What are the benefits and complications with societies mandating a set of moral ideologies? How might this affect an individual's ability to be true to himself/herself?
The benefits of societies mandating a set of moral ideologies is that it helps give the society an underlying structure/foundation; where as a society without set morals would have no "respect code" by which the people would live by. These set of morals would guide people in their decisions (if they are moral decisions, they should do it, where as if they are immoral, they wouldn't do it) without ever having to enforce a strict written law code. the complications with societies mandating a set of moral ideologies is that it takes away the individuality of a person. People would begin to conform to what the society believes as "moral" in order to not be looked down upon. However, this gives unity to the society by binding everyone together in a common set of beliefs.
It's true that the moral values would help unify and guide people from minor wrongdoings without a law code. However, how would the people that would not want to follow moral values of their society, but moral values of their own act? I believe it would create a whole new set of complications in which strict law codes would then need to be established.
I agree with this, that if a society didn't have this underlying set of codes helping people differentiate between right and wrong, then society would lose its structure, and chaos would replace order because ultimately, these laws are the framework of our society. On the other hand, as you mentioned, these regulations and limitations take away from one's own beliefs and forces them to conform to society's standards of good and bad, causing a dilemma between the rules of society and one's own moral compass.
I really like what you're saying here. I agree with you on how a set of codes is used as the basic structure for a society, however I believe that these set of moral codes are the reason that causes chaos in a society because there might be people within society that would have different believes from the set of moral codes thus causing disagreement with these laws. Also, I agree with you on how societies mandating a set of moral codes takes away individuality.
In society, morals are among some of the most highly valued aspects of life. In our society, the basics include: Don't Steal, Don't Kill, Don't Cheat on Tests, etc. Most people in our society would agree with that, however a select few believe that those things are perfectly okay. When people don't follow these rules, they are ostracized from society, causing them to not be able to follow their true beliefs. For most, it allows for a just society, however if you don't believe in those morals, it causes you to have to either go against them and risk being excluded from society, or hide your true self. This seems like it would be a very tough situation to be in if you had conflicting ideas with those of your society.
This is true because some people want to try to do things that are outside the moral ideologies and they are restricted because of them. Which doesn't allow them to be their true self.
I feel like a society in which a set of morals is established can lead to less social conflict. However, it can stifle individuals and keep from from feeling accepted. For example, interracial couples were not accepted in the United States until the twentieth century. The morals of the majority kept citizens from being happy. PS this is Ben Munson sorry about the weird Nick name
WOW! Box 5 example, Ben. I disagree that an establishment of morals would lead to less social conflict. Those that wanted to stick to their own personal/spiritual morals would in turn go on their own path, which is sometimes not always accepted by the rest of the society. This is what WOULD cause the inter-society conflicts between the mainstreamers and hipsters of the moral world.
As the affect of societies mandating a set of moral ideologies both beneficial and negative aspects emerge. These morals are the backbone of society. They set up the expectations for being a good citizen within your community. Basic morals are obvious, such as, telling the turth or not stealing, but others can be argued upon. A person will ,in the end, do what they feel is right. But if this is frowned upon by society then you have gotten yourself into a mess. These basic morals are usually followed but if you go against them, there will be consequences. To have conflicting ideas with those of your society would be a problem and throw off the order of society.
Nice points Kate! I agree with most of your argument but i feel as if you go against society and its morals you would not necessarily be punished because a new idea or rule can lead to society being reformed rather than harmed.
Good points Kate! What you are saying makes total sense. If you do whats right in society, for the most part you will not suffer any consequnces. unless what you think is right, isnt. Also, i agree that if you disagree with the rest of society, conflict will arise and people will be judged or looked down upon.
I agree that "morals are the backbone of society" because if people did not know the difference between right and wrong, it would create chaos. Also, people tend to have different morals which would create conflict within a society. Because morals have such an impact on society, it is necessary to have some sort of punishment for those who break these moral codes.
I agree with you Kate. It benefits society to have "set... expectations for being a good citizen" because we know what what will be frowned upon and what we will be praised for. However, we all have varying definitions of good and bad, so as you said we may end up in "a mess" if we do something we see as justifiable that society or the law sees as immoral and therefore illegal.
Standard moral ideologies give way to a unified, yet rigid and inflexible society. On one hand, a set of morals creates cohesion; people are more comfortable knowing that other share familiar beliefs and they don't have to worry about clashing with others' ideologies. It also provides a sense of order in the community by laying a moral foundation for citizens to abide by. On the other hand, these mandated morals are not open to individual interpretation and diverging from the moral code makes one an "outsider" and is frowned upon. In turn, the individual is in constant conflict, for as they develop their own sense of morality, it makes them decide whether to question the already established code (and risk exclusion) or dismiss their ideas as wrong and invalid and revert to conforming to society's rules. Thus, it is very difficult for the individual to be true to himself/herself, as they are always engaged in indecisiveness and , perhaps, self doubt.
I completely agree with this, and I like the point you made about self doubt because when someone is forced to believe one thing, they tend to imagine the other possibilities of how they could be and question themselves.
Cydney, you have some great points! When you said that an individual is in constant conflict deciding between their own sense of morality or to question the already established code, I agree that there are internal conflicts and possible insecurities that can arise. But I do think that these established codes are helpful in protecting the safety of others from possibly harmful acts. But other than that, I value person opinion and individual interest. Great post!
I completely agree. It is interesting that you talked about the risk of being looked upon as an "outsider" if you didnt agree with or follow the standard moral ideologies. I hadn't thought about that but it is very true, if you dont believe what others think you should believe, you are often looked down upon. Good point!
I agree with you cydney, your point about standard moral ideologies creating an orderly yet adamant society, which fits the idea of the lack of individualism within communities. I also liked how you made a point of how some of these morals are so rigid that there is no room for different ideas, and are automatically considered untrue.
I totally agree with your point about a set of morals creating cohesion. And how people are comfortable with their actions when they fit into the ways of society. Self doubt is also a very good point you've brought up! Its easy to be indescisive about something when you find it to be right but society disagrees.
Very well put Cydney, I liked your point on how am individual must decide on wether to follow their personal morals/beliefs or conform to society. Sometimes instead of picking either one some may decise to lay low about their beliefs to avoid such exclusion from society leading to unhappy lifestyle.
I completely agree with you Cydney, people have evolved as group obsessed animals and cannot stand to be all alone. No matter how much people think they are rebelling against society, they are still within another group of outsiders that still abide by social expectations. People have also developed a sense of structure that makes them feel at peace and; is then, desired y all as a means of security and routine. This system of morals and ethics in inescapable as it forms around all people, sometimes making acceptations to try and please everyone. People are clearly willing to give up some f their own individual expression in order to convert to this system and maintain their order that, deep down, we all want. The fear of seclusion has caused many people to also change their own ideologies and continue traditions that they might not personally agree with. An example of this is the speaker in “Mending Wall”, by Robert Frost, in which he continues to build this wall that separates himself from his neighbor even though he sees no purpose in it and actually resents it (Frost). Despite his beliefs against the wall, he convinces himself to rebuild it every spring to create a structured and non-hostile life.
It is beneficial the majority of the time for a society to be governed by a standardized set of morals. This allows for an orderly, and generally cohesive society, in which one is able to act without much fear. One knows what to expect, and thus has no fear as to whether their conduct is correct. Complications arise, though, as the individual's own morals conflict with those set by society. Under such a circumstance, an individual must either choose to continue to partake in the actions of their choice and possibly face being ostracized, or conform to society's will and face the loss of their identity.
I find it very interesting that you point out the choices an individual has if they are not in accordance with the ideologies set by society. Given this sense of choice makes me think that if a person, although not in accordance with society, still stays within that society wouldnt that lead to somewhat of an unhappy society where they live with fear due to their lost of identity? Their lost of identity leads to insecurity which creates fear within them.
Carla I agree with how you said that having a moral standerds being governed in a society can lead to ones loss of who they really are. I just want to ask if they were to be simply given to the public and let them regulate these moral conducts among themselves, would there still be this order and cohesive society?
I completely agree with your point about how an individual whose morals differ from the majority must either face being ostracized or conform to the popular will. However, I'm also curious as to how an individual can act without fear in a cohesive society while gaining fear from their lost of identity.
I agree with what you said about how social morals suppress the individuals beliefs and they are conflicted between if they should express their own morals or confine to the ones set by society. However, I disagree when you said that these morals don't cause fear because if an individual is conflicted on which morals to live by, wouldn't they be in constant fear of upsetting the social image and structure? Other than that I completely agree.
Mandating a set of moral ideologies can lead to a society that comes to terms on more things, therefore making it fairly peaceful and simple when compared to one without it. The set of moral ideologies creates a basic understanding of situations that the society has to follow, and these basic principles make decisions on anything of moral question easier to decide on and follow through with the appropriate course of action. For an individual who decides to follow their own moral code, a society like this would be a nightmare. Unfair discrimination against an individual like this would be something that would unquestionably happen, and because they would be a very, VERY small minority in their society, they would have virtually zero say in anything that happens to the community or themselves. That individual would be powerless against a community that could wrongly punish someone for something that isn't necessarily punishable.
You make a very great point here but I do believe that having a specific set of moral ideologies would do more harm than good because people typically don't like to follow what they're restrained to.
I agree with you on how a set of morals would be beneficial in most cases as they would put pressure on citizens to follow this system and therefore would lead to a sharing of moralistic values.
For the most part dear Noah I agree with your points, but in your introduction you stated that societies with a set amount of moral ideologies makes a society fairly more peacful. On the contrary I think that in most cases if everyone is allowed to follow their own beliefs/morals then society would be alot more peacful with one acception, which would be an individuals inalienable rights. If you look throughout history many civilizations have tried implimenting moral codes and it has failed them in the long run.
The benefit of having a mandated set of morals is that order is created, and in that order, some equality between citizens is created. If everyone in a society is expected to behave in the same manner, following the same ethic principles as his neighbor, than miscommunication is avoided. There is no longer a mannerism barrier that makes people walk on thin lines with each other every time they interact. No one man is morally better that another as long as they all follow the same rules and beliefs.
One complication is the chance for power abuse in this kind of system. Whoever has the mandate to create and instill a society’s morals has the will to either create a fair and just society or to bend the society for his one benefit. In holding this kind of power, corruption is an unavoidable possibility. There is also the issue of individualism in this situation. When a person’s society tells him exactly how to think and behave, there is practically no room for his own voice. When he cannot voice his own opinions, he may lose his individuality. In this situation, people are sometimes forced to conform to a collectivist mindset, taking away their sense of uniqueness.
Essentially, it’s a catch-22; either a society can dictate a set of morals and take away individuality, or it can promote individuality and run the risk of chaos.
Great point, Kristine! I think that brings up an interesting question; Is an uncorrupt, orderly society with outspoken individuality possible? Or does the simple existence of corruption and deceit and collectivism by our Leaders bring order in and of itself? I personally think it is impossible to have one without the other.
"Essentially, it’s a catch-22; either a society can dictate a set of morals and take away individuality, or it can promote individuality and run the risk of chaos." Agreed!
A set of moral ideologies, created by the people or the government, establishes a social standard that often reaches the importance of a law. By inaugurating a code of what one “should” and “shouldn’t” do, these concepts maintain the order of society and allow the government to focus on issues of greater importance. Morals are stressed by a society’s individuals, in an effort to create a sense of community in which all members “fit” in. While this can benefit a society’s network of connection, these ideas often separate those that are unique from the majority. This element of segregation ultimately injects a judgmental view into society and for many, stunts the development of innovation and new ideology. In some of the more strict civilizations of the modern era, for example, speaking against the set morals often results in pure banishment from a community or even death. Therefore, morals can suddenly represent the closure of individualism and personal ethics.
