What incentive is there to do the right thing?

[Betteralone]

Personally, I believe we are born with a sense of right and wrong period. Like the unknown tribes when we discover them, they have formed their own set of rules and accepted behaviors, which can only come from innate sense.

Of course we have all either followed that sense, or desensitized ourselves to it.

 

[Jack]

I believe there is a right and wrong, and many people who would argue there isn't belie their very words by holding moral positions. Incentives are great motivation to act, but they don't necessarily hold a fundamental place in the distinction of what is right and wrong. Presumably how one acts when no one is looking is in some sense the real character of a person. In terms of virtue ethics, the incentive would be that one is developing their self. It, I suppose can be an issue of self-respect, and knowing who you are really. That seems like decent incentive to me.

 

[On my own path]

Incentives are overrated.

Do you really need one to do the right thing?

I believe there is a right and wrong, and many people who would argue it doesn't belie their very words by holding moral positions. Incentives are great motivation to act, but they don't necessarily hold a fundamental place in the distinction of what is right and wrong. Presumably how one acts when no one is looking is in some sense the real character of a person. in In terms of virtue ethics, the incentive would be that one is developing their self. It, I suppose can be an issue of self-respect, and knowing who you are really. That seems like decent incentive to me.

I agree with the above. However I do believe that development of one's self is a good incentive. Of course, then there may be an incentive for that and so on ad infinitum

 

[kyo]

if no one is looking, if no one cares? if the recipient of your good act doesn't appreciate it, or is offended by it?

Love for all that has life. That's good enough for me to do the right thing, that is, what is right in my subjective perspective.

what's the point of morals if you can't always stick to them? and if right and wrong are purely subjective then what's stopping you from dictating your own sense of right and wrong, and acting according to it? is it wrong to conduct yourself in a manner that you've consciously chosen rather than one that seems appropriate according to the culture and traditions that you've been brought up in? :| IF your morals don't align with those of your peers, isn't it more than likely that you are in the wrong?

I'd say that culture and surroundings has a great impact on morals and this somewhat determines what's right and wrong in a given context. So you are asking if one is wrong when standing out from the surroundings that is trying to teach individuals rights and wrongs?
So, what if the one not aligning is smarter than all the others, knows whats right and also knows that the rest is wrong even when they believe they are right, does that make one wrong? I don't think so.

I am thinking morals as some sort of guidelines and not rules and laws. Thus the morals are not what people are judged by. Though, some laws and morals are shared.

 

[rbecca23]

To me, morals are absolute -- but in a different sense then you might think. Morality is a system designed to contribute to the happiness of a given society, and can be measured in the happiness of all people of that given scope (where the scope is a given society or even the entire world). And can be measured by the amount of gain/loss of the parties interacting with each other.

Morals help. To me morality is trust based, if you do a moral thing you often contribute to improving the quality of life of others (where the impact of your gesture was greater than the suffering/inconvenience you have assumed in making that gesture), assuming your gesture was well received, it can have a ripple effect causing others to 'pay it forward'.

I like your logic.

 

[Durandal]

Incentives are overrated.

Do you really need one to do the right thing?

I agree with the point you were making. But here's what I think - obviously, there is an incentive in doing the right thing. And it definitely is to further develop the self. However, I feel if you are conscious of this incentive, it may become a bad thing. If you are intentionally looking for an incentive as you do the righteous action, well, it might not be as righteous as if you were unconsciously doing it and then analyzing why you did it later such as on this board.

 

[GoofyGirl]

Integrity. If, when making a decision based on right or wrong, according to my own understanding of it, I chose what felt wrong, I would be going against myself. I would fragment, and this would have a ripple effect on every decision made afterwards - there would now be two voices - the one that knew right from wrong, and the one that experienced choosing wrong and the consequences of that. Things get complicated very fast if internal guidance isn't followed, and it's harder to pull yourself back together and regain integrity, than it is to stay true to yourself from the beginning. Empathic people have a hard time in this respect, as often, decisions are made based on what will cause the least pain to others, rather than what feels right for ourselves. Integriity, then, becomes a lost and longed for ideal.

I couldn't have said it better from my own lips. For me, it's an internal dialogue that I'm not always cognizant of. I know from experience what making wrong decisions results in, and for me, it becomes a physical phenomena - a weight in my chest from doing the "wrong" thing. Over time, it has developed into the ability to instinctively act without thought - without making a conscious decision to "do the right thing". I also avoid behaviors and situations that may put me in a position where I have to consciously "decide". I have a huge network of "work friends" but because of my position, I do not socialize with any of them outside the office, thus avoiding the conflict between my empathy and my integrity. Sometimes I feel my pattern of behavior is developed almost like muscle memory in an athlete.

 

[just me]

A clear conscious is to a healthy body
as
a summer's rain is to a crop in the field.

