A more advance method to determine right and wrong?

Question: A more advance method to determine right and wrong!?

Hi I have been writing an essay about morality!. I am just wondering is there a more advance method to determines right from wrong except for morality!. For example, people lie to make other people feel better, but base on morality lying is wrong!. So is there other methods to determine right and wrong!?

Thanks for answering the question!.Www@QuestionHome@Com

Best Answer - Chosen by Asker:

I don't believe God has anything to do with it (unless of course God is inseparable from the Logos, which I believe is the case)!. Anyway here's my answer to a better method for determining right from wrong:

Truth Is Derivative-The “Ought” Is There In The Theory’s First Principles

“You’re beginning to sound like you’re back in the classroom,” I responded, “If I remember correctly, the problem back then was getting from the ‘is’ to the ‘ought!.’ The ‘is’ can always be made to sound like it should be an ‘ought,’ but the problem has always been ‘how do we really know!?’ Help me here! When does the ‘is’ become the ‘ought!?’”

“That’s a problem,” said Dr!. Gill, “a problem that’s gone unsolved for far too long!. Many attempts have been make to get from the ‘is’ to the ‘ought,’ but every attempt has ended in failure!. The reason is that it can’t be done!. The relationship moves in the other direction!. You can’t go from the ‘is’ to the ‘ought,’ but you can go from the ‘ought’ to the ‘is!.’ Implications always follow from valid conceptual schemes (operationally defined concepts structured according to established rules)!. These implications, when extended, produce necessary and self-consistent results!. In other words, first you set up the rules that you are going to use!. Then, by experiment, or by reasoning, you explore the logical implications of those rules!. Truth is derivative!. In the use of the scientific method, it is not unusual for the ‘ought,’ the implications of a theory, to turn into the ‘is,’ the scientifically confirmed results of the theory!. In ethical theory it should be the same way!. The ‘ought’ is there, in the theory’s first principles!. Turning the ‘ought’ into the ‘is,’ however, will always take work!."

When the self-contradictory is used to keep a person honest, self-consistent behavior follows naturally, like water running downstream!.Www@QuestionHome@Com

I find that experience is the best tool!.

Philosophically however, I believe that your definition of morality is based solely on your belief or disbelief in God!.

Unbelief in God will result in a morality that is an unspoken compromise between human beings!. For instance, humans have compromised their ability to kill others in the understanding that killing is now classified as immoral!.

Belief in God will result in a morality that reflects that belief, be it Christian, Jewish, Muslim, Hindu, whatever!. It gets complicated here, but basically the morality would be based on the criteria your religion uses for those who are saved, exalted, glorified, or whatever the religion's final state of mankind is!.

In short, Determining right and wrong necessitates determining if God exists and what he is like!.Www@QuestionHome@Com

Yes, there might be this:
Whatever action is based upon greed, aversion or delusion is unwholesome!. Whatever action is based upon non-greed, non-aversion and non-delusion is wholesome!.
Now you can forget about idea of morality and make a simple choice "Will I regard unwholesome as wrong, and wholesome as right!? Or vice versa!? Or will I make the decisions separately so to suit my immediate needs!? Or will I refuse to make such compromises!?"!.

Good luck!.Www@QuestionHome@Com

Good question!.

I think in this instance it is a judgement call!. If your values make you feel that it is for the greater good to not lie, or to lie!.

Personally I always try not to lie because I like to keep things simple!. Even if it will hurt someone I prefer to just get it over with to aviod a larger problem in the future!.

In other cases I don't think that I often even utilize morality to make decisions!. I usually rely on pure, good old logic!. I try to break any problem down in my head into a yes or no answer no matter what it is!. Then I go the direction I deem safe and/or wise!. If they are both equal, then it does not matter and either will do so I pick whichever option I see yielding me personally the most reward!.Www@QuestionHome@Com

The Golden Rule is the method!. For example, I know that lying to others is ultimately not good for them!. Proper application of the Golden Rule is hard work!. It is much more than making others feel good!.

Of course, the GR has no authority over us unless we believe that the GR is God's command to us!. Without God, right and wrong can only be feelings (what you call a sense) and there is no method for deterrmining feelings!.Www@QuestionHome@Com

I don't feel I could give you a comprehensive answer to your question, but I will submit this:
I go by the Golden Rule, which says, "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you"!.
That works for me!.
I admit, that defines right or wrong according to my perception, but I do think it's a good and workable system!.Www@QuestionHome@Com

How much harm or good does it have!. Based on the example you gave: lying!. White lie is acceptable coz it protects the person from being hurt!. So it brings more good than harm!. Unlike the opposite which brings more harm because you are doing it to hurt a person's feelings!.

Just an opinion!. sorry if i sound stupid!.Www@QuestionHome@Com

People lie to make themselves look better in their own eyes!. And all the rights, have inherent wrongs, and within bad is (a very Little bit, maybe) of right!. What is right for you, is wrong to me, and vice versa!. Ask a Jew: "Would you prepare pork on Friday night!?" You would have broken 3 commandments!.
I, on the other hand could not care less!. Think Ying and Yang!.
Peace!.Www@QuestionHome@Com

Yes if it makes feel people better we do lie!.eg A person is suffering from an incurable ailment, we assure him not to worry and he'll be fine; knowing fully well that he wont!.Lying for gain is wrong!.This should be the principle!.Www@QuestionHome@Com

rules, laws, or religion!?
these are all set guidelines where if gone against they are wrong!.Www@QuestionHome@Com

Think, WWBD (What would Bush do!?)!.

Then do the opposite!.Www@QuestionHome@Com

think, WWJD (what would Jesus do!?)Www@QuestionHome@Com