I agree with you that morals can lead to a closure of individualism and personal ethics due to the lost of identity that is seen throughout strict societies. I really like how you used an example allowing your point to be backed up with facts that are seen even in modern society still. A question that arises from this would be, if people who live in these strict societies want to voice their opinion but have decided to loss their identity and live according to what society sees thats right, would it lead to order based fear due the insecurity that arise from the lost of identity?
I found your point to be very interesting on how morals do create a greater sense of community, yet they may still represent segregation within this said community. Thus, creating strict moral code can lead to social conflicts within society, however having a moral foundation prevents chaos.
Your ideas of how morals can have complications in socities were interesting. You made many points that I didnt think of intially. You have a balnace of details of the downfalls and benefits of morals in socities which, I feel, all ideas are valid.
It can be beneficial to a society but also have a chance of leading to complications. If the moral ideologies are something that are broken a lot because of its strictness then it has a chance of leading to corruption. Ideologies should be strict but not to the point where it's hard for people to follow. The beneficial side of it is that any functioning society needs a set of rules. Theirs no chance of a society ever making it if their aren't ideologies to make it clear what is right or wrong. In society today these rules are broken every day but not to a point where major chaos is created. In the Puritan society or any other strict culture it is taken to a different extent. The stricter the rules, the more difficult it is for people to speak out on what they believe is right. Today people in our society are able to have freedom of speech and express their own ideologies. Back in the Puritan society it was not welcomed based on how strict their laws were.
While I see the validity of your points and understand the gist of your arguments, what happens if the morals of a society are already corrupt? If our perception of society's morals were skewed or reversed, would the society continue be considered "normal", or would its morals cease to be morals altogether? The moral conceptions of one society may provide huge benefits (like social/cultural unification) while if placed in another society would prove detrimental to itself and collapse. Immorality is relative to the individual, and is dependent on the support of others within that society. What would occur if our preconceived norms were altered: what would be the ramifications?
i like the question you posed Maddee. What if you view of morals is already skewed and we arent the noraml? i also agree that immoral depends on the individual.
A set of moral ideologies in a society can bring up benefits and complications. Morals allow for order and are building blocks of a society on how people should act in it. Some complications in some moral ideologies is that some might inhibit people to follow societies ideas and takes away the sense of individuality among people. This affects an individual because he/she might not be able to express their individuality do to the fact that these moral ideologies restrict them to.
Moral ideologies that societies mandate, can be both accepted by society and cause problems between individuals. When morals are a major part of individuals lives, the society has a better idea of what is right and what is wrong. People go by these morals to make decisions, whether they are important or not. Individuals can learn to grow together from these morals. They can connect with each other both socially and emotionally, by following the same morals. Although a set of morals can bring a society together, it can bring them apart as well. While the morals are meant to distinguish right from wrong, some individuals could disagree on the morals established. It could cause larger issues than just differences on views. Individuals who agree on the same morals are themselves, they don't try to be someone they are not because it could make others upset or uncomfortable. If the society was group of people that believed in different morals, society would be disorganized and not civilized. No one would be able to express their views and society would be very limited, thus allowing the society to be reflected on the set of morals that individuals follow.
I defiantly agree with you Bella. I see your points behind what would happen if everyone in a society had conflicting views and ideologies. Society would defiantly be very limited and could lead to a lot of corruption. All of your ideas on the different ways morals could effect societies appear to be very valid with your commentary on the results from both sides with the effects of morals on themselves
If a set of moral ideologies are imposed on society it could bring both benefits as well as complications. The benefits it would bring would be that the set of moral ideologies could be used as a guideline or set of rules. They could be used as a guideline on how an individual should act within a society. If an individual acts according to these ideologies it would create order within a society. Although many individuals would act accroding to these ideologies there will be a few who will have opposing views. Not every person has the same set of beliefs or ideologies which could lead to conflict. These ceratin individuals would argue that their individual rights are being violated. They could also argue that the freedom that they have is being taken away from them by society due to imposing ideologies upon people which creates a very limited society.
Incorporating moral ideologies into humanities, or into a government over a society, benefits that society by creating laws for which it is supposed to live by. Hammurabi’s Code is an example of imposed law based on morals believed to be what man should live by in order to be prosperous. By integrating morals into society we create organization; individuals don’t kill each other as abundantly because of the fear generated by repercussions of their actions. The difficulty with imposing regulations based on moral are that not everyone lives by the same principles, in Babylon (where Hammurabi’s code was enforced) the laws were based on social status. If we assimilated similar laws based on social prestige many Americans would fight against each other because of the unfairness it would cause (ex. Slave revolts in early American history). So, yes, by generating instructions we produce union but consequences come of it, many people who disagree with the morals the societies are based on have a tendency to not follow them, creating conflict in that society as seen in early American history. Whites based their regulations on the beliefs that whites had superiority over blacks which allowed widespread slavery, which later led to slave revolts in turn leading to the future segregation lived by the blacks (very negative outcome). Individualism is affected by the joining of moral principles and society because if set laws disagree with ones beliefs, and consequences follow the breaking of that law, then that individual will most likely hide his beliefs (ex. Jews in Nazi Germany), reducing individuality immensely.
I agree on your view that moral ideologies provide unity and the fact that moral provides fear of repercussion. I didn't think of fear of repercussion but that is completely true. I also liked how you used many examples to support your ideals throughout history, particularly the one about slavery. That was spot on. The reduction of individuality due to the case of breaking law was also a good point you had that I agree with. Great analysis!
The benefits of society mandating a set of moral ideologies helps to build a foundation and a social structure. A strong infrastructure keeps society running smoothly and it prevents individuals from making decisions that could potentially harm others. With these set morals, everyone has the same expectations and agenda. There isn't room to debate the standards of society. On the other hand, these moral ideologies limit an individual's ability to be himself/herself. These strict expectations inhibit personal freedoms and the choice of free will. This imposes restrictions on the uniqueness and individuality of a person, but keeps people from exceeding what is generally considered to be morally acceptable. Moral ideologies are established for the greater good and to prevent chaos in society.
You make really good points, however I do believe that moral codes (most commonly strict ones) can lead to disunity and conflict within a society. We see examples of this between reublicans and democrats everyday because in some cases they abide to a different set of values.
I completely agree with you. A society with with a set of basic morals will be more unified. Creating strict moral code can lead to social conflicts, but having a moral foundation prevents chaos.
Some benefits of society mandating moral codes would be being able to live in a safer community. This is because it would prevent people from doing immoral actions like killing, stealing and lying which all lead to chaos in society. Some complications of defining moral codes would be the risk of unfair judgment. This is because some moral activities could be justified as immoral when they are really not which could end up defining other people's actions. This could affect an individual that is staying true to the morals of his old surroundings that may not be accepted in his new surroundings.
I agree, having society set a moral code maintains peace because it establishes the goods and the bads. I like how you mentioned how morals might be accepted in one society and not in another, since there are many different morals in the world and they don't all correspond with each other.
A moral, in my opinion, is something that one commonly knows is the right thing to do which isn't necessarily the law. By having the government mandate a set of what they believe is moral, it can lead to the people within society being better behaved. Also people could possibly get along better in terms of agreement because their society was shaped around those specific interpretations of right and wrong. However, having these specific morals can make a person lose their sense of individuality and following what they believe. It's almost an example of church taking over the state, because people don't typically have the same morals and forcing one specific moral on a person wouldn't make them happy if they don't agree with it. This would possibly lead to a rise in the rebellion within society because when someone is restrained to certain things they have a tendency to break those rules just for the sake of going against them. Also, having these specific morals would make a person lose their own individuality in what they do because they it's common law that they have to act in a specific way. If they try to do what they believe should be acceptable, they risk being ostracized so they are then stuck acting how people want them to and never truly being themselves.
I definitely agree with your main points of how morals controls peoples actions and can be used to control peoples actions. The only thing critique I have is when you said "It's almost an example of church taking over the state" (Maresco) You should have a stronger voice in your writing. Instead try Church taking over the state IS an example etc. It would make your writing seem stronger. Over good job!
Sets of morals and Ideologies are often incorperated into society and the government of that society. Some of the benefits of mandating these morals and ideologies are seen in the structure of the society, they keep people "in line." They create uniforminty, everyone should feel the same way and chose to act accordingly. Morals and ideologies also allow fr concistancy within the soceity if multiple people get in trouble for the same thing they will be treated in about the same manner. Order is also a benefit, morals and ideologies that most people accept and that the government enforces provents chaos. There are many complications however, the government cant stop everybody so there is no real way to fully inforce something. Another complications is that not everyone agrees or thinks the same way or has the same believes so the goverment may put something i place that they disagree with or dont feel they need to follow. These government enfoced morals and ideologies also greatly hurt individuality. They dont allow one to think for themselves, not everyone belives or acts the same way and by foceing people to follow ideologies it hinders there personal expresstion and thought.People can no longer always be themselves because they have to make sure they are within government regulations on how they schould think or act.
Yes! i definitely agree and I like how you incorporated the idea that some individuality is lost when morals are enforced, however, I don't feel as if it is only the government that regulates their actions because it can also be their families or friends that judge them based on their actions as well.
Kaitlyn I appreciated the way you stated your view point, it helped me to better understand the possible role of morals within a society. I definitely agree that a set of moral ideologies creates uniformity, also enticing people to conform to the "norm" of society. I also agree that this kind of structure could take an individual's sense of individuality and ability to express one's self away.
I completely agree with this and like the way you emphasized what morals are in order to lead into your view on how they affect society. I also really like the benefits you pointed out, since they weren't ones that I had come up with, so it really helped broaden the ideas of morals and their affect on society for me. Going off of the government regulations you pointed out for the individuality part of morals also allows not only for less individuality, but also for more of a lock down on society because of this lack of individual belief.
I agree with how you stated that morals keep people in line. They help keep society on the same page and follow similar ideas. I also like how you pointed out the flaws in morals by saying that they can hurt individuals, because they can't think for themselves. Morals can positively affect a society by creating a strong bond, but it can also tear it apart because of the lack of expression. You really helped me clearly understand more views on morals.
What is beneficial about having a set of moral ideologies is that they maintain a social order often mandated by certain laws, keeping society a safe place. However, this might affect an individual’s ability to be true to himself/herself because it establishes a set of expectations for people to follow and fit in regardless of their own personal beliefs and values. These expectations make it difficult for someone who has disagreeing ideas with society to cooperate, thus leading to personal and social conflicts. An example of a personal conflict caused by the expectations of society is that someone might be forced to behave in a certain way that does not relate to who they truly are. Pretending to be something that you’re not in order to fit in can lead to self harm, depression, suicide and so on.
I agree with your point on keeping moral ideology in order to create a safe atmosphere for a society, I hadn't thought of that perspective before. Also, I liked how you mentioned that differing views could lead to depression and more personal effects because that is something, I believe, that most could relate to. Most individuals have been put in the position at some point in their lives to have to conform to something they don't like, whether it be giving a speech or having to go to a party where they know completely no one and things like that. Once someone is uncomfortable, they're views and actions completely change and I could see how hat would lead to a social conflict. I totally concur on your reference to personal effects due to suppression with moral codes.
Moral ideologies are a set of beliefs regarding what is "right" and "wrong" conduct. If societies were to mandate, meaning to require, a common set of moral ideologies upon a diverse array of people with different backgrounds, perspectives, and beliefs,minorities would inevitably be oppressed. The mandatory set of moral ideologies would be structured upon popular consensus, excluding the moral values of those whose beliefs don't fall in line with the majority. Individualism would therefore be shunned by society and members would be pressured to conform to popular views on morality in fear the social repercussions otherwise.
