Social Question

Hypocrisy_Central's avatar

How many times have you seen people disqualify logic for the sake of morality?

Asked by Hypocrisy_Central (26821points) April 29th, 2015

People say they try to be logical and do logical things; for the opposite would be illogical or insane. Not that some would know it, but they unwittingly derail logic for the sake of morality. Logic has no foot in morality. For instance, a chain is supposedly as strong as its weakest link. As a distressed or impoverished community, society, etc. if you can remove the weakest links, overall it would be better for everyone, especially if it came to survival or battle. Some, maybe many, would try to override that logic with morality because no one wants to seem heartless and admit eliminating the weak, old, and cripple would be the best move to maximize the available resources for those who can actively support the community fairly equal to everyone else and to what they will consume in resources. There are many other examples of logic appearing immoral and thus people don’t want to embrace it. Have you seem instances where logic in not applied because it would go against some standard of morality a community has set in place?

Observing members: 0 Composing members: 0

34 Answers

Dutchess_III's avatar

Well, believing in God is a good example of defying logic so I see it 24/7

Hypocrisy_Central's avatar

^ Well, believing in God is a good example of defying logic so I see it 24/7
OK, see we have to go over this fact one more time, when it comes to faith and spiritual matters, it is not about man’s logic but the Wisdom and logic of the Creator. If you are using a belief in God as reason for those of faith not to apply reason, what excuse are you using for those who do not believe in God for their not using logic for fear that it is not moral or appears to be immoral? It would seem those (without God) would be using logic, unadulterated, the most.,

flutherother's avatar

We always use some kind of morality when deciding what we are going to do. Feelings motivate us not reason.

Hypocrisy_Central's avatar

^ We always use some kind of morality when deciding what we are going to do. Feelings motivate us not reason.
As much as people try to give props to Aristotle and Plato in reality no one believes what they said because logic is being used as a way to legitimize or qualify one’s emotions which may have no logical quality about them whatsoever. At least that is what you seem to be indicating, if you intended it or not.

cazzie's avatar

We’re not machines. We have feelings and, regardless if we have gods or not, we have morals.

Hypocrisy_Central's avatar

@cazzie We’re not machines. We have feelings and, regardless if we have gods or not, we have morals.
That is kind of the crux of the question, people not being logical but trying to truncate logic into what they feel is moral, in short, short circuiting logic at the expense of their personal morality and emotions. Where have you seen it?

cazzie's avatar

It sounds like you are valuing the logic over the morals? Why is that?

Hypocrisy_Central's avatar

^ It sounds like you are valuing the logic over the morals? Why is that?
I am not valuing logic over morals, I know where my morals come from, so the logic behind them stem from a different place, and unless you can embrace that area, and some, maybe most here don’t, it will not make any sense. However, those who don’t stem their logic from that source I wonder how they can’t stand on the logic for logic sake as they stand on science for science sake. If one wants to be an emotional and reactionary person without logic, what is the benefit of having logic?

cazzie's avatar

Oh… because I don’t subscribe to your god, I can’t have morals… or feelings or make judgements on those morals and feelings and, MUST because I dismiss a Sky Father, only obey my machinist logic and to do anything else is dishonest…... RIGHT!!!

Dutchess_III's avatar

You know, it’s really scary to know that without God there would be nothing to stop you from turning into Ted Bundy @Hypocrisy_Central.

cazzie's avatar

I know where MY morals come from as well, and I also have the benefit of science and logic.

jwalsh1202's avatar

Whether secular or religious in origin, basic morals seem to be fairly consistent around the world. I think that morals which stem from a non-religion basis are stronger than those coming from religion. There is no “carrot and stick” of eternal paradise or damnation driving them.

Hypocrisy_Central's avatar

@cazzie Oh… because I don’t subscribe to your god, I can’t have morals
Please do not put words in my mouth that are not there. I said no such thing.

MUST because I dismiss a Sky Father, only obey my machinist logic and to do anything else is dishonest
Is that your equivalent to using the ‘F’ word for gays, Sky Father? If you can’t use His proper name, please do not use it at all. It is not about dishonesty, it is about why people discount logic for sake of their morality. I never said which morality you could use, you what you have used, I prefer that anyhow.

I know where MY morals come from as well, and I also have the benefit of science and logic. I know where MY morals come from as well, and I also have the benefit of science and logic.
Who was that or they? I would want to study up on them to see how close they conducted themselves to their own logic, and the logic they want to import on the rest of us. Then, which weighs most prominence your logic or your morals? If your science will be gutted because the logic supporting it is nullified by your morals, how do you reconcile that?

@Dutchess_III You know, it’s really scary to know that without God there would be nothing to stop you from turning into Ted Bundy
Then it would be a very good think I believe in God, huh? I would think it scary that logic can be derailed by reactionary emotions. When that happens usually all sorts of funk jump off, and the deaths that occur has nothing to do with any religion. Now, if you cannot debunk the notion fine, at least say so, but so far I have not seen you mount a defense that people do not truncate logic under what they feel, want to believe, or their own morality.

