The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
The Forum - On Line Opinion's article discussion area



Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Main Articles General

Sign In      Register

The Forum > Article Comments > What is right and what is wrong? > Comments

What is right and what is wrong? : Comments

By Graham Preston, published 1/2/2007

Book review: 'Right and wrong - how to decide for yourself' by Hugh Mackay.

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. Page 2
  4. 3
  5. All
Well..if we are going to have Buddha's teaching, we may as well have the Biblical one :)

"Ultimately, each one of us has to develop the wisdom to act morally"

said brother Fautino. Which of course leads us back to the Article title "what IS right and wrong..moral"

Well, aside from the theocratic Israelite community laws of the Old Testament, the basic thrust of it all is summed up in 2 statements.
1/ Love God with all your heart.
2/ Love your neighbour as yourself.

There is nothing simpler and more encompassing. Lets explore the idea of 'Love your neighbour'..withOUT "Love God".... if God, the ultimate moral authority, is 'not', then morality is totally relative to culture and philosophical whim. Anyone doubting this, (if they are old enough) should look back to the late 50s, and compare concepts of 'right and wrong' to those of 'now'.

Clearly, we are a ship adrift in a sea of moral whim. So, when Buddha outlined his 4fold way and noble 8fold something, he did it in an ethical context where most people understood its meaning.

If you try to transplant that social understanding to another culture, it may be meaningless and without connectivity to ethical/moral reference points. So, something which is considered 'noble' by the Buddha, might be considered 'abominable' or just plain stupid by some tribal person of Irian Jaya.

This is why we need the divine input "This is they way, walk ye in it"
From that foundation, we can call mankind back to account for his waywardness.

When the great prophets of the Old Testament called upon the people to forsake idolatry, they were also calling them to forsake immoral conduct, as Idolatry and immorality went together like 2 peas in a pod.
Posted by BOAZ_David, Friday, 2 February 2007 8:11:21 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
David B, the moral basis I derived from my Christian mother has served me well, and is essentially the same as the panca-sila (five-fold morality) that I mentioned. The Buddha said that, whether or not there is a God, you have to make efforts yourself, bring about your own salvation; and you can do this by developing your own deep understanding of reality, so that your wisdom is derived from your own direct experience rather than from external sources such as scripture. You might notice that I’ve never decried scripture, but I tend to see it as a guide and inspiration rather than being sufficient in itself.

You and I have broadly similar moral beliefs, we differ mainly in that you believe that there is a God to whom we must surrender in order to develop spiritually, I don’t share that belief. But it does seem to me that, call it what you will, there is an underlying moral order, that adherence to it will bring benefits for oneself and others in this life and, if there is another life, in that too.

The second major difference is that your approach is highly sectarian. Truth, absolute reality, cannot be sectarian, it must be universal. The Buddha taught a universal technique, not Buddhism, and followers of any or no religion can benefit from practising it without being required to put aside their faith. Many Christians have done so.
Posted by Faustino, Friday, 2 February 2007 8:29:11 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Ridiculous Preston. Any true discussion on moral values in a world where War and Poverty smack at the heart of the present, would be useful.

While I have not read Hugh Mackay’s book “Right and wrong - how to decide for yourself”, I see no contradiction through your rebuttals. In fact from the beginning I see your explanations from the first para onwards extremely pro-negative and out of balance. Unfortunately you appear to sell us a weaker argument.

Ie: You say;

a) “Does he actually mean that Hitler, torturers, and child abusers have the right to do whatever they want and no one should interfere?

And,

b) “pedophilia and incest are okay after all, apparently.”

Then finally as negative as your opening para you say;

c) “However, if humanity has simply happened to evolve out of the slime, then Mackay is correct that there are no moral absolutes.”

Nasty stuff Preston. I truly feel you might read more with depth as you sit with your ‘group …. over the next five years, … intervening to rescue preborn children at Queensland abortion “clinics” by sitting in front of their doors.’

You may mean well, and you have the right to “mean well” but your own stance is unreasonable, heartless and totally flawed through this presentation.

http://www.miacat.com
Posted by miacat, Friday, 2 February 2007 8:36:17 AM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
"Personally, I’m far more comfortable trusting someone willing to take a moment and think about a decision, than someone who so caught up in absolutes that the merits of the situation don’t matter."

Too right, Mylakhrion. While those who reject moral absolutes will devise their own set in order to justify their actions, those who adhere to them will just as surely do the same. Any number of atrocities have been committed in the name of so-called morals, just as they have in the name of other causes. The author might sit on the steps of abortion clinics, but at least he doesn't blow them up.

Personally I'm in favour of DB's point 2. Not a lot to quibble about there.
Posted by bennie, Friday, 2 February 2007 9:14:51 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
There is right and wrong. And there is outright evil. Most everyone aside from the occasional sociopath is guided by the innate conscience. Humans have an inherent essential nature. That nature is to be good. Even with our liberal societies we only suffer about 5% criminal behavior. Which isn't a great deal considering the number and extent of our laws that we have for the most part agreed to uphold.

Even in a condition of total anarchy good would be struggling to assert itself through human behavior. Conditions for relating would soon be defined. There is long term benefit in being good. Any advantage to behaving badly is short term and carries a cost that generally voids the interim period.

A tired example I'm sure but, five years of Hitler and Nazism got the German people very short term gains. For all the Nazi struggled to dominate, take, steal, coerce, murder, rape and plunder, documents show that the cost of executing the war had drastically emptied the national coffers and that an end was a precondition in spite of any victory and all gains expected never materialized.
Germany still had their unemployment issues post WWII to contend with requiring tremendous aid and logistics on behalf of the Allies.
(excluding Russian interference)
Posted by aqvarivs, Friday, 2 February 2007 9:35:17 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
I find it somewhat bizarre when people defend logical contradictions. Moral Relativism is a useless idea that no one believes. Quite often, it is merely used by those seeking to appear 'tolerant' whilst they attempt to get other people to follow their own morality.
Posted by Grey, Friday, 2 February 2007 4:10:49 PM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. Page 2
  4. 3
  5. All

About Us :: Search :: Discuss :: Feedback :: Legals :: Privacy