On the other hand,establishing a common set of moral ideologies would foster a sense of camaraderie among its members. If what's "right" or "wrong" is cleanly stated in black and white, there is left to little interpretation. Debates over morality wouldn't be an issue, and everyone would be able to function knowing without a doubt whether their actions were acceptable. A new sense of social equality would emerge, for everyone who doesn't reject the guideline would be considered equal on moral grounds.
When pondering the implications and benefits of imposing a set of moral ideologies, one should also consider the constantly evolving nature of human thought. What was considered morally acceptable in the past may no longer be in the present. With this in mind, how would a moral law code evolve with progression of human attitudes? Who would be entitled to alter the moral law code in response to altering views?
I agree; when a set of morals are established, it creates conflict because the subject of right and wrong is very subjective. I also really like the point you bring up about morals and the evolving human attitudes concerning morals.
Nice points. I really like how you brought up the point that a society's ethics do evolve and then question who has the right to lead such transformations. Overall I agree with your assertions. But while I agree that many individuals would be pressured into conformity, I do not believe every individual would, so what happens to those who stray from these social constructs?
Morals in society help promote what society believes to be right. While it is not the law, morals create an idea of what is right and what is wrong, and it is this idea that is found at the foundations of many laws in society. However, this belief of what is right and the implications morals have on an individual allows society to be, to some extent, controlled and behaved, without laws in place, since morals, in general, are created for the welfare of one’s self and that of the rest of society. While most morals are accepted widely by all of society, interpretations of morals can lead to diversity within beliefs and, sometimes, violence. The differing of morals for individuals, as well as the degree that they differ from the morals put in place by society, leads to a suppression of individual morals, since, even though individuality exists, people tend to conform to the ideas of a society as a whole rather than their own distinct beliefs.
I agree with your point. Having morals in society helps keep people in place without everything having to be regulated to the smallest detail. It is designed to keep individuals and people's actions in check. The government does not have to watch over things as much and also allows people to trust each other more. However, there can be downfalls to this in that it could lead to people trusting each other too much and as a result getting something stolen or being a victim of some other criminal act. It also leads to less individuality as you stated above.
Establishing a set of morals for society to abide by undoubtedly creates an organized and civilized community that is guided in such a way that it is mostly free from crime such as stealing, murder etc. However, this mandate of rules can create some complications in that a handful of people might disagree with them and claim that their rights as an individual are being violated or abused. For example, in the middle east, a common moral that’s practiced is arranged marriage where the father of the family chooses his daughter’s spouse for her and if she refuses, she will be punished severely and said to be cursed with bad luck. I would imagine most girls think this is unfair and a violation to her ability to voice her opinion and take control of her life. Ultimately, the idea of forcing morals on people isn’t as effective as allowing the people to establish their morals themselves.
Really interesting ideas Sophia! I enjoyed the way that you gave a precise example of the restricting side of established morals. However, I would like to point out that if we allowed everyone to establish their own morals, there would be major conflicts in people’s opinions. For example, the government of the United States is very loose with the country’s established morals. As a nation, we promote innovation and individualism and yet we still witness crime and people’s unethical decisions. Therefore, I agree with the idea that many morals restrict personal freedom, but disagree with the effectiveness of total dependency on individual beliefs. Ultimately, this is a difficult problem with the nature of the human society.
I definitely agree with your point about people claiming their rights to be violated if one is to disagree with the accepted ways of society. These morals create an organized community for sure. (:
Mandating a set of morals will make society better as it will enforce morals on people who lack morals such as serial killers and possibly steer their decisions away from acts that cause harm upon others. Each person has a unique set of morals they live by, some possess few morals, others with an abundance of morals. A set of morals will bring those who lack morals up to a standard of morality where society may be less bothered by crime. On the other hand, placing a restriction on this will inhibit one's ability to be themselves by controlling their decisions and creating a communist-like society. How is society going to create a single set of morals when the people in society are so unique? The creation of this code will cause a significant amount of conflict.
Good ideas Kevin! I really enjoyed your point about how those with an “abundance” of morals have a huge impact on people that lack this set of ethics. As we see in modern American society, our human nature increases our desire to strive for the best. Therefore, we look for good human examples in history or in modern society that we can base our actions off. Ultimately, this establishes a competitive community in which people strive to fulfill the set morals and expected behaviors.
This is a very good point and i highly agree with your thoughts. I see where you are coming from when you say how it can help correct the immoral acts committed by felons, but on the other hand it can enhance the immoral acts by trying to suppress them. I think that society shouldn't try to restrain others from their free will, but they should definitely increase the punishments when citizens act out immorally. This would cause a great outbreak in society if people tried to force morals on people.
I agree with your ideas. Your point about people with different morals helps emphasize how society can benefit people but it can also supress them. I agree with how society struggles with establishing a set of moral codes when the individuals already have a diverse set of morals.
While imposing moral ideologies is beneficial to the order and conduct of society, it can also eliminate a person's sense of individualism. At a very young age, we are taught the "rights" and the "wrongs" of what is expected in our society. Although there are basic moral principles that most communities follow, such as being kind to one another, not to cheat, not to steal, etc., not all societies have the same moral principles. With this belief of right and wrong, it suggests that any person or group that acts or believes differently than another is wrong, which ultimately leads to conflict. These morals can be changed if society finds them unjust or unethical, however, just as no society has exactly the same idea of right and wrong, neither do individuals. Although moral ideologies provide a backbone for laws and composition within society, it is often the main cause of prejudice and conflict.
I think you are right when you say that the ideas of "right" and "wrong" can stifle one's individualism, especially at a young age. And I think it's interesting that you bring up that moral ideologies, while providing "backbone" for laws, also cause prejudice, because that is true in many cases.
Some benefits with the society mandating a set of moral ideologies is that it establishes order among the majority of the people, emphasizing what is good compared to what is not. Depending on how the society mandates the moral code, it could result in positive or negative consequences. If society has a strict moral code, some people cannot express their own morals because they have to follow the beliefs of the society in order to be accepted by them. In some Middle Eastern countries, there is a strong belief about veiling women. This shows that society controlling the morals of the people might prohibit them from being themselves. In a broad perspective, having society mandate moral ideology can benefit the people because it can distinguish the good and the evil. However, it can also prevent individuals from expressing their own values.
I agree with your statement relating the strictness of the moral code and its correlation with its effects on society. A strictly enforced code does prevent crime better than a flimsy code but the strict code restricts a person's ability to be themselves. Your example of veiling women in the Middle East exemplifies strict codes infringing on people's rights.
I agree, a single set of moral ideologies seems both good and bad. I like your idea that it depends on how strict the society makes the moral code for whether they are good or bad for individualism. Also, couldn't some strict moral ideologies be beneficial to society, such as some of the 10 commandments, with little impact on a person’s individualism?
Society benefits from mandating a set a moral ideologies; it provides structure and order to daily social life. It is also easier for people to get along if they have already agreed on an unspoken set of rules. Morals sometimes help establish legal codes as well. However a set of moral ideologies can cause conflict because what is "right" and what is "wrong" can be subjective at times. A minority can be persecuted for their beliefs. A person can feel ashamed and lose their sense of individuality as they conform to the expected morals in society.
Society benefits from mandating a set of moral ideologies because of how it is able to maintain a sense of agreement among individuals. If everyone is on the same page, they'll be able to cooperate and easily justify solutions throughout the community, bringing different views and positions on subjects to resolve issues. On the other hand, a consequence to mandating moral ideology could be an uprise in differing views. Unlike the benefit of having differing views to help resolve an idea, people could totally be against the set policy and want to rebel against it, creating an anarchy versus a democracy. People don't like being told what to believe and a set policy of what is to be abided to would cause rebellion and riot. Besides this, people would feel alienated and unable to express their views, effecting their will to be themselves and becoming easily suppressed in society. Instead of expressing new ideas to suggest change in a community, people would follow the established policy and live in a mundane community with no sense of progress.
The benefits of a society mandating a set of moral ideologies is that the society can have a structure and follow the same beliefs and practices. Having a set of moral ideologies also allows the society to be more organized in their actions and decision making process by considering what they think is socially acceptable by their society. Some of the consequences would be that people are going to have their own ideas and opinions on what they think is right. It may also cause rebellions and chaos in their society leading to a disorganized and disfunctional society. Having a set of moral ideologies can negatively affect an individual's ability to be true to him or herself by them questioning their own opinions and actions. It also restricts them from being individuals who can form thier own ideas and opinions.
I like how you addressed the fact that these morals could spark rebellious actions. The inability to voice one's individual opinions in a society can be a frustrating thing and could entice those individuals to make a change, especially if they discover they are not alone in their opinions. This then could create segregations in society since there are many different views on what is right and wrong. This division can lead to disorganization and chaos within society.
Some of the benefits of establishing and regulating a set mof moral ideologies within a society are that they will allow people to do better, not for themselves , but for others. It will make people want to do good for others not because they know its the "right" thing to do but because it will feel good to them and come natural. One of the main responsibilities humans have is that they have to help one another. Some of the complications of having a set of moral ideologies regulating within a society are that it may steal a persons freedom, may rob them are their rights , and take away their identity. It may possibly redirect them in a direction that favors those who influence these " moral ideologies" Thus not allowing one to express who they really are, but rather "market " them as what is wanted in that society
I agree with your assertions, but one society's set of morals may be different than another society's. Through this, the "right thing" to do may contradict with the thoughts of certain individuals within that society, which, like you said, would impair their ability to partake in their freedom as an individual.
When society sets moral standards there is much less of a conflict based on the decision of what is wrong/right, the benefit of this is that society becomes orderly unified and people can live great lives; however, because of this, people lose their identities and everyone becomes restricted in their freedom.
Yes, when society has morals to base their lives off of they have an expectation of what is right and wrong and it helps create order throughout society. But with this being said, as you mentioned, people do not feel the same freedom they could have without moral ideologies.
I believe that the benefits of a society mandating a set of moral ideologies outweigh the consequences. Having set moral ideologies allows for facilitation of order within the society because all or most of the people abide by the same guidelines. therefore, these moral ideologies prove beneficial to society as a whole in the long term. Although some may disobey the moral ideologies and rebel or argue that they are being stripped of their freedom or rights. It could also stop an individual from being theirselves and expressing themselves in the way that they would like to. In the end the best intrest of a society is more important than that of an individual, so sometimes people may have to conform or if not they should keep it to themselves.
You do bring up a valid point that is understandable, but you also make the society as a whole the focus of why this is more beneficial. If you look at the consequences of mandating a set of moral ideologies on the individual level, the possibility of discrimination and being punished for something that isn't necessarily wrong, but "unmoral", is a very great consequence. Though the society may benefit, it won't be ideal if individuals want a sense of freedom rather than a sense of having to live a certain way because it was how they were told to live.
Surprisingly, I'm inclined to agree with Alex. Although, like you said Noah, being punished unjustly is a very great, very negative consequence of imposing a set moral code on the People, the morals and opinions of other groups and societies do not differ very greatly. For example, in all societies, one will find that one killing another is wrong. While the groups may disagree on semantics, or certain details of the deed, all still believe that killing is wrong. What I'm trying to get at here is that the morals that Society deems to be rules are, more often than not, rules that everyone agrees one as moral and ethical and "right." It's just how those rules are implemented and enforced that people would really disagree on and would force people to conform. So, like Alex said, the benefits of setting those moral ideologies in place outweigh the cost of maybe stifling an individual feeling or belief. People need to be willing to set aside their own beliefs for the good of their community, or else chaos will ensue.
Sadly, I totally agree with Alex on this one. The moral ideologies benefiting the society as a whole not just individuals just makes more sense. I think that's what this one comes down to... making more sense. Either way "chaos will ensue" (Litzenberg). Might as well pick the one that benefits society as a whole.