 

[Skathac]

if no one is looking, if no one cares? if the recipient of your good act doesn't appreciate it, or is offended by it?
what's the point of morals if you can't always stick to them? and if right and wrong are purely subjective then what's stopping you from dictating your own sense of right and wrong, and acting according to it? is it wrong to conduct yourself in a manner that you've consciously chosen rather than one that seems appropriate according to the culture and traditions that you've been brought up in? :| IF your morals don't align with those of your peers, isn't it more than likely that you are in the wrong?

I always try to act on what my conscience says is the right thing to do. Yes this is likely due to all my past experiences, what I've been taught by my folks, and things I've read. I've never traveled to another country, but I'd damn well be mindful of myself when encountering a culture I am not familiar with. I feel that most of the problems that crop up in this world are from pesky outsiders meddling in things they do not understand.

I really don't care either way if no one cares that I did the right thing. I appreciate a thank you if offered and I'll shrug off harsh words. Peers can be wrong just as easily as you can, in this listen to your heart and your conscience...they'll see you through.

 

[aeon]

What incentive is there to do the right thing?

Inasmuch as we each have a system within the brain that leads to pleasure and pain, and that we associate "rightness" with those things pleasureable, and "wrongness" with those things painful, and that we tend to seek pleasure, and seek to avoid pain, our incentive is the experience of pleasure, as experienced on multiple levels of awareness*, to do that which we judge as "right."

* said pleasure could be physical sensation, positive emotion, satisfying thought, and a state of grace, whereas said pain could be an unpleasant feeling, negative emotion, disturbing thought, sense of disconnection with the self and/or others.

What incentive is there to do the right thing if no one is looking, if no one cares?

The incentive is the same as I outlined above. That said, if the sole source of pleasure for a given person is the knowing that someone external witnesses and values their choice of action, then indeed, there would be no incentive to do that thing judged "right" if there was no witness and no valuation.

What incentive is there to do the right thing if the recipient of your good act doesn't appreciate it, or is offended by it?

None, if the sole source of pleasure for a given person is the receipt of appreciation/positive valuation of their choice of action from a recipient of that action.

what's the point of morals if you can't always stick to them?

If by morals, you mean a system or framework that judges a certain class of actions as "right," and another class as "wrong," I think the point is that it acts as a guide that may help us in regards to seeking that which is pleasurable. We, of course, are living things whose perspective and situation changes moment to moment - the value of such a system or framework will necessarily change as we change perspective and our situation changes.

and if right and wrong are purely subjective then what's stopping you from dictating your own sense of right and wrong, and acting according to it?

Nothing whatsoever, and indeed, it is all any of us can do.

is it wrong to conduct yourself in a manner that you've consciously chosen rather than one that seems appropriate according to the culture and traditions that you've been brought up in? :|

I value conscious choice, so I wouldn't judge it as wrong, and for that matter, I value not judging it at all, but others with different values may choose otherwise.

Consider too that one's conscious choice of conduct may align well with the culture and its traditions. Part of that conscious choice may involve the consideration and valuation of the expectations of others.

IF your morals don't align with those of your peers, isn't it more than likely that you are in the wrong?

Only to oneself if one chooses to judge oneself that way, and only to others if they choose to judge you as wrong.

That said, they don't know intimately what is right or wrong for you, just as you don't know it for any of them, so how can anyone judge another in such a moral fashion?


cheers,
Ian

 

[muir]

I think what aeon is saying is very interesting, about the brains reward system. The brain giving dopamine when it is happy for example

I watched 'child of our time' last night on BBC iplayer. If you haven't heard of it it is a programme that takes a bunch of kids and their parents and follows their development over a period of time. It is particularly concerned with personality

They conduct various tests to determine the effects of various personality traits. For example they got the risk takers together for one experiment. By risk takers i mean people whose brains give them a hit of dopamine when they take risks (internal reward for risk), and they gave them all balloons and told them whoever managed to blow their balloon up the biggest would win the prize, however they said if their balloon popped then they would get nothing.

So many went ahead and blew their ballooons up so much that they popped! The two people who won were found to be high in another trait: 'conscientiousness'. Their conscientiousness kind of acted as a brake on their ambition which stopped them overstepping the mark.

.....I'll get to the point of what i'm saying in a minute but just want to mention 2 more tests they did.

They gave a little girl who was low on 'agreeableness' a huge cookie and they sat her sister next to her and they gave her sister a tiny tiny cookie and the girl didn't even think of sharing her cookie with her sister! In fact when she couldn't eat anymore of her cookie she gave it back to the testers instead of giving it to her sister; when the tester then offered it to her sister she snatched it back and said angrily 'i will eat it later!'

They then tested people in a top London law firm to see what personality traits earned the highest amount of money (they called this 'success'...but i'll not go into that!). Anyway they found that the optimum earners were: Low in 'agreeableness', medium on 'extrovertism' and high on 'openess' (which i think is about openess to ideas and willingness to depart from rules)

Suddenly it becomes clear why so much goes wrong in the world, for example the banking crisis!

The people who push their way to the top are: extraverted, selfish, aggressive, risk takers!

The caring and sharing types are just shouldered out of the way and the pushy ruthless ones then shape society and they shape it in their image, leaving the rest feeling out of place in the world!

......just a theory!