Right or Wrong

I think right and wrong should be based somewhat around the laws of society, but I think there should be exceptions.
e.g. If you don't have money and need to eat, stealing is fine. If your in a war, killing is fine (as long as they are the guys trying to kill you).

If you have to do what society deems as wrong to survive I don't think its really wrong, once you start committing crimes even if you have the option not to, then it's wrong. (Doing it just because you feel like it or doing it for gain that you don't desperately need)

And because right and wrong are based around laws, there is no universal right or wrong. It will always be different depending on both time and place.

Yeah its all based on you as a person. What you "Feel" is "Right" and "Wrong"

but those themselves are just words, Ethic's, Morality.

Its all based on who you are as an individual. It has to do with peoples upbringings, mental state. And lots of other elements.

Some people think things that feel "Pleasurable" must be "good"

things that people don't understand or don't want must be "bad"

though everything is based on certain situations.

Right is what society wants...wrong is what society hates

right is stereotyped some ethnic as greedy, cheap, briber, corruptor is that so? I have fought against this Idea for so long. Whatever your society told you, some Idea cannot labeled as Right or wrong. you shouldn't give up to some society rule. I had face this dilemma for long. especially godamn bribery. shit I wanna puke on their face

as for me right or wrong is what your God told so. Even if against rule of society. I would not back down. except for some lewd stuff like hentai(I'm Addicted to sex)
the good news is Poligamy and lolis is legal. YES

Morality (in a narrower sense) is a huge topic, but i will try to put it in a nutshell.

First of all: Philosophy and "opinions" wont answer this topic, since its far too spongy the way you approach it.

However, if sponginess and philosophy is what you are looking for, you should start reading "groundwork of the metaphysic of morals" by Kant, on the topic of the categorical imperative. Kant states that weather an action is morally right or wrong, depends on weather its initiator did it because of his wanting (the maxime), or because he thinks it is universally "right". This "right" is therefore a synthetic judgment a priori, called the categorical imperative. Kant's concept on morality is very similar to stoicism, which he probably deducted it from.

These views on morale sounded very plausible 300 (2000 respectively) years ago. However, from the nowadays perspective of natural science, morality as an absolute value does not exist. It is basically a mechanism of intelligent life to support DNA that is similar to its own (and support itself that way).

F.e.: If your tribe is in war with other tribes, it would be not immoral to kill other tribe's members. If mankind was at war with Martians, it would not be immoral to kill Martians. But if both were threatened by a Supernova of the Sun, they would work together. If you see a capybara fighting with an anaconda for his life, who do you root for? For the mammal of course, although in behavior we would have more similarities with the snake.

Morality means simply that selfishness in a broader sense is sociality.

Complex beings like Humans have a more complex understanding of morality; f.e. its unmoral to beat your children at young age since it can traumatize them, but a Goldfish-parent beating his children would be indifferent.

And really, masturbating to porn, or running around naked has nothing to do with morality - it only harms obsolete codes of behavior.

Seems that everyone agrees; Morality is based on Society.

Need ANYONE say more?

I obviously disagree, read my post again.

I've always enjoyed the musing of Nietzsche on such topics:

"What is new, however, is always evil, being that which wants to conquer and overthrow the old boundary markers and the old pieties; and only what is old is good. The good men are in all ages those who dig the old thoughts, digging deep and getting them to bear fruit - the farmers of the spirit. But eventually all land is depleted, and the ploughshare of evil must come again and again."

"What is good? All that heightens the feeling of power in man, the will to power, power itself. What is bad? All that is born of weakness. What is happiness? The feeling that power is growing, that resistance is overcome."

I do apologize. >_>

i think it was from hamlet, and i'm surely misquoting, "there is no such thing as right or wrong, only thinking makes it so".

I believe right or wrong exist. Just not in all situations.

no right or wrong, all perception...

how and where you're brought up heavily impacts your views...
u kno, all that moral and ethics stuff they brainwash you in school.

There Morally and Ethically right and wrong.

Then again everyone makes opinions themselves based on personal experience or critical thinking.

Though I think Morality has to do with the societies eye or how your raise. Which of course can go any which way across the dashboard. While Ethic's have to do whats legally right or wrong. I don't know if I'm right.

But in all it all depends on the situation.

so if you wanna rich and happy (probably always right) don't go to school

My face when half the people in this thread need a lesson in morality.

Side question:

Is it morally wrong to take the life of one healthy person in order to save the lives of 20 or more sick people?

human rights were a) established by the strong and b) are highly subjective.
The meaning of good and bad is highly dependent on perspective. Most people agree that killing people is bad. In some US states, the law permits it to kill people for crimes. Ask people if they find that good or bad and you will get different opinions from different people.
A battered woman kills her abusive husband, good or evil?
A poor guy steals because he or his child would starve otherwise, good or evil?

well, different places and government have lots of different views that they try to force upon you, like communism or democracy

Isn't that exactly the opposite of objective? Or am I missing something again? -_-

In my little head the reasons why stuff is right or wrong (just like all the other things people do) are nicely divided into three groups:

1. Biological. The attributes that evolution has favoured. Be nice to other people or they kick your ass.
2. Effect of the environment. Said so many times it makes you yawn. Parents, media, school and whatnot.
3. Individual reasoning. It's a bit strange to put separated as it's own, cause it's the combination of the first two; biology and environment colliding. But I think it's still worth of saying, since it seems to be the reason why the views over morality chance.

I'm always right usually everyone else is wrong.

right or wrong....all I believe in is my morals, values and conscience