@jwalsh1202 Whether secular or religious in origin, basic morals seem to be fairly consistent around the world.
Well, I will say most morality takes a same grain, I can agree with you on that. Still people are caught on the point of which morality when it is irrelevant, the question is does that morality takes irrational actions and do people using it allow it to displace logic?

PriceisRightx26's avatar

You’re speaking as if morality and logistics are completely separate entities. They’re not. It might not be logical in a financial aspect to keep the “weak links,” but altruism is extremely beneficial to all involved, and therefore socially and emotionally logical.

Dutchess_III's avatar

You said your morality comes from God. Ergo, if there were no God you would have no morals.

jwalsh1202's avatar

@Hypocrisy_Central, I would say yes, especially with religious based morals. You could be stoned for not keeping the sabbath, using gods name in vain (try harder @cazzie, Sky Father does not count!) or children rebelling against their parents. Seemingly great moral offenses at the time, and certainly an irrational action for such non-offenses. The morals that are rational and logical appear to be fairly universal across many cultures and faiths, so I would say they are independent of religion.

SmashTheState's avatar

If one accepts natural law (and why wouldn’t one?), then logic and morality are completely synonymous. Natural law holds that axiomatic moral imperatives can be derived from conditions which must hold for knowledge itself to exist. The application of natural law is called natural justice, and is the basis on which the US Declaration of Idependence and the US Constitution were written.

Blondesjon's avatar

@SmashTheState . . . I am not trying to be a dick. I would actually like to see what facts you back that statement up with. I am truly intrigued by this idea.

SmashTheState's avatar

@Blondesjon http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Categorical_imperative

The moral imperative is a special case of the categorical imperative – both the perfect and imperfect duty of the first formulation.

Blondesjon's avatar

Thanks for the link.

cazzie's avatar

@Hypocrisy_Central your offense at the Sky Father comment tells me something of your morals vs your logic.

cazzie's avatar

Here is an example of logic vs morals:

A middle aged couple is deep in debt. They are seriously struggling. They have a couple of kids, a mortgage and jobs. Their lives are insured. They get to the point where they are about to loose everything and have to be homeless and jobbless. The man’s life is insured for more than the woman’s. The man has no interest in raising the children alone, so he suggests one night that the logical thing to do is for him to stage his death so she can collect the life insurance, get rid of the debt and she would be set and raise the children and no one need be homeless. Now, that might sound like a logical solution, but we don’t do that. That, by definition, is quite insane. Our morals and values are what keep us from doing what can seem logical in moments of desperation.

flutherother's avatar

“A madman is not someone who has lost his reason but someone who has lost everything but his reason” G K Chesterton.

Hypocrisy_Central's avatar

@Dutchess_III You said your morality comes from God. Ergo, if there were no God you would have no morals.
Well, morality would not exist, so neither would anyone else. However, there would be some standard in place.

@jwalsh1202.I would say yes, especially with religious based morals.
You say that to say only people whose morality comes from religion override logic with morality and those who have morality they credit to be of anything but religion always place the logic ahead of said morality? As far as the question goes, what you said is a little nebulous and unclear.

[…using gods name in vain (try harder @cazzie, Sky Father does not count!)
If she had directed it to a god, then it would make perfect sense, but since she was maligning God, a mocking disrespect like that does count, I pray she doesn’t have to explain it to Him in the last days.

The morals that are rational and logical appear to be fairly universal across many cultures and faiths, so I would say they are independent of religion.
There are times where morality and compassion, etc. can be logical, other times it doesn’t. If morality is logical it might be because people force it to be because they do not want logic to make them appear illogical. How or which logic mankind uses is immaterial, the pertinent fact is does that morality ever take front stage in front of logic?,

@SmashTheState If one accepts natural law (and why wouldn’t one?), then logic and morality are completely synonymous.
They are not, to believe that is a folie à deux, and I am not part of it. If any system exists in nature it is logic, unadulterated by compassion, Eros, arrogance, greed etc. It is mainly about survival, survival, and more survival.

The moral imperative is a special case of the categorical imperative – both the perfect and imperfect duty of the first formulation.
An interesting piece of reading but has no footing or supplies no ammo for this question.

@cazzie your offense at the Sky Father comment tells me something of your morals vs your logic.
If you have not figured my morality and logic by now, you have not been taking notes, I have stated them more times than one can shake a stick at them. Certainly nothing negative…..

Now, that might sound like a logical solution, but we don’t do that. That, by definition, is quite insane.
Well, we finally came up with something we can launch from, and it took all this.That may or may not be logical, but cheating the insurance company is certainly not moral. Even if he was terminally ill, his morality to be honest and upright to death would not allow him to be a crook and cheat the insurance company even if it helps his family. It is like during the Great Depression, when I heard stories of a hungry kid stealing bread; he was hungry and the bread was on the stand by the street easy to get, with no money it made logical sense to swipe the bread. However, once his father found out, he marched the lad back to the store and made him giver the bread back, and apologize to the baker. With a family hungry and a loaf of bread in the house, logic says take care of your own 1st over the moral imperative to be honest and not a crook. Some people in spite they needed the bread, widget, or whatever, can’t live with themselves being a thief, even if they are the only one who would know they are a thief. Insanity did not keep him from doing the logical thing in that situation. It might not be logical if the father worked at that bakery part time, then the theft would jeopardize work which equals money.

cazzie's avatar

Moral wrong one: Killing oneself and making it look like an accident so wife can collect insurance.