The complications from the established set of ideologies would be the result of a society being tuned upside down and will lead to a downward spiral of destruction and chaos. Also, a society will not know the difference between right and wrong and will cause a divide in society. When the governed "high-power" established rules of society they are of what SHOULD be right and isn't always what IS right. The benefits depend on who is enforcing the rules and who ends up listening to them. This is when peoples' true colors come out because each person should stay true to themselves and follow there heart/ what they believe because if they don't they will start to question and resist to the rules and ideologies that become mandated.
The benefits of creating a set of moral ideologies within a society are that they give more order to the society and allow individuals to be there own person. It will also make people want to set a good example for others and it will give themconfidence in themselves and what they believe in and not being agraid to be themselves. Some of the complication of having a set of moral ideologies within a society are that maybe not everyone will agree with what the moral or ideology is; therefore, leading to conflict within the society. Also, it might offend people and they might begin to turn on their true morals and beliefs and head down a bad path. Making them more apt to care less about the important thing sin life. This will all affect their ability to be true to themselves because us as humans are easily influenced by others and are willing to compromise important tings in order to become accepted.
I really like your point Ann! I like how you mentioned that this type of society provides good examples and models for other people; you took a positive perspective on the topic. I also had never thought of people compromising themselves for inclusion. Great point!
If a society were to mandate a set of moral ideologies, a benefit would be a sense of unity within the people who adhere to said ideologies. People who do not necessarily follow those guidelines would become excluded from society, presenting a complication.
However, I personally do not believe that a society completely controls the morals and ideas of the people within that society. I believe that people are capable of creating their own moral guidelines, it just depends on their own strength and/or confidence whether or not they are able to stick to their own morals, rather than the morals that everyone else accepts, simply BECAUSE they are widely accepted morals. I do believe that people are influenced heavily by those around them as well as their religion or how they were raised, but at the end of the day, people can make their own decisions.
Morals that are mandated by society result in both positive and negative consequences. These morals ultimately create a mold in which all members of society are expected to abide by. This is good because it creates a base for organization within society, such as law enforcement. Certain expectations are in made, not in the place of laws, but as reinforcement to the laws society has set. These prior expectations woven into everyday life influence society as a whole, and allow people to differentiate between right and wrong more easily. By providing guidelines, it creates a sense of peer pressure among the people of society, which makes people, feel more obligated to follow the rules and not break from the mold created by these morals.
However, these morals have a negative impact as well. With these expectation set into place, there is a loss of individual morals. This suppression restricts a person’s own view on what is right and wrong, which could manipulate a sensible opinion an individual has, even if it is more rational than the opinions of society overall. This also makes it harder to voice one’s opinion for fear of being rejected by society if an individual’s own personal morals betray those of society.
I like your points about peer pressure and rejection.
Peer pressure helps instill good morals, but it could also be a negative effect in the sense that people may lose their individuality as a side effect of being pressured into going against their own will.
Fear of rejection is also a big conflict because fear itself is a very poisonous feeling. It is not only caused by difficult circumstances but can also create difficult situations. Having no voice can be intimidating, and fearing rejection from a whole society amplifies the intimidation one may feel when being forced to confine to a set of morals.
The benefits of mandating a set of moral ideologies includes a structure or order of some sort to society, it also distinguishes between right from wrong, and helps to avoid conflict, confrontation, and chaos within a community. However, some complications may include reasons such as taking away from a person's own rights to their identity, individuality, expressing one's self, and diversity within society. Moral ideologies are important because they provide a stable foundation and create the notion of common sense (right from wrong) to avoid chaos.
You make good points Haley. I agree that having a set of moral ideologies helps create order in societies. I like how you pointed out that it avoids chaos within a community, because if there were no expectations for how people were to behave, there would be a lot of disorder, between people as well, as you said, conflict and confrontation.
When society mandates a set of moral beliefs for everyone to follow, some problems can arise concerning individual freedoms. Since the moral ideologies will most likely represent those of the majority, (assuming it’s a democratic society) the minority would be left out. This can arise due to, most commonly, when religious beliefs dictate the moral ideologies of a society. In this case, the people who don’t agree with that religion would be left out, as what happened in England that made the Puritans come to America. In the Puritan colony, not everyone agreed with their moral beliefs, and this caused them to have to leave the community in order to stay true to their selves. On the other hand, a set of moral ideologies can have some benefits to society, including promoting order, with everyone following the same moral guidelines.
I agree with your viewpoints of how our morals represent the majority, and in today's world this idea is true in many countries, because even though the minority is their it is only a small amount of the population. If a society or country were to side with the ideologies of the minority what will most likely result is the loss of power by the majority or general chaos of its people, in which everyone is trying to fight for what they believe the morals of society should be thus further limiting both the majority's and the minority's abilities for their own personal freedoms.
I agree with you when you say that the moral ideologies in today's society arise from religious beliefs. Most things that cultures today believe as "the right thing to do" can be reflected in the core of their religion, while other religions may not support these morals. However, I do not believe that morals can be "mandated" within a society. If morals are just idologies within a society, how can you force everyone to believe the same thing? I believe that morals are something that you would just mandate within yourself; they are the rules you live by.
The consequences of mandating a set of morals can be that the viewpoints of the individual are erased. People will not truly say express their beliefs due to fear of the majority. These morals due set a balanced society in which peoples viewpoints will be very similar which reduces conflict.
I agree with you that the viewpoints of the individual are erased as a consequence of mandating a set of morals in society. When society mandates a set of morals, people's personal beliefs and values are disregarded. I also like how you point out that that people might not truly express their beliefs due to the fear of majority, I think we all can relate to this at some point in our lives. Although I don't support kind of suppression, I see how it might reduce social conflicts and set a balanced society.
I agree with you, Dani. The fact that these set expectations change people, because they constantly fear how society will view them. Also, they fear the consequences, and judgement that may follow if they follow through with something that may be moral to them, but immoral to society.
In a society with set morals, there is limited individualism. People cant chose what they want to believe or stnad for in that type of society. It also doesnt allow people express their beliefs or aggree/disagree with others, its just a set code of law. It is critical for people to develope their own sense of right and wrong if we want society to function. It limits people to expand their beliefs an morals. It's an attempt tp creat this "perfect" utopian society, which has never worked throughout history
I really like what you're saying here. It's short and to the point, but it doesn't leave out any important details. I also think that its really great that you made that connection from the controlling of one's morals to a utopian society because I do believe, in a sense, that that's true. If you try to control how people thing then it's basically controlling how everything's going to be, otherwise there would be small amounts of chaos.
The benefits of society mandating a set of moral ideologies is that it helps provide a base for the society. If there were no moral codes in society, the society would be chaotic and disordered. The moral ideologies promote a respect based on integrity. When people know the codes, they follow them and try to understand what is expected of them. It creates an atmosphere of trust and responsibility. For example, some main moral codes are the Ten Commandments in the Torah, the Gospel of Luke in the Christian Bible, and Five Pillars of Islam. All these create a society with peace and respect for one another. They give a distinct way of living life and show how to be responsible with your life. These codes distinguish what’s wrong and right in the society by the standards of behavior to what kind of character you are. These codes make the people get along easier and make them feel the same in status because they all have to follow the same moral codes. However, these codes can be a complication of society because the codes take away the person’s uniqueness and freedom. Society members can’t do things without letting people butt into their business. Thus, these moral codes create a peaceful bond with the members of society.
With societies mandating moral ideologies it gives assurances that the people living in the society have rules that keep order and a set of guide’s lines determining what is right or wrong. Not allowing people to see any action as right or wrong but being taught and showed that there are a certain set of rules that all people must follow in order to have order with in the society for the morals teach and instill order within the people to cut down on any chaotic actions. The down side is the morals are based on those who originally put down the morals that would guide the society and these goals may become outdated or may be bigoted to a certain group of people. As more generations also become introduced to these morals it can become more difficult to remove due to its growth into tradition. The benefits and consequences of societies depend on who made then, if they can adapt, and if they push for equality.
The benefits for mandating a set of moral ideologies within society are that they allow the society to establish a standard for how to act withing a certain environment thus giving it order and organization. If a society had no order then it would not survive. Morals give individuals a sort of guideline on how to behave and restrict their actions because individuals would not like to upset the social standards and be looked down upon. However, this greatly restricts an individual's ability to express him or herself because since society holds certain standards their believes are molded to fit with society even though it might not be what the individuals true opinion which is one complication that arises from society setting these morals. Another complication would be that as people grow up within these morals set by society their own believes are suppressed and causes them to restrict themselves to what ever the society views as right and wrong.
I agree with everything you said and I like how you spoke about how people who grow up under these standards are suppressed. I'd never thought about the people who grow up with these set morals until I read your post!
I also like how you said that "[i]f a society had no order then it would not survive," because it's very true and it's a simple statement that actually means a lot.
Moral ideologies imposed on societies are often based on an established religion or the traditional beliefs -- social codes that determine what should or shouldn't be done-- of a civilization, and certain actions are widely accepted by the public as either moral or immoral. Individuals are expected to behave in accordance with these mandated 'rules' on social conduct, and if they don't, they are judged or criticized by those who choose to adhere to the rules. Such ideologies can be beneficial by creating order and harmony within a society, but can also potentially lead to conflicts as a result of disputes over what is morally wrong or right. People have differing views on morality depending on their personal beliefs, but they often suppress these beliefs in order to avoid suffering the negative consequences of breaking societal 'laws' -- defying them could be considered reprehensible. Questioning or challenging these laws can lead to chaos, as elucidated by the various revolts and rebellions throughout history. Forcing individuals to conform to rules on what is socially acceptable can cause them to lose some of their individualism and abandon their own unique ideas on morality ; however, if these rules were completely ignored, anarchy would ensue.
I like how you pointed out how that mandated or widley accepted morals can cause people to fear being judged by their opposing views. I beleive that many of these revolts and rebellons have ended with positive consequences, many try to avoid these rebellions and revolts because of the fear of chaos which is why society leans to one direction of the majority.
Moral ideologies in society create benefits in many different ways. The most important being that these morals create order and structure as it distinguishes what is right from wrong. However with this being said people now can be restricted to certain things they feel they can stand up too. For example if a person feels a certain way about something they should be able to speak their mind about it but with these morals it restricts the ability to speak your mind because people and society may judge you.
Societies that have a set of moral ideologies, are beneficial in that they create order, structure, and fixed expecations for members in the community. These morals explain what is viewed as immoral or moral in society, which help keep society in place, and to avoid disorder. Basic morals set by society are to not lie, steal, cheat etc., however many individuals end up making decisions based on what they feel is right, not what society expects or believes is moral. The downside to having a set of morals in a community, is that it significantly affects individualism and the rights humans have to make their own decisions and opinions as to what they believe is right and wrong. In tight knit comminuties, such as Puritan communities, individuals are far too concerned with how society views them, that they have lost their sense of individuality and ability to decide things on their own.
The benefits of societies mandating a set of moral ideologies is that it helps give the society an underlying structure/foundation; where as a society without set morals would have no "respect code" by which the people would live by. These set of morals would guide people in their decisions (if they are moral decisions, they should do it, where as if they are immoral, they wouldn't do it) without ever having to enforce a strict written law code.
ReplyDeletethe complications with societies mandating a set of moral ideologies is that it takes away the individuality of a person. People would begin to conform to what the society believes as "moral" in order to not be looked down upon. However, this gives unity to the society by binding everyone together in a common set of beliefs.
It's true that the moral values would help unify and guide people from minor wrongdoings without a law code. However, how would the people that would not want to follow moral values of their society, but moral values of their own act? I believe it would create a whole new set of complications in which strict law codes would then need to be established.
