Thread: What is right and wrong?

After recent pondering of the issue of right and wrong, I'ev been wondering, do they really exist? Is there really a right and a wrong? For instance let me give you examples were these are used daily.

1: You are doing that wrong.

By who's standards is something wrong? One persons way may be right, when someone else percieves it to be right. And of course vice versa. But the point is, if the outcome is succesful, does right and wrong matter? And what is success? Is it truly neccesary to become the best? And what is best? etc etc. When you question right and wrong and what is right and what is wrong can you actually go on your daily life without asking questions about almost everything that are so drilled into your existence that you never actually would?

2: You're wrong in saying that.

In who's terms again is one right and wrong, if thre are so many different ways of saying something and everyone has a look at everyone being right or wrong, right and wrong become words, without meaning. So when someone says 'you're wrong' they may be right, but then again they may be wrong. But then what I just said has no meaning because I used right and wrong. So again it begs the question, what is right and wrong?

3: The Earth is round? Thats wrong.

Almost definatley 500 years ago this would have been the said thing if someone differed from the theory that the Earth was flat. But the Earth is flat from our perspective with our eyes isn't it? So is right and wrong just a concept of understanding even though we use it as a definition of fact or fiction?

4: My faith is right, your atheism is wrong. Your delusion is wrong, my atheism is right.

We all know that one. So then, both of those when they call each other wrong are thinking the same thing, the same assumption. Granter they are differnt motives and ideals behind each others saying that, but both classifying the other as wrong is the same psychological composite, with the same feelings and motives to say 'wrong'. So in essence there is no right and wrong because they are both the same, so is right and wrong relative like time? If we were all 'right' or 'wrong', would the world be any different? I don't think so. What's your ideas and thoughts on this, if any?

I agree with you all the way up until the last point, if it's the ideals themselves that are 'in the wrong' then you are still correct but as to the existence of a God or deity people can be wrong. Yes it may be perspective but if God exists, atheists were wrong in their assumption that he did not and vice versa.

In conclusion right and wrong allude largely to existential matters of absolute truth (I suppose sciences can also be placed under this as you can say 2+2 is 5 but you'd be wrong to say so).

When it comes to matters of opinion I feel that cannibalism is wrong however certain tribes would disagree and believe it to be right. I'll use this as my example that opinions can have no right or wrong only preferences.

There is no 'right' and 'wrong'; there are only different prospectives.
For instence:

"M3h 1z th4 b3s7 1337 p4wnz0r 1n 7h4 w0rld!!!"
Is wrong from the 'gramatically correct English' prospective.

But from leetspeak and jibberish prospectives it's tottaly correct.

~~

Another example:

-A brawl in a bar.

From tha` mateys point of view its the total fun and is right(and fun) becouse the like it.

From the police point of view all teh brawlers should be put to jail for the night to teach them that brawls are dangeorus and are wrong... *f them!*

I hope you guys feel my drift...

Originally Posted by Hanuka

I hope you guys feel my drift...

Yeah...........

Can you dig me out?

Originally Posted by Selene

Originally Posted by Hanuka

I hope you guys feel my drift...

Yeah...........

Can you dig me out?

Sorry mate, I'm digging in, not out :P

Originally Posted by 425 Chaotic Requisition

After recent pondering of the issue of right and wrong, I'ev been wondering, do they really exist? Is there really a right and a wrong? For instance let me give you examples were these are used daily.

1: You are doing that wrong.

By who's standards is something wrong? One persons way may be right, when someone else percieves it to be right. And of course vice versa. But the point is, if the outcome is succesful, does right and wrong matter? And what is success? Is it truly neccesary to become the best? And what is best? etc etc. When you question right and wrong and what is right and what is wrong can you actually go on your daily life without asking questions about almost everything that are so drilled into your existence that you never actually would?

It's not a matter of whether it's successful or not. It's a matter of doing it efficiently while also being successful. Anyone can get lucky on one try, but if you don't have an efficient method then that maybe the only time you're successful. Is it necessary to become the best? There maybe some factors at play where it's improbable that you'll become the best, but there's no reason for being lazy about things you can control. The best is the 'most efficient and most successful.'

2: You're wrong in saying that.

In who's terms again is one right and wrong, if there are so many different ways of saying something and everyone has a look at everyone being right or wrong, right and wrong become words, without meaning. So when someone says 'you're wrong' they may be right, but then again they may be wrong. But then what I just said has no meaning because I used right and wrong. So again it begs the question, what is right and wrong?

I have no idea what you're trying to point out here, but the first part seems more like an issue of semantics, rather than whether or not a conclusion is true or false.

3: The Earth is round? Thats wrong.

Almost definatley 500 years ago this would have been the said thing if someone differed from the theory that the Earth was flat. But the Earth is flat from our perspective with our eyes isn't it? So is right and wrong just a concept of understanding even though we use it as a definition of fact or fiction?

This is purely a scientific issue.

4: My faith is right, your atheism is wrong. Your delusion is wrong, my atheism is right.

We all know that one. So then, both of those when they call each other wrong are thinking the same thing, the same assumption. Granter they are differnt motives and ideals behind each others saying that, but both classifying the other as wrong is the same psychological composite, with the same feelings and motives to say 'wrong'. So in essence there is no right and wrong because they are both the same, so is right and wrong relative like time? If we were all 'right' or 'wrong', would the world be any different? I don't think so. What's your ideas and thoughts on this, if any?

Are you trying to equate atheism and religion here? Because if you are, then that's WRONG.

Ah, relativism. This quote from Archetypes of Wisdom: An Introduction to Philosophy Sixth Edition sums it all up.

By the way, just about every relativist I have met argues for his relativism or at least tries to give reasons why my nonrelativism is "inferior," "misguided," "mistaken," or "intolerant." As if that weren't odd enough, the relativist often gets angry when I simply point out that, according to his own relativistic claims, it is impossible for his views to be "righter" than mine. After all, relativism is "just his opinion."