[Oni]

Morality is a concept humans have created in order to distinguish good behavior from bad. Taking anything, especially a human life, is generally accepted as immoral.

Spoiler:

I wish we had actual threads in this section.

[Despised]

Don't say no reason because there's always at least one.

I must say I do agree with this.

I'm not saying It's fine to kill someone, but I've always been a firm believer that there's a motive behind every murder. You read about all these killings In schools, whereby some student walked In and went on a shooting rampage. Who knows, he could've been bullied, or a teacher didn't mark his grades correctly, the school canteen may have been rude and short-changed him and the list goes on.

Whatever the reason may be, there Is one. No one gets up In the morning, feels bored and simply takes lives.

Precisely. Whether that be having own mental/financial problems, or simply taking pleasure in others' pain (like myself). There's nothing anyone does for no reason.

Morality is a concept humans have created in order to distinguish good behavior from bad. Taking anything, especially a human life, is generally accepted as immoral.

Spoiler:

I wish we had actual threads in this section.

The moment you call it morally right, morally wrong, moral or immoral is the moment it becomes based on your personal opinion, regardless of the basis you have for it.

I believe homicide is morally right and justifiable regardless of the reason. It's only within the past few hundred years that humans have adapted the morals of killing is wrong. "Let's keep the world overpopulated." Just because your opinion is the same as the majority of people (that are alive), it doesn't make it any more right than mine.

[817_091_278]

It's never been officially constituted as morally wrong (nothing has) - but it's the vast, vast majorities opinion.

[mothered]

There are so many angles that the concept of murder can be exhausted, defined and opinionated.

As a result, I don't believe there'll be a conclusive association with It.

[Nil]

No one is more right than anyone else and I don't believe anyone can easily counter this topic in any objective sense. But, many laws based on morality exist because a majority has agreed with them. When an overwhelming number of people agree with an act, or forbid one, one's own opinion of it becomes moot in a pragmatic sense (i.e., punishment will be enforced regardless).

At a more basic level, punishing murder provides a minimum comfort of security to all people and allows and encourages a safer environment for social interactions and for trust to grow; it helps to stabilize a society. Now I'm going to insert my own viewpoint into the matter and I think Confucius said it best, "Don't do unto others what you don't want others to do unto you".

[swatterhat]

Can we consider assisted suicide a murder? Does this still touch the morality surface we are talking about here?

[Despised]

Can we consider assisted suicide a murder? Does this still touch the morality surface we are talking about here?

It depends. Are we talking about voluntary, non-voluntary or involuntary euthanasia?

[DarkMuse]

You are being absolutely relativistic throughout your entire post.

Morality is completely dependent on personal opinion

No, no it most definitely is not. Morality is absolutely and definitively objective.

murder being morally wrong is only wrong when someone uses their opinion to deem it wrong.

Oh but wait...uhm... isn't your opinion then an opinion of someone elses opinion? so wait, who's right here? Where's the truth? Some classic circular logic.

The answer to your question boils down to this:
What is truth?
Are you saying truth varies depending on the person you ask? One may say murder is wrong, while another may say it is right. The truth is different person to person. But, that doesn't make sense, because then there can be no truth. So, are you saying truth does not exist?

Morality = objective
HIGHLY debatable. No definitive answer one way or the other (objective vs subjective)
However, your observation of the obvious relativistic is quite correct as well as it being circular in terms of the used logic.

I think that if OP honestly attempts to rewrite his argument in a more specific and logically correct manner (I mean that as in logical forms, not in the sense that some would seem to be rude or insulting) he would find that the core of his argument is, for lack of a better word, wrong.

Still was nice to see an attempt at philosophical conversation here; I had no idea even a few people were versed in the art :-)

[Despised]

Morality = objective
HIGHLY debatable. No definitive answer one way or the other (objective vs subjective)
However, your observation of the obvious relativistic is quite correct as well as it being circular in terms of the used logic.

No one takes my word for it anyways, so..

Morality is a concept humans have created in order to distinguish good behavior from bad.

Thus it is an opinion, subjective.

[insidious]

No one takes my word for it anyways, so..

Because we should totally take an internet strangers word when he states murder is not morally wrong.

At a more basic level, punishing murder provides a minimum comfort of security to all people and allows and encourages a safer environment for social interactions and for trust to grow; it helps to stabilize a society. Now I'm going to insert my own viewpoint into the matter and I think Confucius said it best, "Don't do unto others what you don't want others to do unto you".

This part is clearly important (fitting that @GOD should weigh in on the matter ). There may not be any convincing the person who believes homicide is not morally wrong, though that's not saying society won't alienate such an individual.

You are saying murder is OK. If I walked up to you and cut you into a million pieces for absolutely no reason, is that OK?

If you are capable of that, sure. Don't say no reason because there's always at least one.

No justifiable reason.

It is understood by society to be wrong since it steals the one thing that nearly every human being holds sacred.


Homicide doesn't make you're post any less vague, it just gives more angles to argue, and makes this thread more complex. It's an even more general term than 'murder'. I mean, what do you expect SL to do, write an ethics book? lol

"Homicide occurs when one human being causes the death of another.[1] Homicides can be divided into many overlapping types, including murder, manslaughter, justifiable homicide, killing in war, euthanasia, and execution, depending on the circumstances of the death."
-http://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/homicide
-https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homicide

I'm of the opinion that any kind of killing of another human being is wrong. This means that even if an individual is on death row for some egregious crimes, I would be against their government-sanctioned murder. I believe they should be isolated from society, and at least some kind of attempt at rehabilitation taken. Clearly if that is not possible then they shouldn't be part of the general population, but remain isolated/in prison.

I can, however, understand how many would say government-sanctioned killing, or killing with a 'justifiable' reason accepted by most of society, is OK.
I can understand if someone kills another person in some situations (self-defence or otherwise).

Seriously - you're alienating yourself by saying ALL homicide is OK, or all murder is OK, or whatever. It's better not to generalize.

I mean, with you're current logic, one could argue you find nothing morally wrong with Hitlers mass-homicide of millions of people.
----that is not OK...

Can we consider assisted suicide a murder? Does this still touch the morality surface we are talking about here?

It depends. Are we talking about voluntary, non-voluntary or involuntary euthanasia?

At this point you're basically defining your own definition of "homicide", since both those things (if assisted) can fall under the 'homicide' category, depending on who you ask.
If it "depends" maybe make your post more clear/list so that everyone knows exactly what kind of homicides you are talking about. Otherwise the question is essentially impossible to answer.

Spoiler:

non-voluntary and involuntary are the same thing, no need to be redundant