Why do humans need ethics, anyway?

[2ndRateMind]

So, it's a deep question.

It's prompted by my continuing quest to unite the three or four philosophical approaches to ethics, they being rule, character, outcome and (possibly) situation.

I'd be interested in all your takes on this. On the face of it, each individual would be better off without any ethics at all, since they could then pursue their interests and ambitions without any let or hindrance from what they ought to do. On the other hand, if we were all that selfish, society might suffer.

Is ethics then, nothing more than the righteous balance of interests between the individual and society? And if it is, then who gets to decide what is righteous, and on what reasoning do they justify that decision?

Cheers, 2RM.

[Divine Insight]

So, it's a deep question.

It's not really deep at all. In fact, you answered your own question in the OP:

I'd be interested in all your takes on this. On the face of it, each individual would be better off without any ethics at all, since they could then pursue their interests and ambitions without any let or hindrance from what they ought to do. On the other hand, if we were all that selfish, society might suffer.

That's your answer right there. Humans are a socially dependent species. Sure, some individuals can go off and live a solitary life, but the problem is that they wouldn't fair very well doing that. Especially in terms of ever achieving any major technological advances such as the science of medicine and building hospitals, etc.

In short, a solitary hermit who has chosen to go off and live on their own would quickly die with the first threatening illness or accident. So they lose the major benefit of being a "social species". In this way being "selfish" doesn't really pay off at all. And if they continue to socialize with even a few other humans, then they are still participating in a "society". Albeit a small one.

So this answers your question of "Why Socialism?"

Is ethics then, nothing more than the righteous balance of interests between the individual and society? And if it is, then who gets to decide what is righteous, and on what reasoning do they justify that decision?

We really don't need to even talk about concepts such as "righteousness". Ethics can be based entirely on practical considerations for what contributes to the society as a whole.

Now here is where I have to agree that it does get a bit complication. This is because we cannot ignore the fact that a society is made up of individuals. Therefore the happiness of each individual is also of interest to the society as a whole.

Therefore, as a society, we need to take into consideration the needs, and desires of the individuals that make up the society. As well as taking into consideration the health and well-being of the society as a whole.

It would make very little sense for a society to create rules of ethics that make life miserable for every individual within the society. After all, if every individual within the society is miserable, then the society as a whole is going to also be miserable.

So we can't ignore the needs and desires of individuals when arguing what we think might be good for the society as a whole. It's all linked together. A society cannot exist if it's not made up of a group of individuals.

So the needs and desires of the individual cannot be separated from the society as a whole as though these represent two totally independent or separate things.

Therefore the best approach to creating ethical rules for a society is to take into consideration all of the individuals within the society.

Having said the above, clearly there will be things that individuals may want to do that would be dangerous to the society as a whole. For example, if one individual wants to just be able to kill anyone within the society just because he or she doesn't approve of that person, then this would create a problem for other individuals within the society.

So clearly there are going to need to be discussions and evaluations of what individual behaviors should be permitted versus outlawed.

But you can't just create an imaginary dichotomy where you try to entirely separate the needs and desires of individuals from the needs and desires of the society as a whole, because the society is a collection of individuals. Therefore the individuals have to matter. If the individuals don't matter, then neither can the society as a whole matter.

[Wootah]

[Replying to post 1 by 2ndRateMind]

Ethics is probably a mask for fear but no one wants to admit to being afraid.

So rather than saying i have a fear of being caught stealing we say we are too moral to steal.

So ethics serrves a useful social function of covering our nakedness.

[Divine Insight]

So rather than saying i have a fear of being caught stealing we say we are too moral to steal.

You seem to be making a major assumption here. You appear to be assuming that anyone would steal if they simply thought they could get away with it. As if that it the only possible reason why someone wouldn't steal.

From my perspective that simply doesn't apply. I have actually found valuable things, including wallets containing lots of money. I could have kept them. In fact, I could have even kept them proclaiming that this isn't even stealing. I could simply claim "Losers weepers finders keepers" and have no fear of being caught for "stealing".

Even in terms of a God, I could argue that this wasn't "stealing", I simply found something of value that someone else had lost.

Yet I always make every effort to return anything of value I find to the rightful owner.