DeleteI agree with this, that if a society didn't have this underlying set of codes helping people differentiate between right and wrong, then society would lose its structure, and chaos would replace order because ultimately, these laws are the framework of our society. On the other hand, as you mentioned, these regulations and limitations take away from one's own beliefs and forces them to conform to society's standards of good and bad, causing a dilemma between the rules of society and one's own moral compass.
DeleteI really like what you're saying here. I agree with you on how a set of codes is used as the basic structure for a society, however I believe that these set of moral codes are the reason that causes chaos in a society because there might be people within society that would have different believes from the set of moral codes thus causing disagreement with these laws. Also, I agree with you on how societies mandating a set of moral codes takes away individuality.
DeleteIn society, morals are among some of the most highly valued aspects of life. In our society, the basics include: Don't Steal, Don't Kill, Don't Cheat on Tests, etc. Most people in our society would agree with that, however a select few believe that those things are perfectly okay. When people don't follow these rules, they are ostracized from society, causing them to not be able to follow their true beliefs. For most, it allows for a just society, however if you don't believe in those morals, it causes you to have to either go against them and risk being excluded from society, or hide your true self. This seems like it would be a very tough situation to be in if you had conflicting ideas with those of your society.
ReplyDeleteThis is true because some people want to try to do things that are outside the moral ideologies and they are restricted because of them. Which doesn't allow them to be their true self.
DeleteI feel like a society in which a set of morals is established can lead to less social conflict. However, it can stifle individuals and keep from from feeling accepted. For example, interracial couples were not accepted in the United States until the twentieth century. The morals of the majority kept citizens from being happy.
ReplyDeletePS this is Ben Munson sorry about the weird Nick name
WOW! Box 5 example, Ben. I disagree that an establishment of morals would lead to less social conflict. Those that wanted to stick to their own personal/spiritual morals would in turn go on their own path, which is sometimes not always accepted by the rest of the society. This is what WOULD cause the inter-society conflicts between the mainstreamers and hipsters of the moral world.
DeleteAs the affect of societies mandating a set of moral ideologies both beneficial and negative aspects emerge. These morals are the backbone of society. They set up the expectations for being a good citizen within your community. Basic morals are obvious, such as, telling the turth or not stealing, but others can be argued upon. A person will ,in the end, do what they feel is right. But if this is frowned upon by society then you have gotten yourself into a mess. These basic morals are usually followed but if you go against them, there will be consequences. To have conflicting ideas with those of your society would be a problem and throw off the order of society.
ReplyDeleteNice points Kate! I agree with most of your argument but i feel as if you go against society and its morals you would not necessarily be punished because a new idea or rule can lead to society being reformed rather than harmed.
DeleteGood points Kate! What you are saying makes total sense. If you do whats right in society, for the most part you will not suffer any consequnces. unless what you think is right, isnt. Also, i agree that if you disagree with the rest of society, conflict will arise and people will be judged or looked down upon.
DeleteI agree that "morals are the backbone of society" because if people did not know the difference between right and wrong, it would create chaos. Also, people tend to have different morals which would create conflict within a society. Because morals have such an impact on society, it is necessary to have some sort of punishment for those who break these moral codes.
DeleteI agree with you Kate. It benefits society to have "set... expectations for being a good citizen" because we know what what will be frowned upon and what we will be praised for. However, we all have varying definitions of good and bad, so as you said we may end up in "a mess" if we do something we see as justifiable that society or the law sees as immoral and therefore illegal.
DeleteStandard moral ideologies give way to a unified, yet rigid and inflexible society. On one hand, a set of morals creates cohesion; people are more comfortable knowing that other share familiar beliefs and they don't have to worry about clashing with others' ideologies. It also provides a sense of order in the community by laying a moral foundation for citizens to abide by. On the other hand, these mandated morals are not open to individual interpretation and diverging from the moral code makes one an "outsider" and is frowned upon. In turn, the individual is in constant conflict, for as they develop their own sense of morality, it makes them decide whether to question the already established code (and risk exclusion) or dismiss their ideas as wrong and invalid and revert to conforming to society's rules. Thus, it is very difficult for the individual to be true to himself/herself, as they are always engaged in indecisiveness and , perhaps, self doubt.
ReplyDeleteI completely agree with this, and I like the point you made about self doubt because when someone is forced to believe one thing, they tend to imagine the other possibilities of how they could be and question themselves.
DeleteCydney, you have some great points! When you said that an individual is in constant conflict deciding between their own sense of morality or to question the already established code, I agree that there are internal conflicts and possible insecurities that can arise. But I do think that these established codes are helpful in protecting the safety of others from possibly harmful acts. But other than that, I value person opinion and individual interest. Great post!
DeleteI completely agree. It is interesting that you talked about the risk of being looked upon as an "outsider" if you didnt agree with or follow the standard moral ideologies. I hadn't thought about that but it is very true, if you dont believe what others think you should believe, you are often looked down upon. Good point!
DeleteI agree with you cydney, your point about standard moral ideologies creating an orderly yet adamant society, which fits the idea of the lack of individualism within communities. I also liked how you made a point of how some of these morals are so rigid that there is no room for different ideas, and are automatically considered untrue.
DeleteI totally agree with your point about a set of morals creating cohesion. And how people are comfortable with their actions when they fit into the ways of society. Self doubt is also a very good point you've brought up! Its easy to be indescisive about something when you find it to be right but society disagrees.
DeleteVery well put Cydney, I liked your point on how am individual must decide on wether to follow their personal morals/beliefs or conform to society. Sometimes instead of picking either one some may decise to lay low about their beliefs to avoid such exclusion from society leading to unhappy lifestyle.
DeleteI completely agree with you Cydney, people have evolved as group obsessed animals and cannot stand to be all alone. No matter how much people think they are rebelling against society, they are still within another group of outsiders that still abide by social expectations. People have also developed a sense of structure that makes them feel at peace and; is then, desired y all as a means of security and routine. This system of morals and ethics in inescapable as it forms around all people, sometimes making acceptations to try and please everyone. People are clearly willing to give up some f their own individual expression in order to convert to this system and maintain their order that, deep down, we all want. The fear of seclusion has caused many people to also change their own ideologies and continue traditions that they might not personally agree with. An example of this is the speaker in “Mending Wall”, by Robert Frost, in which he continues to build this wall that separates himself from his neighbor even though he sees no purpose in it and actually resents it (Frost). Despite his beliefs against the wall, he convinces himself to rebuild it every spring to create a structured and non-hostile life.
DeleteIt is beneficial the majority of the time for a society to be governed by a standardized set of morals. This allows for an orderly, and generally cohesive society, in which one is able to act without much fear. One knows what to expect, and thus has no fear as to whether their conduct is correct. Complications arise, though, as the individual's own morals conflict with those set by society. Under such a circumstance, an individual must either choose to continue to partake in the actions of their choice and possibly face being ostracized, or conform to society's will and face the loss of their identity.
ReplyDeleteI find it very interesting that you point out the choices an individual has if they are not in accordance with the ideologies set by society. Given this sense of choice makes me think that if a person, although not in accordance with society, still stays within that society wouldnt that lead to somewhat of an unhappy society where they live with fear due to their lost of identity? Their lost of identity leads to insecurity which creates fear within them.
DeleteCarla I agree with how you said that having a moral standerds being governed in a society can lead to ones loss of who they really are. I just want to ask if they were to be simply given to the public and let them regulate these moral conducts among themselves, would there still be this order and cohesive society?
DeleteI completely agree with your point about how an individual whose morals differ from the majority must either face being ostracized or conform to the popular will. However, I'm also curious as to how an individual can act without fear in a cohesive society while gaining fear from their lost of identity.
DeleteI agree with what you said about how social morals suppress the individuals beliefs and they are conflicted between if they should express their own morals or confine to the ones set by society. However, I disagree when you said that these morals don't cause fear because if an individual is conflicted on which morals to live by, wouldn't they be in constant fear of upsetting the social image and structure? Other than that I completely agree.
DeleteMandating a set of moral ideologies can lead to a society that comes to terms on more things, therefore making it fairly peaceful and simple when compared to one without it. The set of moral ideologies creates a basic understanding of situations that the society has to follow, and these basic principles make decisions on anything of moral question easier to decide on and follow through with the appropriate course of action. For an individual who decides to follow their own moral code, a society like this would be a nightmare. Unfair discrimination against an individual like this would be something that would unquestionably happen, and because they would be a very, VERY small minority in their society, they would have virtually zero say in anything that happens to the community or themselves. That individual would be powerless against a community that could wrongly punish someone for something that isn't necessarily punishable.
ReplyDeleteYou make a very great point here but I do believe that having a specific set of moral ideologies would do more harm than good because people typically don't like to follow what they're restrained to.
DeleteI agree with you on how a set of morals would be beneficial in most cases as they would put pressure on citizens to follow this system and therefore would lead to a sharing of moralistic values.
DeleteFor the most part dear Noah I agree with your points, but in your introduction you stated that societies with a set amount of moral ideologies makes a society fairly more peacful. On the contrary I think that in most cases if everyone is allowed to follow their own beliefs/morals then society would be alot more peacful with one acception, which would be an individuals inalienable rights. If you look throughout history many civilizations have tried implimenting moral codes and it has failed them in the long run.
DeleteThe benefit of having a mandated set of morals is that order is created, and in that order, some equality between citizens is created. If everyone in a society is expected to behave in the same manner, following the same ethic principles as his neighbor, than miscommunication is avoided. There is no longer a mannerism barrier that makes people walk on thin lines with each other every time they interact. No one man is morally better that another as long as they all follow the same rules and beliefs.
ReplyDeleteOne complication is the chance for power abuse in this kind of system. Whoever has the mandate to create and instill a society’s morals has the will to either create a fair and just society or to bend the society for his one benefit. In holding this kind of power, corruption is an unavoidable possibility. There is also the issue of individualism in this situation. When a person’s society tells him exactly how to think and behave, there is practically no room for his own voice. When he cannot voice his own opinions, he may lose his individuality. In this situation, people are sometimes forced to conform to a collectivist mindset, taking away their sense of uniqueness.
Essentially, it’s a catch-22; either a society can dictate a set of morals and take away individuality, or it can promote individuality and run the risk of chaos.
Great point, Kristine! I think that brings up an interesting question; Is an uncorrupt, orderly society with outspoken individuality possible? Or does the simple existence of corruption and deceit and collectivism by our Leaders bring order in and of itself? I personally think it is impossible to have one without the other.
Delete"Essentially, it’s a catch-22; either a society can dictate a set of morals and take away individuality, or it can promote individuality and run the risk of chaos." Agreed!
DeleteA set of moral ideologies, created by the people or the government, establishes a social standard that often reaches the importance of a law. By inaugurating a code of what one “should” and “shouldn’t” do, these concepts maintain the order of society and allow the government to focus on issues of greater importance. Morals are stressed by a society’s individuals, in an effort to create a sense of community in which all members “fit” in. While this can benefit a society’s network of connection, these ideas often separate those that are unique from the majority. This element of segregation ultimately injects a judgmental view into society and for many, stunts the development of innovation and new ideology. In some of the more strict civilizations of the modern era, for example, speaking against the set morals often results in pure banishment from a community or even death. Therefore, morals can suddenly represent the closure of individualism and personal ethics.
ReplyDeleteI agree with you that morals can lead to a closure of individualism and personal ethics due to the lost of identity that is seen throughout strict societies. I really like how you used an example allowing your point to be backed up with facts that are seen even in modern society still. A question that arises from this would be, if people who live in these strict societies want to voice their opinion but have decided to loss their identity and live according to what society sees thats right, would it lead to order based fear due the insecurity that arise from the lost of identity?
DeleteI found your point to be very interesting on how morals do create a greater sense of community, yet they may still represent segregation within this said community. Thus, creating strict moral code can lead to social conflicts within society, however having a moral foundation prevents chaos.
