Developing systems of morality, outside of religious influence.

[Kookaburra]

---

Wasn’t sure if this should go here or in the philosophy section, but here goes.

Basically, one of the biggest things I’ve had trouble with since leaving Christianity is justifying my actions.  Before, when I needed to make an ethical decision, I would rely on the bible to tell me what to do.  Or, if that failed, I’d ask someone more educated in the bible than me, and they’d tell me the “best” interpretation.

Now, I’m aware that the bible isn’t any better of an ethical system than anything else humans have come up with - probably worse, in a number of ways, seeing as it allows all kinds of things I would, at least in a gut response, see as atrocities.  However, at least from the point of view of the people inside of their religion, they have a rock solid starting point.

I guess I’ve got my “shoulds” mixed up nowadays.  I come to an argument on whether or not someone should do something or not do something(abortion, animal rights, lgbtq rights, racism, etc), and it seems like the best I have to contribute is “I personally like/don’t like that idea”.  I’m aware that there are a number of different moral systems that aren’t necessarily religious(hedonism, utilitarianism, Kant’s theory, etc.), but I don’t feel at all qualified to just pick one arbitrarily and run with it.  Would it ultimately be an emotion-based decision, going with the one that just makes me feel better about myself?

So anyways, for a TL;DR: how do each of you, personally, approach ethics?  Do you adopt a certain system, or do you use a more cobbled together way of approaching things?  How does one feel justified in applying their belief system to the world, if there’s no divine objectivity backing them up?

---

I'm afraid this might be a trap but here goes anyway.

So anyways, for a TL;DR: how do each of you, personally, approach ethics?

I think the goal of the best possible well-being for everyone and avoidance of the worst possible misery of everyone, is good.

How does one feel justified in applying their belief system to the world, if there’s no divine objectivity backing them up?

Who else is there to apply it?  I feel justified because I am the only one who can do it.

Not a trap, I promise.  I’m genuinely interested in gaining knowledge on the topic.

Why is avoidance of misery “good”?  I mean, on the surface, yeah, I get it of course.  And I have a similar way of thinking about things on a day to day basis - personally, I would prefer that no sentient being living on the same planet with me has to suffer.  At least not needlessly.  But on a deeper level, what makes an action good vs bad, if anything?  Is it someone’s personal feelings on the subject?

---

Personally, I try to do what is best for other people and animals. I don't use any particular system rigidly, I think through each situation on its own merits. I draw up a pro and con list, often mentally if it's not a huge decision, and weigh it up. There's no formula, not even one I could prescribe for myself.

I aim for the situation where I can justify my actions, by explaining my thought processes, at least to myself. Of course, not everyone will agree with my conclusions. They may have weighed things differently. But my conscience tells me whether I've made the most effort I can to be moral.

For rules of thumb, I don't do anything to other people/animals that I wouldn't want them to do to me; and if I can help, then I do.

There is no objective system, as you're now learning. Anyone can just claim their particular system is "the right one", but that's completely pointless. If we can all at least agree that we want to look after each other, then that's a great starting point.

(I have a video where I go into more detail, if you're interested.)

Bold mine - yeah sure!  Hit me up.