwed. That is the only reality worthy of considering.

Again, what is the criterion for wrongness?
It's possible to be on a uninhabited island with no one to "peacefully coexist" with. Are there no morals on a uninhabited island?

Janoah wrote: ↑Sat May 30, 2026 8:42 pm

Gary Childress wrote: ↑Sat May 30, 2026 4:25 pm

Janoah wrote: ↑Thu May 28, 2026 5:23 pm

What is the criterion of rightness?

There is no "rightness," only avoiding wrongness as much as possible. We're all living in a dungeon called "the universe". We've all been condemned to live in this place. The best we can do is try to coexist peacefully with each other as best as possible. When one of us decides that the only answer is to purge the world of another, then we're not living in the reality of our condition. We're all in this dungeon together. We're all equally screwed. That is the only reality worthy of considering.

Again, what is the criterion for wrongness?
It's possible to be on a uninhabited island with no one to "peacefully coexist" with. Are there no morals on a uninhabited island?

If there is nothing else living on the Island, then why would there be any morals to follow?

EDIT: To directly answer your question: No. There are no morals to follow for someone living on an island uninhabited by any other living beings.