As far as purposefully stealing something from someone, I simply have no desire to do that at all. So, for me, it has absolutely nothing at all to do with a fear of getting caught.

In fact, I know of things I could steal right now where the chances of getting caught are extremely slim. In short, if I wasn't caught in the actual act, I would never be caught. And the chances that I would be caught in the act are themselves extremely small. None the less, I don't rush off to steal those things.

I would rather obtain my possessions honestly. Not so I can brag about being a moral person, but simply because I can feel good about the things I own because I know I came by them honestly.

What's wrong with wanting to be an honest person?

You seem to be suggesting that no one would ever be an honest person if they thought they could get away with being dishonest without being caught.

I just don't buy into that assumption. It's certainly not true for me. An

[Divine Insight]

So rather than saying i have a fear of being caught stealing we say we are too moral to steal.

You seem to be making a major assumption here. You appear to be assuming that anyone would steal if they simply thought they could get away with it. As if that is the only possible reason why someone wouldn't steal.

From my perspective that simply doesn't apply. I have actually found valuable things, including wallets containing lots of money. I could have kept them. In fact, I could have even kept them proclaiming that this isn't even stealing. I could simply claim "Losers weepers finders keepers" and have no fear of being caught for "stealing".

Even in terms of a God, I could argue that this wasn't "stealing", I simply found something of value that someone else had lost.

Yet I always make every effort to return anything of value I find to the rightful owner.

As far as purposefully stealing something from someone, I simply have no desire to do that at all. So, for me, it has absolutely nothing at all to do with a fear of getting caught.

In fact, I know of things I could steal right now where the chances of getting caught are extremely slim. In short, if I wasn't caught in the actual act, I would never be caught. And the chances that I would be caught in the act are themselves extremely small. None the less, I don't rush off to steal those things.

I would rather obtain my possessions honestly. Not so I can brag about being a moral person, but simply because I can feel good about the things I own because I know I came by them honestly.

What's wrong with wanting to be an honest person?

You seem to be suggesting that no one would ever be an honest person if they thought they could get away with being dishonest without being caught.

I just don't buy into that assumption. It's certainly not true for me. And I would hope that I'm not alone in that.

[Wootah]

[Replying to post 4 by Divine Insight]

I would hope you are not alone in your assertion. I expect most people to respond with indignation as you have.

Just wait until hard times come and then lets see who believes in stealing?

[Divine Insight]

[Replying to post 4 by Divine Insight]

I would hope you are not alone in your assertion. I expect most people to respond with indignation as you have.

Just wait until hard times come and then lets see who believes in stealing?

You had previously said,

So rather than saying i have a fear of being caught stealing we say we are too moral to steal.

So are you now saying that this only applies to people who are facing extreme desperation in a totally hopeless situation?

[Wootah]

[Replying to post 6 by Divine Insight]

It seems obvious what i mean. Hard times will expose my point more clearly.

[Divine Insight]

[Replying to post 6 by Divine Insight]

It seems obvious what i mean. Hard times will expose my point more clearly.

I don't think so. In fact, if hard times is what requires your point to stand, then you don't have much of a point at all.

And besides, what are you even calling "Hard Times"?

I've been living well under the poverty level in the USA for more than a decade. On top of the poverty level income, I'm also deeply in debt which takes over 2/3 of my poverty level income every month.

Most Americans would consider my current situation to be extremely "hard times". Especially anyone who is living in a "middle class" situation.

Yet I have absolutely no intention of stealing anything.

So exactly how desperate does a person need to be before they qualify for your asserted proposition?

What's your definition of "Hard Times"?

Can you be more precise?

I wouldn't be motivated to steal until I found myself homeless on the street. And even then I would only steal food and whatever else I needed to survive. And only that after I had exhausted every possible social service available, including possibly finding employment.

In fact, if I was that "desperate" I would actually want to be caught and thrown in jail so I could be guaranteed housing and free meals.

Keep in mind, your assertion was that people refrain from stealing because they have a fear of being caught. If I was as "desperate" as you require I would actually want to be caught and thrown in jail. That would be better than being homeless on the street.

[Wootah]

[Replying to post 8 by Divine Insight]

Clearly poverty in 2018 is a lot better than other times.

As i said ethics covers our nakedness. You cloth yourself in ethics