Morality And Its Effect On Society

John, also known as John the Savage, is the son of Linda and his father, who are both members of Utopia. He was born and raised on the Savage Reservation. John is an outsider both on the Reservation - where the natives still practise marriage, natural birth, family life and religion - and the apparently civilised Brave New World: a totalitarian welfare-state based on principles of stability and happiness, even if it`s a happiness of a superficial and bland nature.

When we get into how society and people look at crime, it happens in every city, every neighborhood, people are victims every day, businesses, and even property. Crime dates back since colonization and the rates have varied over time, believe it or not, crime has decreased over the years. As a matter of fact, the United States has been on a decline. The crime rate for the year 2000 was a total of 11,608,072 a declining year in 2015 with a total of 9,225,197. (U.S. Department of Justice)

James Rachels' article, "Morality is Not Relative," is incorrect, he provides arguments that cannot logically be applied or have no bearing on the statement of contention. His argument, seems to favor some of the ideas set forth in cultural relativism, but he has issues with other parts that make cultural relativism what it is.

2. Morality is not static because morals refer to personal believes of right and wrong, as well as what one ought and ought not to do. Due to morality having a more personal connotation to it, it would be require not to be static. Each person deals with their own set of challenges and challenges change and adapt over time. Since challenges and individuals change over time, one might have to think that a person’s concept of morality would have to be just as dynamic in order to still complete its function.

Many people try to argue that there is not a moral decline going on. I have heard things such as, “the ratio of moral people and unmoral people is the same as fifty years ago; as the population grows the amount of moral and unmoral people grow too.” And what about “life around us is changing, we just have different priorties and values which determine our morals.” Everyone has their own idea of morality, what’s right and wrong and what is causing this moral decline, if there even is one.

In chapter 4 the chapter considers a variety of possible explanations for the significant drop in crime and crime rates that occurred in the 1990s. Based on articles that appeared in the country’s largest newspapers, the authors compile a list of the leading, commonly offered explanations. The next step is to systematically examine each explanation and consider whether available data support the explanation. What the authors, in fact, demonstrate is that in all but three cases–increased reliance on prisons, increased number of police, and changes in illegal drug markets–correlation was erroneously interpreted as causation and in some cases, the correlation wasn’t even that strong.

A study by the University of Chicago analyzed the most popular explanations, and decided that they could have only contributed to a small fraction of the decrease. The University of Chicago analyzed the top 10 leading news sources including the New York Times and USA Today and found that out of the different explanations that could have contributed to the crime drop, the traditional aspects (including a strong economy, more police officers, and a dying generation) were mentioned a total of 250 times, while the nontraditional aspects (including legalization of abortion, ‘hotspot’ patrolling, and an increased prison population) were mentioned a mere 34 times (Levitt). When tested, it is clear that the traditional means of decreasing crime are not the reasons as to why crime is decreasing this

The book Brave New World, is exactly what it sounds like. It is about a world that is completely different from our own. Author, Aldous Huxley, describes a world of Utopia where people are better off being immediately happy then with understanding the truth. This way of living is not typical and what we consider “normal” would be horrifying to the characters living in this other world. Throughout the novel, Huxley makes it evident by the way his characters live that instant satisfaction is more meaningful than life’s truths.

Friedrich Nietzsche’s “On the Genealogy of Morality” includes his theory on man’s development of “bad conscience.” Nietzsche believes that when transitioning from a free-roaming individual to a member of a community, man had to suppress his “will to power,” his natural “instinct of freedom”(59). The governing community threatened its members with punishment for violation of its laws, its “morality of customs,” thereby creating a uniform and predictable man (36). With fear of punishment curtailing his behavior, man was no longer allowed the freedom to indulge his every instinct. He turned his aggressive focus inward, became ashamed of his natural animal instincts, judged himself as inherently evil, and developed a bad conscience (46).

The link between morality and human nature has been a progressive reoccurring theme since ancient times (Prinz, 2008). Moral development is a characteristic of a person’s general development that transpires over the course of a lifetime. Moral development is derived by a wide variety of cultural and demographic factors that appear to influence morally relevant actions. Turiel (2006) defined morality as an individuals “prescriptive judgments of justice, rights, and welfare pertaining to how people ought to relate to each other.” Individuals’ moral judgments are frequently considered to be a product of culturally specific controls that provide a framework for behavioral motivations that are sensitive to the effects of gender, education, religion and politics (Banerjee, Huebner & Hauser, 2010). While several approaches have been utilized to examine the interaction of multivariate contributors to fundamental moral differences such as: disputes about family life, sexuality, social fairness, and so on, research has suggested that ideological considerations have provided a potent and diverse explanation for the polarization of contrasting views (Weber & Federico, 2013).

Morality only exists if we believe in God; therefore if God doesn’t exist there is no morality. There have been so many evil acts committed in the name of God that it is difficult to maintain that a belief in God equates to morality. There are situations that happen every day where decisions are made based off of human rights that contradict the word of God. Morality comes from within, it is an understanding of right versus wrong and the ability to choose what is right. Knowing all this a belief in God is not a requirement for a person to be moral. (Mosser, 2011)

Morality has been a term of debate for several years by intellectuals who have not come to the final conclusion of its definition. According to Damon (5), morality is an existing, multifaceted construct that may not be pinned down by any single definitional criteria which is flexible. The moral character has long been associated with happiness which is that state of having achieved one's desires although there are some disconnections. Several theories have been forwarded in connection to morality and happiness as far as the society is concerned. In this argumentative paper we shall give detailed analysis of morality and happiness and whether or not moral character is a requirement to happiness.

Societies have traditionally set up a system of laws that a culture learns to accept as the moral and just norm. Cultures and societies then learn right and wrong from this system of laws and rules and soon accept them as the moral truth. However, some individuals choose to side with innate morals of emotions and of nature, rather than the learned system of moral ‘truths’. These people would believe that there is no such thing as inherent good and evil in the world, as defined by law, that those labels are simply artificial constructs of their society. Right and wrong are so often determined by the people who hold positions of authority: that is the way it has always been so how then can anyone know the ‘truth’ of right and wrong or the ‘truth’ or morality? The world is, in fact, one big moral ‘grey area’; it cannot be carefully categorized into good and bad or good and evil as people would like it to be. Moral correctness cannot be as simple a matter of obeying the laws and rules set up by authority while ignoring one’s emotional and natural code of ethics. This idea of good and evil and of moral correctness is explored within Herman Melville’s novella, Billy Budd, Sailor. Captain Vere, who serves as the authority aboard the ship, Bellipotent, although believing he was upholding the proper morals of the situation at hand, from the view of the laws upon his ship and under the king and country he serves, made the morally wrong decision in sentencing Billy Budd, an ethically

government to make us believe that we were the good side while they were the bad

Some people believe our life is based off of morals, a belief of right/justification or wrong/ unjust. Living this way perceives their ways of the world by doing what they feel is good or bad or what is lead by their conscience regardless of religion. Others believe in religion, a feeling or act of faith, from God or “gods” ( Merriam-Webster). These acts motivated by faith and God/ “gods” provide a comprehension between choices, a choice given to all for all based off of a religious belief. In analyzing this presentation, it will show what the writer of this topic is trying to point out to the intended audience or its purpose, while conveying to the readers what morality and religion is.