Morality?
By orchidae8
@orchidae8 (20)
United States
May 31, 2009 8:22am CST
In Frank Yerby's The Saracen Blade, he stirred my intellect with the statement, morality is subject to locality. What do you think of this?
2 responses
@headabnger2884 (253)
• Ireland
31 May 09
Very good statement. I totally agree. If the society around you sees something as normal then you will see it as normal as well. Who from a different society is to tell you otherwise? Like imagine yourself living amongst a group of cannibals you would probably never even consider it to be wrong to eat another human being if everyone around you is doing it
@headabnger2884 (253)
• Ireland
5 Jun 09
Yeah but our judgement and the way we view right and wrong is tought to us by our parents they show us whats the right way to judge.
Well I dont fully agree with that statement. If anything we do have more freedome althou with all the "isms" and democracy we are all now slaves to our ambitions. We are stuck in a circle of always wanting more and achieving more because we can. Yet most people still never really get more ahead in life then where they started at.
We work so hard our whole lives just to get ahead that we loose the abilitie to apreciate the simple things in life where as people/peasants/cavemen in the past perhaps never bothered themselves with much more then surviving from day to day. Appreciating those things a lot more....hmmmmm
@Hurray (64)
• Canada
1 Jun 09
Hello Orchidae!
I would say he actually defines the "mores". The Merriam-Webster Online dictionary defines it as: "the fixed morally binding customs of a particular group" and "moral attitudes".
And this is cultural. It would be interesting to research and compare mores from one country to the other. Let's use something that might still be an item.
Let's say women in short and top very tiny. In some countries, it is still considered immoral. In others, it has either become accepted or just looked upon as bad manners but not immoral.
Something like that.
Hurray