Moral wrong two: Killing husband and making it look like an accident so wife can collect insurance.

The defrauding of the insurance company, as I see it, is the lesser of the immoral acts. It doesn’t seem that you see it that way, which I find strange.

Also, I didn’t mean to infer that by not choosing the logical solution is the insane thing, but just the opposite. Making the choice to kill and defraud is the mentally unstable choice even if, given the thought process and desperation, it seems the most logical.

Hypocrisy_Central's avatar

^ The defrauding of the insurance company, as I see it, is the lesser of the immoral acts.
I can’t say which moral act is greater or worse since in my belief, they all end up at the same terminal. However, what I was saying in the scenario you painted that even if the guy was terminal, he knows he is on the way out anyhow, that defrauding the insurance company should be the lesser of the immoral acts and the most logical way to go, because it supplies for his family. Personal morality not to go to the grave pegged as a crook or a thief would not allow him to do it, even if it hurts his family in the long run, especially if he was going to get more from the insurance if it was an accident. Logic is not always taken, and logic is not always correct, even acts done for logic sake has a measure of error. Maybe that is why some people would rather take the fallback position and do what they feel is moral because they are afraid their logic would leave them with a negative legacy once they are gone.

JLeslie's avatar

My morality stems from logic. You must be thinking morals come from religion. People base their morals in many different things, it depends on the person. If someone decides what is miral because they just accept whatever is told to them about morality pertaining to their religion, then they don’t have to think at all, they can just be obedient and believe what they are told.

Other people experience life and decide what feels moral to them. I guess most all of us are given advice on what is moral while we are growing up. If it isn’t through religious teachings, it is from our parents and those who raise us. As we become adults life experience reinforces what we were taught or takes us down a different way of thinking. If your morals are based in Your religion, it will be more difficult to change your mind with science and logic if you still believe and identify strongly with that religion, especially if your religion involves hell fire if you disagree.

An example would be gay marriage and being gay in general. If you are raised that being gay is immoral, because God says so, and you believe in God, and identify strongly with your religion that dictates that, how are you going to be ok with gay people? How are you not going to judge them, worry about them, worry about their influence on society, and not worry about God being unhappy with the United States so they He may not bless our nation as we have been blessed since our beginnings? These immoral acts are causing hurricanes and earthquakes and it has nothing to do with global warming and fracking.

cazzie's avatar

@Hypocrisy_Central I’m pretty sure your god has listed some immoral acts worse than others. You should look it up in the book men wrote about him.

obvinate's avatar

I have seen in all too often, but, I think what is being seen as illogical by others is actually logical for the subjective individual. For someone who is feeble, sick, poor, ugly, inept, and uncreative, qualities like vigorousness, intelligence, wealth, health, strength, agility, wit, beauty, and creativity, would not make logical sense. The reverse holds true for the subjective individual with the latter qualities, however, the difference is that this type of person views it as something bad, where as the former individual views his or her’s opposing qualities as something evil.

With this kind of reasoning, the idea of equality allows someone with inferior qualities to overcome their own condition without hating themselves by making inferior qualities a matter of preference to escape frustration.

Hypocrisy_Central's avatar

@JLeslie My morality stems from logic. You must be thinking morals come from religion. People base their morals in many different things, it depends on the person.
For this question I did not inject or quantify which morals to use. I said whichever morality you commend to. I never injected the Christian religion into the thread. For the sake of this question, I was treating it as it did not exist. The morals I speak is from wherever, plumber’s handbook, FEMA report, Ouija board, a box of Cracker Jacks, etc. wherever one felt their morals came from, they were to use that.

An example would be gay marriage and being gay in general. If you are raised that being gay is immoral, because God says so, and you believe in God, and identify strongly with your religion that dictates that, how are you going to be ok with gay people?
Yes, but morality in or through a faith is logical because the logic is created and dictated by an entity that has the right to, in the case of the Christian faith, because He made everything so He knows how it is supposed to go. Logic is not just a process by way one can surmise the best course for a given problem or situation.

@cazzie you should look it up in the book men wrote about him.
No need, I can look it up, and have, in the book He inspired man to write by His Spirit, like the CEO would dictate to a secretary. I have His words from Him, I need no interpretation of what men thought He said.

JLeslie's avatar

@Hypocrisy_Central I’m actually going to agree that religious people see logic in their beliefs, including the morals they have according to their religious beliefs.

Answer this question

Login

or

Join

to answer.
Your answer will be saved while you login or join.

Have a question? Ask Fluther!

What do you know more about?
or
Knowledge Networking @ Fluther