WEEKEND TICKETS GOING FAST!

PRICES GO UP AT THE GATE

PURCHASE TICKET
Good Governance and Moral Character
3929 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
22 / F / My body lives in...
Offline
Posted 5/11/08 , edited 8/27/08
What do you think of "Good Governance and Moral Character"? Is it more like the chicken or the egg thing?
Moreover this is a general thread on good governance so discussion on it is encouraged and may be posted. .
1056 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
27 / M / Irvine, CA
Offline
Posted 5/11/08
I wouldn't really say so. Moral character is something innate that a person initially has, but making good judgment and morals etc. is what builds upon that character? I hope that makes sense.
12079 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
25 / location location...
Offline
Posted 5/11/08
Well you've got to have good governance to differentiate right from wrong. You've got to know whether something is right before learning from it and exhibiting moral values....Good governance's the egg
2711 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
26 / F / Philippines
Offline
Posted 5/11/08
Moral Character is the ability of a person to discern right from wrong or the ability to act according to one's conscience... Good Governance is the willingness of the leader to act out a certain plan for the good of those people entrusted to him... A person needs to be morally driven in order to be a good leader... so yeah... it's like the chicken and the egg thing...
1433 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
29 / M / New York
Offline
Posted 5/12/08
Morality is an empty term.

Basic laws were developed in the beginning to allow for a society. As numbers grew, technology improved, and new concepts emerged, the laws grew in complexity to what we have today. What we deem "morality" emerged primarily out of the need for strong, reliable socialization via institutions; whether religion was formed to control the masses in this way or simply came into being and united with the law is of little consequence at this point.

Insofar as "moral character" is a false concept or is dependent upon regulations for social order, "good governance" came first.
139 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
23 / F / Narnia
Offline
Posted 5/17/08
Good Governance is the upkeep of one's ethical policies...
I suppose you could have a good "Moral Character," but not do anything to help people.
139 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
23 / F / Narnia
Offline
Posted 5/17/08

Mr_T wrote:
You mean there could be a norm that is socially accepted in a particular place that could be their standard which could be below par from other standards?


Well, yeah. Some cultures do things regularly like infanticide and cannibalism...

Some places are told by their governent to tattle on anyone who is a criminal, regardless of their relationship with that person. In America, I don't think someone would out their friends. We just have a different moral code, I guess. But even in those societies there are people who think differently... I suppose that's an example of "moral character." "Good governance" is taught, but "moral character" isn't.
2711 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
26 / F / Philippines
Offline
Posted 5/18/08

Mr_T wrote:


Milia_ wrote:

Moral Character is the ability of a person to discern right from wrong or the ability to act according to one's conscience... Good Governance is the willingness of the leader to act out a certain plan for the good of those people entrusted to him... A person needs to be morally driven in order to be a good leader... so yeah... it's like the chicken and the egg thing...


What if we separate Good Governance and Moral Character?


i think these two go hand in hand... one can't be of much significance without the other... good governance without morals is equal to exploitation while morals alone is stupidity...well that's just for me...
3580 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
25 / M / Somewhere.... Out...
Offline
Posted 5/18/08
Cooperation of both is the BEST!
1433 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
29 / M / New York
Offline
Posted 5/18/08

Mr_T wrote:

You mean there could be a norm that is socially accepted in a particular place that could be their standard which could be below par from other standards?


Well, that's true, but it's not what I was trying to say. What I meant was that basic morality is directly connected to government, since allowing murder and theft is not conducive to functional society. Other rules, whether actual laws or simply social norms, developed as societies grew in complexity. Over time, people either lost sight of the meaning of the laws and that we could arrive at them through reason or came to think they were natural, so religion emerged as an institution to back rules up with notions of good, evil, and absolute. Unfortunately, many people today now believe that religion is the source of all of our rules despite the fact that it is quite easy to imagine rules developing through reason rather than divinity.
139 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
23 / F / Narnia
Offline
Posted 5/18/08
If communities are the ones who teach morality, then where did the belief of helping others originate?

Monkeys don't do that... they'll only help each other if both sides get something out of it.
1433 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
29 / M / New York
Offline
Posted 5/18/08 , edited 5/18/08

Pomegranates wrote:

If communities are the ones who teach morality, then where did the belief of helping others originate?

Monkeys don't do that... they'll only help each other if both sides get something out of it.


1.) I'm not sure what you mean by "the belief of helping others." Helping others is not necessarily connected to morality, since our ability to empathize with others and/or think rationally can move us to help them. As for a more social origin, I guess you could say that people were encouraged to think in terms of the group through the socialization they inevitably underwent by being born and raised in a community. And, again, if no one helped anyone, our society would collapse, so there's rational thought behind being not completely selfish, too.

2.) We should be careful about making statements about other animal groups, since it's hard to universalize based on our own, limited observations. Even if it were true, monkeys don't have the same intellectual capacity as humans, so it's fair to say that our advanced ability to reason creates many differences between our species.

3929 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
22 / F / My body lives in...
Offline
Posted 8/1/08

Regulus133 wrote:


Mr_T wrote:

You mean there could be a norm that is socially accepted in a particular place that could be their standard which could be below par from other standards?


Well, that's true, but it's not what I was trying to say. What I meant was that basic morality is directly connected to government, since allowing murder and theft is not conducive to functional society. Other rules, whether actual laws or simply social norms, developed as societies grew in complexity. Over time, people either lost sight of the meaning of the laws and that we could arrive at them through reason or came to think they were natural, so religion emerged as an institution to back rules up with notions of good, evil, and absolute. Unfortunately, many people today now believe that religion is the source of all of our rules despite the fact that it is quite easy to imagine rules developing through reason rather than divinity.


A good example is the Bible. It is quite basic and yet it is stern by the book or when in a convent. One could be good and bad then pray to remove the evil in oneself. The moral standard of a person may not be at par with the society but maybe tamed once in a religion and can be an outcast when in extreme. To maintain the law and order a law was passed with the concept of the bible as a source because it is a doctrine and it is being practiced since time immemorial .
You must be logged in to post.