does an anarchist believe in such a generalised concept as 'morality'? who is saying what is moral? just a question... I believe in anarchy, but not all my reactions are anarchistic. i'm not sure i would call myself an anarchist, but in certain situations others would label me as that. anyway, nice post, sets up a conversation. i like that 'funnny' is one of your tags. lets not all take ourselves too seriously as anarchists unless we are really sharing information to decentralise the state.
You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
The politicians of course. They are the most holy. ;)
I believe personally to know what is immoral. I'm not gonna tell someone how to live a moral live in relationships with me, but I will tell the what I find Immoral if they would do that to me ...themselves or let it do by anyone else. They don't have to do specific things for me but they may not do specific things to me, like stealing, raping, punch me in the face, shoot me etc. Because I believe.....believe it or not....that if someone initiates violence against me without me having done anything, that I have the right to defend myself. And not only a right in the sense of "human right" or "law" but I will naturally defend myself (that can be by fight or flight) nothing special.
Oh........and no one can force me to do something that I see as immoral, like stealing raping, punching murdering.
This is the best personal answer I can think of right now. I could say the NAP (Non aggression principle)
But that would have been to short i.m.o. so I wrote you this.
Edit:
The non aggression priciple however is worth looking in too if you're not familiar with that already. this I found to be a very clear explanation.
Thanks for taking time to reply to me. I think i understand that we can know what is immoral without necessarily preaching what is moral. I agree with that definitely.
Thanks @wordsword. Yes, the NAP is absolutely essential to understanding morality and how it effects our daily lives. Thanks for that input.
Thanks for the comment. When I use the term "morality", it is in the sense of objective right and wrong for human behavior. Many people have a skewed sense of what morality actually is. For example, just because someone doesn't LIKE some type of behavior such as drug use or a particular sexual orientation, they say it's immoral. Just because someone doesn't LIKE something does NOT make it immoral. Immoral means it is WRONG. Something that is WRONG causes harm to another individual. For example, when the tax man takes someone's money, that is WRONG because it is THEFT and it is causing harm to the individual that is losing their money. If someone does nothing but play video games all day, every day, it is NOT WRONG. They are not harming another individual by their actions. They are only harming themselves, which they have a right to do. I might not like or agree with their lifestyle, but it is NOT WRONG in terms of objective morality. To learn in greater depth about objective morality, I highly recommend the work of Mark Passio. His Natural Law presentation can be found online. Buckle in, it's about 8 hours of amazing information. Just search "Mark Passio Natural Law Presentation" and you'll find it. His website is whatonearthishappening.com. Thanks again for the comment and getting dialogue going. Steem on!
And sorry for the late reply. I'm in Asia right now so the time difference is huge.
And sorry for the late reply. I'm in Asia right now so the time difference is huge.