DeleteYour ideas of how morals can have complications in socities were interesting. You made many points that I didnt think of intially. You have a balnace of details of the downfalls and benefits of morals in socities which, I feel, all ideas are valid.
DeleteIt can be beneficial to a society but also have a chance of leading to complications. If the moral ideologies are something that are broken a lot because of its strictness then it has a chance of leading to corruption. Ideologies should be strict but not to the point where it's hard for people to follow. The beneficial side of it is that any functioning society needs a set of rules. Theirs no chance of a society ever making it if their aren't ideologies to make it clear what is right or wrong. In society today these rules are broken every day but not to a point where major chaos is created. In the Puritan society or any other strict culture it is taken to a different extent. The stricter the rules, the more difficult it is for people to speak out on what they believe is right. Today people in our society are able to have freedom of speech and express their own ideologies. Back in the Puritan society it was not welcomed based on how strict their laws were.
ReplyDeleteWhile I see the validity of your points and understand the gist of your arguments, what happens if the morals of a society are already corrupt? If our perception of society's morals were skewed or reversed, would the society continue be considered "normal", or would its morals cease to be morals altogether? The moral conceptions of one society may provide huge benefits (like social/cultural unification) while if placed in another society would prove detrimental to itself and collapse. Immorality is relative to the individual, and is dependent on the support of others within that society. What would occur if our preconceived norms were altered: what would be the ramifications?
Deletei like the question you posed Maddee. What if you view of morals is already skewed and we arent the noraml? i also agree that immoral depends on the individual.
DeleteA set of moral ideologies in a society can bring up benefits and complications. Morals allow for order and are building blocks of a society on how people should act in it. Some complications in some moral ideologies is that some might inhibit people to follow societies ideas and takes away the sense of individuality among people. This affects an individual because he/she might not be able to express their individuality do to the fact that these moral ideologies restrict them to.
ReplyDeleteMoral ideologies that societies mandate, can be both accepted by society and cause problems between individuals. When morals are a major part of individuals lives, the society has a better idea of what is right and what is wrong. People go by these morals to make decisions, whether they are important or not. Individuals can learn to grow together from these morals. They can connect with each other both socially and emotionally, by following the same morals. Although a set of morals can bring a society together, it can bring them apart as well. While the morals are meant to distinguish right from wrong, some individuals could disagree on the morals established. It could cause larger issues than just differences on views. Individuals who agree on the same morals are themselves, they don't try to be someone they are not because it could make others upset or uncomfortable. If the society was group of people that believed in different morals, society would be disorganized and not civilized. No one would be able to express their views and society would be very limited, thus allowing the society to be reflected on the set of morals that individuals follow.
ReplyDeleteI defiantly agree with you Bella. I see your points behind what would happen if everyone in a society had conflicting views and ideologies. Society would defiantly be very limited and could lead to a lot of corruption. All of your ideas on the different ways morals could effect societies appear to be very valid with your commentary on the results from both sides with the effects of morals on themselves
DeleteIf a set of moral ideologies are imposed on society it could bring both benefits as well as complications. The benefits it would bring would be that the set of moral ideologies could be used as a guideline or set of rules. They could be used as a guideline on how an individual should act within a society. If an individual acts according to these ideologies it would create order within a society. Although many individuals would act accroding to these ideologies there will be a few who will have opposing views. Not every person has the same set of beliefs or ideologies which could lead to conflict. These ceratin individuals would argue that their individual rights are being violated. They could also argue that the freedom that they have is being taken away from them by society due to imposing ideologies upon people which creates a very limited society.
ReplyDeleteIncorporating moral ideologies into humanities, or into a government over a society, benefits that society by creating laws for which it is supposed to live by. Hammurabi’s Code is an example of imposed law based on morals believed to be what man should live by in order to be prosperous. By integrating morals into society we create organization; individuals don’t kill each other as abundantly because of the fear generated by repercussions of their actions. The difficulty with imposing regulations based on moral are that not everyone lives by the same principles, in Babylon (where Hammurabi’s code was enforced) the laws were based on social status. If we assimilated similar laws based on social prestige many Americans would fight against each other because of the unfairness it would cause (ex. Slave revolts in early American history). So, yes, by generating instructions we produce union but consequences come of it, many people who disagree with the morals the societies are based on have a tendency to not follow them, creating conflict in that society as seen in early American history. Whites based their regulations on the beliefs that whites had superiority over blacks which allowed widespread slavery, which later led to slave revolts in turn leading to the future segregation lived by the blacks (very negative outcome). Individualism is affected by the joining of moral principles and society because if set laws disagree with ones beliefs, and consequences follow the breaking of that law, then that individual will most likely hide his beliefs (ex. Jews in Nazi Germany), reducing individuality immensely.
ReplyDeleteI agree on your view that moral ideologies provide unity and the fact that moral provides fear of repercussion. I didn't think of fear of repercussion but that is completely true. I also liked how you used many examples to support your ideals throughout history, particularly the one about slavery. That was spot on. The reduction of individuality due to the case of breaking law was also a good point you had that I agree with. Great analysis!
DeleteThe benefits of society mandating a set of moral ideologies helps to build a foundation and a social structure. A strong infrastructure keeps society running smoothly and it prevents individuals from making decisions that could potentially harm others. With these set morals, everyone has the same expectations and agenda. There isn't room to debate the standards of society. On the other hand, these moral ideologies limit an individual's ability to be himself/herself. These strict expectations inhibit personal freedoms and the choice of free will. This imposes restrictions on the uniqueness and individuality of a person, but keeps people from exceeding what is generally considered to be morally acceptable. Moral ideologies are established for the greater good and to prevent chaos in society.
ReplyDeleteYou make really good points, however I do believe that moral codes (most commonly strict ones) can lead to disunity and conflict within a society. We see examples of this between reublicans and democrats everyday because in some cases they abide to a different set of values.
DeleteI completely agree with you. A society with with a set of basic morals will be more unified. Creating strict moral code can lead to social conflicts, but having a moral foundation prevents chaos.
DeleteSome benefits of society mandating moral codes would be being able to live in a safer community. This is because it would prevent people from doing immoral actions like killing, stealing and lying which all lead to chaos in society. Some complications of defining moral codes would be the risk of unfair judgment. This is because some moral activities could be justified as immoral when they are really not which could end up defining other people's actions. This could affect an individual that is staying true to the morals of his old surroundings that may not be accepted in his new surroundings.
ReplyDeleteI agree with how you bring up the fact that the morals could become outdated if the people moved into new surroundings.
DeleteI agree, having society set a moral code maintains peace because it establishes the goods and the bads. I like how you mentioned how morals might be accepted in one society and not in another, since there are many different morals in the world and they don't all correspond with each other.
DeleteA moral, in my opinion, is something that one commonly knows is the right thing to do which isn't necessarily the law. By having the government mandate a set of what they believe is moral, it can lead to the people within society being better behaved. Also people could possibly get along better in terms of agreement because their society was shaped around those specific interpretations of right and wrong. However, having these specific morals can make a person lose their sense of individuality and following what they believe. It's almost an example of church taking over the state, because people don't typically have the same morals and forcing one specific moral on a person wouldn't make them happy if they don't agree with it. This would possibly lead to a rise in the rebellion within society because when someone is restrained to certain things they have a tendency to break those rules just for the sake of going against them. Also, having these specific morals would make a person lose their own individuality in what they do because they it's common law that they have to act in a specific way. If they try to do what they believe should be acceptable, they risk being ostracized so they are then stuck acting how people want them to and never truly being themselves.
ReplyDeleteI definitely agree with your main points of how morals controls peoples actions and can be used to control peoples actions. The only thing critique I have is when you said "It's almost an example of church taking over the state" (Maresco) You should have a stronger voice in your writing. Instead try Church taking over the state IS an example etc. It would make your writing seem stronger. Over good job!
DeleteSets of morals and Ideologies are often incorperated into society and the government of that society. Some of the benefits of mandating these morals and ideologies are seen in the structure of the society, they keep people "in line." They create uniforminty, everyone should feel the same way and chose to act accordingly. Morals and ideologies also allow fr concistancy within the soceity if multiple people get in trouble for the same thing they will be treated in about the same manner. Order is also a benefit, morals and ideologies that most people accept and that the government enforces provents chaos. There are many complications however, the government cant stop everybody so there is no real way to fully inforce something. Another complications is that not everyone agrees or thinks the same way or has the same believes so the goverment may put something i place that they disagree with or dont feel they need to follow. These government enfoced morals and ideologies also greatly hurt individuality. They dont allow one to think for themselves, not everyone belives or acts the same way and by foceing people to follow ideologies it hinders there personal expresstion and thought.People can no longer always be themselves because they have to make sure they are within government regulations on how they schould think or act.
ReplyDeleteYes! i definitely agree and I like how you incorporated the idea that some individuality is lost when morals are enforced, however, I don't feel as if it is only the government that regulates their actions because it can also be their families or friends that judge them based on their actions as well.
DeleteKaitlyn I appreciated the way you stated your view point, it helped me to better understand the possible role of morals within a society. I definitely agree that a set of moral ideologies creates uniformity, also enticing people to conform to the "norm" of society. I also agree that this kind of structure could take an individual's sense of individuality and ability to express one's self away.
DeleteI completely agree with this and like the way you emphasized what morals are in order to lead into your view on how they affect society. I also really like the benefits you pointed out, since they weren't ones that I had come up with, so it really helped broaden the ideas of morals and their affect on society for me. Going off of the government regulations you pointed out for the individuality part of morals also allows not only for less individuality, but also for more of a lock down on society because of this lack of individual belief.
DeleteI agree with how you stated that morals keep people in line. They help keep society on the same page and follow similar ideas. I also like how you pointed out the flaws in morals by saying that they can hurt individuals, because they can't think for themselves. Morals can positively affect a society by creating a strong bond, but it can also tear it apart because of the lack of expression. You really helped me clearly understand more views on morals.
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
DeleteWhat is beneficial about having a set of moral ideologies is that they maintain a social order often mandated by certain laws, keeping society a safe place. However, this might affect an individual’s ability to be true to himself/herself because it establishes a set of expectations for people to follow and fit in regardless of their own personal beliefs and values. These expectations make it difficult for someone who has disagreeing ideas with society to cooperate, thus leading to personal and social conflicts. An example of a personal conflict caused by the expectations of society is that someone might be forced to behave in a certain way that does not relate to who they truly are. Pretending to be something that you’re not in order to fit in can lead to self harm, depression, suicide and so on.
ReplyDeleteI agree with your point on keeping moral ideology in order to create a safe atmosphere for a society, I hadn't thought of that perspective before. Also, I liked how you mentioned that differing views could lead to depression and more personal effects because that is something, I believe, that most could relate to. Most individuals have been put in the position at some point in their lives to have to conform to something they don't like, whether it be giving a speech or having to go to a party where they know completely no one and things like that. Once someone is uncomfortable, they're views and actions completely change and I could see how hat would lead to a social conflict. I totally concur on your reference to personal effects due to suppression with moral codes.
DeleteMoral ideologies are a set of beliefs regarding what is "right" and "wrong" conduct. If societies were to mandate, meaning to require, a common set of moral ideologies upon a diverse array of people with different backgrounds, perspectives, and beliefs,minorities would inevitably be oppressed. The mandatory set of moral ideologies would be structured upon popular consensus, excluding the moral values of those whose beliefs don't fall in line with the majority. Individualism would therefore be shunned by society and members would be pressured to conform to popular views on morality in fear the social repercussions otherwise.
ReplyDeleteOn the other hand,establishing a common set of moral ideologies would foster a sense of camaraderie among its members. If what's "right" or "wrong" is cleanly stated in black and white, there is left to little interpretation. Debates over morality wouldn't be an issue, and everyone would be able to function knowing without a doubt whether their actions were acceptable. A new sense of social equality would emerge, for everyone who doesn't reject the guideline would be considered equal on moral grounds.
