We grownups know the difference between right and wrong. How far do you go to justify/rationalize doing something you want to do, when you know it is not the "right" thing to do?

I agree that "right" and "wrong" vary from person to person, society to society and historical framework to historical framework...but within your belief system, I think you must have formed a set of values by which you live your life, or measure your worth as a human being..is any of that really ambiguous for you? I'm not sure how old you are, Dirigo, but in my mind I definitely know what is "right" and "wrong" for who I am, or who I believe I am..there are no ambiguities for me! Thanks for your answer! :) Though I disagree with the gist of your answer, it was very well stated! :)

• Report

by RosieGHM Jetpacker on December 10th, 2007

Give me an example of an action you would consider doing that you also consider to be absolutely wrong. I cannot think of one such example.

• Report

by EL1 2 on December 10th, 2007

Now you're putting me on the spot, m'dear...of course if it were absolutely wrong with no extenuating or exigent circumstances, I probably wouldn't do it. Killing someone comes to mind...I believe I would do it to save/protect someone else..I think one would go into automatic and react...I am not sure if I would be able to do that to save myself, though..I am basically not a very brave person so I might be frozen and unable to move..but killing is not a good thing, even though we say it is o.k. to protect the innocent..that is how we justify killing strangers in wars..we are told if we don't, they will kill us or others..so we kill them first. It doesn't make it right..but it allows us to do it.

• Report

by RosieGHM Jetpacker on December 10th, 2007

So you are saying that it is absolutely ethically wrong to fatally shoot a gunman who is on a shooting rampage?

• Report

by EL1 2 on December 10th, 2007

That is one of the exigent circumstances to which I referred.

• Report

by RosieGHM Jetpacker on December 10th, 2007

I don't want to seem bothersome but since killing has its exceptions, can you think of another example? If not, it's quite alright. I respect your opinion that there are such absolutes.

• Report

by EL1 2 on December 10th, 2007

Here's another example, m'dear..you are not at all bothersome. You have been married for awhile..the "magic" has gone out of the relationship..but you don't want a divorce. A hotsy totsy gal at your work has let you know that she is "available"..you take her up on that offer...all men/women who cheat know it's wrong..but they all justify doing so, don't they? And it is never that they are at fault..it is always that their partner doesn't "satisfy" their needs...there is no exigent circumstance/extenuating circumstance for betrayal, cheating on a spouse..never, ever, for any reason..the honorable person gets out of the relationship first..so why do you think there are so many cowardly cheaters staying in marriages, betraying their spouses? Because they know it's wrong, but they are afraid of giving up what is comfortable. :(

• Report

by RosieGHM Jetpacker on December 10th, 2007

Some marriages are "open" in that manner. It could improve morale at work, too, which in turn could ensure some good things happen.

• Report

by EL1 2 on December 10th, 2007

We see things differently. You are justifying to me something that I find to be reprehensible. Again, no harm no foul.

• Report

by RosieGHM Jetpacker on December 10th, 2007

I'm very opposed to absolutes. Absolutes easily lead to generalizations which lead to all sorts of nasty things like stereotypes.

• Report

by EL1 2 on December 10th, 2007

You have every right to be opposed to anything you wish..I have every right to believe what I wish. I no more criticize you for your beliefs than I would expect you to criticize me for mine. You live your life according to your beliefs..I shall do the same. Game/set/match! We both win.

• Report

by RosieGHM Jetpacker on December 10th, 2007

That is a very good rule by which to live. Thanks for your answer, Dbd! :) Happy Monday!

• Report

by RosieGHM Jetpacker on December 10th, 2007

I think it is wrong to "judge" others..unless you walk in someone else's shoes, you are only an outsider looking in and assuming things that may or may not be true. So ignoring everyone else, what are you willing to do to justify to yourself an action that you know to be wrong? :) Happy Sunday, m'dear! :)

• Report

by RosieGHM Jetpacker on December 9th, 2007

As a soldier, "I was following orders sir!" is the cliche answer, killing is also wrong yet I could kill to save others, my justification would be that it was the lesser of two evils.

• Report

by Worzel on December 9th, 2007

Well, of course, in time of war, under direct command..I agree that killing is wrong..but there are exigent circumstances that control certain situations...if your killing of "an enemy" results in saving lives of innocents, that is one justification. To go out and look for people to kill..what do we call it..pre-emptive attacks..that seems wrong to me. To protect those who are unable to protect themselves (the elderly, women, children, fellow combatants) for survival..that would be an exigent circumstance in my opinion.

• Report

by RosieGHM Jetpacker on December 9th, 2007