If you don’t agree with the concept of good or bad people, you dont have to answer just down vote. If you think a person is good or bad based on where they were born and live you don’t have to answer just down vote.

  • balderdash@lemmy.zip
    4·
    1 day ago

    Although philosophers who embrace moral realism will have different views, my takeaway is that it is much harder to be a virtuous moral agent than the layperson assumes.

    That said, if I find that a person often puts their own interests above those of everyone else, this is a good indication of questionable character.

    • YappyMonotheist@lemmy.world
      2·
      20 hours ago

      It’s not all or nothing, and small things are universally tolerable. Gluttony isn’t good but most people have someone fat/obese they love and even admire. Excess vanity isn’t good but to a certain degree most women are somewhat vain and that doesn’t make them bad (and men enjoy looking at women when they’re done up too), right? It’s impossible to be perfect, and virtue will be disregarded at times, but I think it’s not that difficult to be above the threshold we all naturally understand (unless you’re an amoral perspectivist): don’t lie, don’t cheat, don’t be coercive or aggressive, don’t mistreat others, take your vows seriously (raise your kids and try to make things work with your partner), be generous when possible, etc etc. And you can always repent and make amends when you fail too, people understand.

      • balderdash@lemmy.zip
        2·
        3 hours ago

        It’s impossible to be perfect, and virtue will be disregarded at times, but I think it’s not that difficult to be above the threshold we all naturally understand

        This is a practical mindset to have but allow me to say more about where I think the difficulty lies. 1) We commonly do immoral things. 2) The right thing to do isn’t always clear. Let’s consider each in turn.

        1. Many practices are so commonplace in our time that we no longer feel their moral implications: even when we know that the action is wrong! For example, I eat meat that comes from factory farmed animals; I know that the animals are essentially being tortured, but it’s easy to let price and gustatory pleasure outweigh the moral considerations because everyone else is doing the same. Similarly, I know that the minerals used to build my cellphone come from literal slave labor of miners in the Congo. Yet instead of buying a Fair Phone, I bought the cheapest phone that served my own needs.
        1. There are also cases in which our virtues come into conflict. In such cases, the right action to take is not always so straight-forward. For example, is it okay to tell my wife a white lie if I know it makes her feel better? (Deontologists like Immanuel Kant would emphatically answer “no”.) Or, if I have a set amount of money to donate, should I give the money to a random unhoused person, donate the money to someone (who I cannot see) in an even worse position in a poorer country, or give the money to a friend/family? Moral realists (e.g., virtue ethicists, deontologists, consequentialists) all agree that there are definitive answers to these questions, even though they will disagree on what the actual answers are.

        To be a morally virtuous persons, it seems you have to be willing to go against the common practices of your own time and you must also be knowledgeable enough to make correct moral judgements. This is a tall order for most of us to achieve.