right and wrong

[rcgreen]

Theoretical question:

If you have a nice car, and I want to steal it, and I need to kill you
in order to successfully do it, Who is to say that it is wrong?

Assuming that there are no witnesses, and there's virtually no
chance of being caught, why should I be limited by your
concept of morality, missing out on a chance of getting what
I want for free?

Who is to say what is ultimately right or wrong?
Sure, you would say that it is wrong, because you are the
one being robbed and killed, but my standard of
morality may be different.

Is there an objective standard of right and wrong,
or is it just a matter of opinion?

[pwaring]

There is an objective standard of what is right and wrong that is set by the majority of society, upon which laws are based (e.g. to take your example, the majority of society believes that both stealing and killing are morally wrong, therefore they are illegal).

Of course, there is no ultimate right and wrong "right and wrong" (if you understand what I mean), because at the end of the day morals and ethics are subjective. However, if your standard of right and wrong conflicts with that of the social majority, you will probably end up in prison.

[devilmech]

In answer to your question: If jesus had died alone and with no publicity, would we still be saved?

EDIT: this post in no way involves an admission on my part that I believe in jesus or feel that I need to be saved

[Dr_Evil]

Who is to say what is ultimately right or wrong?

Who is to say what is ultimately right or wrong?
Sure, you would say that it is wrong, because you are the
one being robbed and killed, but my standard of
morality may be different

Well if your standard is different, then its surely ok for me to rape your mother , sister and girlfriend.Steal you money,car and murder your family.

Is there an objective standard of right and wrong,
or is it just a matter of opinion?

The objective standard of right and wrong is not to do something to others that you dont want to be done to you.Most of it is common sense I guess.

Dr Evil

[bballad]

Society is t osay you where wrong, we have social mores and norms (every society dose) and some of those are even codified into laws. In the modern american society stealing someones possesions is wrong, now if we emulated the society of the plains indians there would be nothing wrong with what you did. In our society killing any one is wrong, in the society of the confederate south killing a slave isn't necesarly wrong, in biblical isrial killing a nonjew wasn't wrong. It all depends on your social paridiam. In saying that I don't think the idea of accepting other cultural norms and moors is a good idea in our culture, sure while in rome do as the romans, but in america do as the americans.

[RoadClosed]

Just to add to other comments....

Stealing software, using a windows license on a pc not correctly purchased or downloading music on a pc when you don't own the original is wrong. Or is it? Just using that paradigm; many examples given here come into play. Sure, technically it's illegal but often accepted as "OK" within the technical community.

[bballad]

True often times subculters have there own norms and mores(ie their own definitions of what is right and wrong.). But remember just because somthing is rigth in a subculture (killing an abortion doctor) dosn't make it right in society as a whole, and when society notices the subculture and applies its norms and mores its time to pay the piper (in your example the BSA), yuor subcultuer may aplod you but you are still subject t o punishment by the main society if you break their conventions..