When pondering the implications and benefits of imposing a set of moral ideologies, one should also consider the constantly evolving nature of human thought. What was considered morally acceptable in the past may no longer be in the present. With this in mind, how would a moral law code evolve with progression of human attitudes?
Who would be entitled to alter the moral law code in response to altering views?
I agree; when a set of morals are established, it creates conflict because the subject of right and wrong is very subjective. I also really like the point you bring up about morals and the evolving human attitudes concerning morals.
DeleteNice points. I really like how you brought up the point that a society's ethics do evolve and then question who has the right to lead such transformations. Overall I agree with your assertions. But while I agree that many individuals would be pressured into conformity, I do not believe every individual would, so what happens to those who stray from these social constructs?
DeleteMorals in society help promote what society believes to be right. While it is not the law, morals create an idea of what is right and what is wrong, and it is this idea that is found at the foundations of many laws in society. However, this belief of what is right and the implications morals have on an individual allows society to be, to some extent, controlled and behaved, without laws in place, since morals, in general, are created for the welfare of one’s self and that of the rest of society. While most morals are accepted widely by all of society, interpretations of morals can lead to diversity within beliefs and, sometimes, violence. The differing of morals for individuals, as well as the degree that they differ from the morals put in place by society, leads to a suppression of individual morals, since, even though individuality exists, people tend to conform to the ideas of a society as a whole rather than their own distinct beliefs.
ReplyDeleteI agree with your point. Having morals in society helps keep people in place without everything having to be regulated to the smallest detail. It is designed to keep individuals and people's actions in check. The government does not have to watch over things as much and also allows people to trust each other more. However, there can be downfalls to this in that it could lead to people trusting each other too much and as a result getting something stolen or being a victim of some other criminal act. It also leads to less individuality as you stated above.
DeleteEstablishing a set of morals for society to abide by undoubtedly creates an organized and civilized community that is guided in such a way that it is mostly free from crime such as stealing, murder etc. However, this mandate of rules can create some complications in that a handful of people might disagree with them and claim that their rights as an individual are being violated or abused. For example, in the middle east, a common moral that’s practiced is arranged marriage where the father of the family chooses his daughter’s spouse for her and if she refuses, she will be punished severely and said to be cursed with bad luck. I would imagine most girls think this is unfair and a violation to her ability to voice her opinion and take control of her life. Ultimately, the idea of forcing morals on people isn’t as effective as allowing the people to establish their morals themselves.
ReplyDeleteReally interesting ideas Sophia! I enjoyed the way that you gave a precise example of the restricting side of established morals. However, I would like to point out that if we allowed everyone to establish their own morals, there would be major conflicts in people’s opinions. For example, the government of the United States is very loose with the country’s established morals. As a nation, we promote innovation and individualism and yet we still witness crime and people’s unethical decisions. Therefore, I agree with the idea that many morals restrict personal freedom, but disagree with the effectiveness of total dependency on individual beliefs. Ultimately, this is a difficult problem with the nature of the human society.
DeleteI definitely agree with your point about people claiming their rights to be violated if one is to disagree with the accepted ways of society. These morals create an organized community for sure. (:
DeleteMandating a set of morals will make society better as it will enforce morals on people who lack morals such as serial killers and possibly steer their decisions away from acts that cause harm upon others. Each person has a unique set of morals they live by, some possess few morals, others with an abundance of morals. A set of morals will bring those who lack morals up to a standard of morality where society may be less bothered by crime. On the other hand, placing a restriction on this will inhibit one's ability to be themselves by controlling their decisions and creating a communist-like society. How is society going to create a single set of morals when the people in society are so unique? The creation of this code will cause a significant amount of conflict.
ReplyDeleteGood ideas Kevin! I really enjoyed your point about how those with an “abundance” of morals have a huge impact on people that lack this set of ethics. As we see in modern American society, our human nature increases our desire to strive for the best. Therefore, we look for good human examples in history or in modern society that we can base our actions off. Ultimately, this establishes a competitive community in which people strive to fulfill the set morals and expected behaviors.
DeleteThis is a very good point and i highly agree with your thoughts. I see where you are coming from when you say how it can help correct the immoral acts committed by felons, but on the other hand it can enhance the immoral acts by trying to suppress them. I think that society shouldn't try to restrain others from their free will, but they should definitely increase the punishments when citizens act out immorally. This would cause a great outbreak in society if people tried to force morals on people.
DeleteI agree with your ideas. Your point about people with different morals helps emphasize how society can benefit people but it can also supress them. I agree with how society struggles with establishing a set of moral codes when the individuals already have a diverse set of morals.
DeleteWhile imposing moral ideologies is beneficial to the order and conduct of society, it can also eliminate a person's sense of individualism. At a very young age, we are taught the "rights" and the "wrongs" of what is expected in our society. Although there are basic moral principles that most communities follow, such as being kind to one another, not to cheat, not to steal, etc., not all societies have the same moral principles. With this belief of right and wrong, it suggests that any person or group that acts or believes differently than another is wrong, which ultimately leads to conflict. These morals can be changed if society finds them unjust or unethical, however, just as no society has exactly the same idea of right and wrong, neither do individuals. Although moral ideologies provide a backbone for laws and composition within society, it is often the main cause of prejudice and conflict.
ReplyDeleteI think you are right when you say that the ideas of "right" and "wrong" can stifle one's individualism, especially at a young age. And I think it's interesting that you bring up that moral ideologies, while providing "backbone" for laws, also cause prejudice, because that is true in many cases.
DeleteSome benefits with the society mandating a set of moral ideologies is that it establishes order among the majority of the people, emphasizing what is good compared to what is not. Depending on how the society mandates the moral code, it could result in positive or negative consequences. If society has a strict moral code, some people cannot express their own morals because they have to follow the beliefs of the society in order to be accepted by them. In some Middle Eastern countries, there is a strong belief about veiling women. This shows that society controlling the morals of the people might prohibit them from being themselves. In a broad perspective, having society mandate moral ideology can benefit the people because it can distinguish the good and the evil. However, it can also prevent individuals from expressing their own values.
ReplyDeleteI agree with your statement relating the strictness of the moral code and its correlation with its effects on society. A strictly enforced code does prevent crime better than a flimsy code but the strict code restricts a person's ability to be themselves. Your example of veiling women in the Middle East exemplifies strict codes infringing on people's rights.
DeleteI agree, a single set of moral ideologies seems both good and bad. I like your idea that it depends on how strict the society makes the moral code for whether they are good or bad for individualism. Also, couldn't some strict moral ideologies be beneficial to society, such as some of the 10 commandments, with little impact on a person’s individualism?
DeleteSociety benefits from mandating a set a moral ideologies; it provides structure and order to daily social life. It is also easier for people to get along if they have already agreed on an unspoken set of rules. Morals sometimes help establish legal codes as well. However a set of moral ideologies can cause conflict because what is "right" and what is "wrong" can be subjective at times. A minority can be persecuted for their beliefs. A person can feel ashamed and lose their sense of individuality as they conform to the expected morals in society.
ReplyDeleteSociety benefits from mandating a set of moral ideologies because of how it is able to maintain a sense of agreement among individuals. If everyone is on the same page, they'll be able to cooperate and easily justify solutions throughout the community, bringing different views and positions on subjects to resolve issues. On the other hand, a consequence to mandating moral ideology could be an uprise in differing views. Unlike the benefit of having differing views to help resolve an idea, people could totally be against the set policy and want to rebel against it, creating an anarchy versus a democracy. People don't like being told what to believe and a set policy of what is to be abided to would cause rebellion and riot. Besides this, people would feel alienated and unable to express their views, effecting their will to be themselves and becoming easily suppressed in society. Instead of expressing new ideas to suggest change in a community, people would follow the established policy and live in a mundane community with no sense of progress.
ReplyDeleteThe benefits of a society mandating a set of moral ideologies is that the society can have a structure and follow the same beliefs and practices. Having a set of moral ideologies also allows the society to be more organized in their actions and decision making process by considering what they think is socially acceptable by their society. Some of the consequences would be that people are going to have their own ideas and opinions on what they think is right. It may also cause rebellions and chaos in their society leading to a disorganized and disfunctional society.
ReplyDeleteHaving a set of moral ideologies can negatively affect an individual's ability to be true to him or herself by them questioning their own opinions and actions. It also restricts them from being individuals who can form thier own ideas and opinions.
I like how you addressed the fact that these morals could spark rebellious actions. The inability to voice one's individual opinions in a society can be a frustrating thing and could entice those individuals to make a change, especially if they discover they are not alone in their opinions. This then could create segregations in society since there are many different views on what is right and wrong. This division can lead to disorganization and chaos within society.
DeleteSome of the benefits of establishing and regulating a set mof moral ideologies within a society are that they will allow people to do better, not for themselves , but for others. It will make people want to do good for others not because they know its the "right" thing to do but because it will feel good to them and come natural. One of the main responsibilities humans have is that they have to help one another. Some of the complications of having a set of moral ideologies regulating within a society are that it may steal a persons freedom, may rob them are their rights , and take away their identity. It may possibly redirect them in a direction that favors those who influence these " moral ideologies" Thus not allowing one to express who they really are, but rather "market " them as what is wanted in that society
ReplyDeleteI agree with your assertions, but one society's set of morals may be different than another society's. Through this, the "right thing" to do may contradict with the thoughts of certain individuals within that society, which, like you said, would impair their ability to partake in their freedom as an individual.
DeleteWhen society sets moral standards there is much less of a conflict based on the decision of what is wrong/right, the benefit of this is that society becomes orderly unified and people can live great lives; however, because of this, people lose their identities and everyone becomes restricted in their freedom.
ReplyDeleteYes, when society has morals to base their lives off of they have an expectation of what is right and wrong and it helps create order throughout society. But with this being said, as you mentioned, people do not feel the same freedom they could have without moral ideologies.
DeleteI believe that the benefits of a society mandating a set of moral ideologies outweigh the consequences. Having set moral ideologies allows for facilitation of order within the society because all or most of the people abide by the same guidelines. therefore, these moral ideologies prove beneficial to society as a whole in the long term. Although some may disobey the moral ideologies and rebel or argue that they are being stripped of their freedom or rights. It could also stop an individual from being theirselves and expressing themselves in the way that they would like to.
ReplyDeleteIn the end the best intrest of a society is more important than that of an individual, so sometimes people may have to conform or if not they should keep it to themselves.
You do bring up a valid point that is understandable, but you also make the society as a whole the focus of why this is more beneficial. If you look at the consequences of mandating a set of moral ideologies on the individual level, the possibility of discrimination and being punished for something that isn't necessarily wrong, but "unmoral", is a very great consequence. Though the society may benefit, it won't be ideal if individuals want a sense of freedom rather than a sense of having to live a certain way because it was how they were told to live.
DeleteSurprisingly, I'm inclined to agree with Alex. Although, like you said Noah, being punished unjustly is a very great, very negative consequence of imposing a set moral code on the People, the morals and opinions of other groups and societies do not differ very greatly. For example, in all societies, one will find that one killing another is wrong. While the groups may disagree on semantics, or certain details of the deed, all still believe that killing is wrong. What I'm trying to get at here is that the morals that Society deems to be rules are, more often than not, rules that everyone agrees one as moral and ethical and "right." It's just how those rules are implemented and enforced that people would really disagree on and would force people to conform. So, like Alex said, the benefits of setting those moral ideologies in place outweigh the cost of maybe stifling an individual feeling or belief. People need to be willing to set aside their own beliefs for the good of their community, or else chaos will ensue.
DeleteSadly, I totally agree with Alex on this one. The moral ideologies benefiting the society as a whole not just individuals just makes more sense. I think that's what this one comes down to... making more sense. Either way "chaos will ensue" (Litzenberg). Might as well pick the one that benefits society as a whole.
DeleteThe complications from the established set of ideologies would be the result of a society being tuned upside down and will lead to a downward spiral of destruction and chaos. Also, a society will not know the difference between right and wrong and will cause a divide in society. When the governed "high-power" established rules of society they are of what SHOULD be right and isn't always what IS right. The benefits depend on who is enforcing the rules and who ends up listening to them. This is when peoples' true colors come out because each person should stay true to themselves and follow there heart/ what they believe because if they don't they will start to question and resist to the rules and ideologies that become mandated.
ReplyDeleteThe benefits of creating a set of moral ideologies within a society are that they give more order to the society and allow individuals to be there own person. It will also make people want to set a good example for others and it will give themconfidence in themselves and what they believe in and not being agraid to be themselves. Some of the complication of having a set of moral ideologies within a society are that maybe not everyone will agree with what the moral or ideology is; therefore, leading to conflict within the society. Also, it might offend people and they might begin to turn on their true morals and beliefs and head down a bad path. Making them more apt to care less about the important thing sin life. This will all affect their ability to be true to themselves because us as humans are easily influenced by others and are willing to compromise important tings in order to become accepted.
ReplyDeleteI really like your point Ann! I like how you mentioned that this type of society provides good examples and models for other people; you took a positive perspective on the topic. I also had never thought of people compromising themselves for inclusion. Great point!
DeleteIf a society were to mandate a set of moral ideologies, a benefit would be a sense of unity within the people who adhere to said ideologies. People who do not necessarily follow those guidelines would become excluded from society, presenting a complication.
ReplyDeleteHowever, I personally do not believe that a society completely controls the morals and ideas of the people within that society. I believe that people are capable of creating their own moral guidelines, it just depends on their own strength and/or confidence whether or not they are able to stick to their own morals, rather than the morals that everyone else accepts, simply BECAUSE they are widely accepted morals.
I do believe that people are influenced heavily by those around them as well as their religion or how they were raised, but at the end of the day, people can make their own decisions.
Morals that are mandated by society result in both positive and negative consequences. These morals ultimately create a mold in which all members of society are expected to abide by. This is good because it creates a base for organization within society, such as law enforcement. Certain expectations are in made, not in the place of laws, but as reinforcement to the laws society has set. These prior expectations woven into everyday life influence society as a whole, and allow people to differentiate between right and wrong more easily. By providing guidelines, it creates a sense of peer pressure among the people of society, which makes people, feel more obligated to follow the rules and not break from the mold created by these morals.
ReplyDeleteHowever, these morals have a negative impact as well. With these expectation set into place, there is a loss of individual morals. This suppression restricts a person’s own view on what is right and wrong, which could manipulate a sensible opinion an individual has, even if it is more rational than the opinions of society overall. This also makes it harder to voice one’s opinion for fear of being rejected by society if an individual’s own personal morals betray those of society.
I like your points about peer pressure and rejection.
DeletePeer pressure helps instill good morals, but it could also be a negative effect in the sense that people may lose their individuality as a side effect of being pressured into going against their own will.
Fear of rejection is also a big conflict because fear itself is a very poisonous feeling. It is not only caused by difficult circumstances but can also create difficult situations. Having no voice can be intimidating, and fearing rejection from a whole society amplifies the intimidation one may feel when being forced to confine to a set of morals.
The benefits of mandating a set of moral ideologies includes a structure or order of some sort to society, it also distinguishes between right from wrong, and helps to avoid conflict, confrontation, and chaos within a community. However, some complications may include reasons such as taking away from a person's own rights to their identity, individuality, expressing one's self, and diversity within society. Moral ideologies are important because they provide a stable foundation and create the notion of common sense (right from wrong) to avoid chaos.
ReplyDeleteYou make good points Haley. I agree that having a set of moral ideologies helps create order in societies. I like how you pointed out that it avoids chaos within a community, because if there were no expectations for how people were to behave, there would be a lot of disorder, between people as well, as you said, conflict and confrontation.
DeleteWhen society mandates a set of moral beliefs for everyone to follow, some problems can arise concerning individual freedoms. Since the moral ideologies will most likely represent those of the majority, (assuming it’s a democratic society) the minority would be left out. This can arise due to, most commonly, when religious beliefs dictate the moral ideologies of a society. In this case, the people who don’t agree with that religion would be left out, as what happened in England that made the Puritans come to America. In the Puritan colony, not everyone agreed with their moral beliefs, and this caused them to have to leave the community in order to stay true to their selves. On the other hand, a set of moral ideologies can have some benefits to society, including promoting order, with everyone following the same moral guidelines.
ReplyDeleteI agree with your viewpoints of how our morals represent the majority, and in today's world this idea is true in many countries, because even though the minority is their it is only a small amount of the population. If a society or country were to side with the ideologies of the minority what will most likely result is the loss of power by the majority or general chaos of its people, in which everyone is trying to fight for what they believe the morals of society should be thus further limiting both the majority's and the minority's abilities for their own personal freedoms.
DeleteI agree with you when you say that the moral ideologies in today's society arise from religious beliefs. Most things that cultures today believe as "the right thing to do" can be reflected in the core of their religion, while other religions may not support these morals. However, I do not believe that morals can be "mandated" within a society. If morals are just idologies within a society, how can you force everyone to believe the same thing? I believe that morals are something that you would just mandate within yourself; they are the rules you live by.
DeleteI agree. Moral ideologies dictated by religion, while promoting order, can lead to problems concerning individualism and personal beliefs.
DeleteThe consequences of mandating a set of morals can be that the viewpoints of the individual are erased. People will not truly say express their beliefs due to fear of the majority. These morals due set a balanced society in which peoples viewpoints will be very similar which reduces conflict.
ReplyDeleteI agree with you that the viewpoints of the individual are erased as a consequence of mandating a set of morals in society. When society mandates a set of morals, people's personal beliefs and values are disregarded. I also like how you point out that that people might not truly express their beliefs due to the fear of majority, I think we all can relate to this at some point in our lives. Although I don't support kind of suppression, I see how it might reduce social conflicts and set a balanced society.
DeleteI agree with you, Dani. The fact that these set expectations change people, because they constantly fear how society will view them. Also, they fear the consequences, and judgement that may follow if they follow through with something that may be moral to them, but immoral to society.
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteIn a society with set morals, there is limited individualism. People cant chose what they want to believe or stnad for in that type of society. It also doesnt allow people express their beliefs or aggree/disagree with others, its just a set code of law. It is critical for people to develope their own sense of right and wrong if we want society to function. It limits people to expand their beliefs an morals. It's an attempt tp creat this "perfect" utopian society, which has never worked throughout history
ReplyDeleteI really like what you're saying here. It's short and to the point, but it doesn't leave out any important details. I also think that its really great that you made that connection from the controlling of one's morals to a utopian society because I do believe, in a sense, that that's true. If you try to control how people thing then it's basically controlling how everything's going to be, otherwise there would be small amounts of chaos.
DeleteThe benefits of society mandating a set of moral ideologies is that it helps provide a base for the society. If there were no moral codes in society, the society would be chaotic and disordered. The moral ideologies promote a respect based on integrity. When people know the codes, they follow them and try to understand what is expected of them. It creates an atmosphere of trust and responsibility. For example, some main moral codes are the Ten Commandments in the Torah, the Gospel of Luke in the Christian Bible, and Five Pillars of Islam. All these create a society with peace and respect for one another. They give a distinct way of living life and show how to be responsible with your life. These codes distinguish what’s wrong and right in the society by the standards of behavior to what kind of character you are. These codes make the people get along easier and make them feel the same in status because they all have to follow the same moral codes. However, these codes can be a complication of society because the codes take away the person’s uniqueness and freedom. Society members can’t do things without letting people butt into their business. Thus, these moral codes create a peaceful bond with the members of society.
ReplyDeleteI like how you said that morals unify a society, but I also agree with Ben and Amanda, strict social codes can lead to disunity in a society.
ReplyDeleteWith societies mandating moral ideologies it gives assurances that the people living in the society have rules that keep order and a set of guide’s lines determining what is right or wrong. Not allowing people to see any action as right or wrong but being taught and showed that there are a certain set of rules that all people must follow in order to have order with in the society for the morals teach and instill order within the people to cut down on any chaotic actions. The down side is the morals are based on those who originally put down the morals that would guide the society and these goals may become outdated or may be bigoted to a certain group of people. As more generations also become introduced to these morals it can become more difficult to remove due to its growth into tradition. The benefits and consequences of societies depend on who made then, if they can adapt, and if they push for equality.
ReplyDeleteThe benefits for mandating a set of moral ideologies within society are that they allow the society to establish a standard for how to act withing a certain environment thus giving it order and organization. If a society had no order then it would not survive. Morals give individuals a sort of guideline on how to behave and restrict their actions because individuals would not like to upset the social standards and be looked down upon. However, this greatly restricts an individual's ability to express him or herself because since society holds certain standards their believes are molded to fit with society even though it might not be what the individuals true opinion which is one complication that arises from society setting these morals. Another complication would be that as people grow up within these morals set by society their own believes are suppressed and causes them to restrict themselves to what ever the society views as right and wrong.
ReplyDeleteI agree with everything you said and I like how you spoke about how people who grow up under these standards are suppressed. I'd never thought about the people who grow up with these set morals until I read your post!
DeleteI also like how you said that "[i]f a society had no order then it would not survive," because it's very true and it's a simple statement that actually means a lot.
Moral ideologies imposed on societies are often based on an established religion or the traditional beliefs -- social codes that determine what should or shouldn't be done-- of a civilization, and certain actions are widely accepted by the public as either moral or immoral. Individuals are expected to behave in accordance with these mandated 'rules' on social conduct, and if they don't, they are judged or criticized by those who choose to adhere to the rules. Such ideologies can be beneficial by creating order and harmony within a society, but can also potentially lead to conflicts as a result of disputes over what is morally wrong or right. People have differing views on morality depending on their personal beliefs, but they often suppress these beliefs in order to avoid suffering the negative consequences of breaking societal 'laws' -- defying them could be considered reprehensible. Questioning or challenging these laws can lead to chaos, as elucidated by the various revolts and rebellions throughout history. Forcing individuals to conform to rules on what is socially acceptable can cause them to lose some of their individualism and abandon their own unique ideas on morality ; however, if these rules were completely ignored, anarchy would ensue.
ReplyDeleteI like how you pointed out how that mandated or widley accepted morals can cause people to fear being judged by their opposing views. I beleive that many of these revolts and rebellons have ended with positive consequences, many try to avoid these rebellions and revolts because of the fear of chaos which is why society leans to one direction of the majority.
DeleteMoral ideologies in society create benefits in many different ways. The most important being that these morals create order and structure as it distinguishes what is right from wrong. However with this being said people now can be restricted to certain things they feel they can stand up too. For example if a person feels a certain way about something they should be able to speak their mind about it but with these morals it restricts the ability to speak your mind because people and society may judge you.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteSocieties that have a set of moral ideologies, are beneficial in that they create order, structure, and fixed expecations for members in the community. These morals explain what is viewed as immoral or moral in society, which help keep society in place, and to avoid disorder. Basic morals set by society are to not lie, steal, cheat etc., however many individuals end up making decisions based on what they feel is right, not what society expects or believes is moral. The downside to having a set of morals in a community, is that it significantly affects individualism and the rights humans have to make their own decisions and opinions as to what they believe is right and wrong. In tight knit comminuties, such as Puritan communities, individuals are far too concerned with how society views them, that they have lost their sense of individuality and ability to decide things on their own.
ReplyDelete