Moral Worth

Society Religion & Philosophy
1

An act of altruism under the influence of;

  1. Intrinsically induced inclination
  2. Deductively acquired perception of responsibility, with or without
    any conception of corollary.
  3. Strictly under law, even thwarting genetic inclination.

which one of above carries more moral worth?

2

Re: Moral Worth

Peace IntelliPhant

I'm not entirely sure I understand the distinction of the above three points, but I would tend to say the option that is more cognisantly onerous is the option that carries greatest moral worth. A moral choice made outweighs a moral act with no choice in the matter.

3

Re: Moral Worth

I am sure you do understand, intrinsic inclination is place holder for congenital appetite; deductive logic is when you accept something on behalf of some one, obviousley perceived at much higher level of knowledge, faith, wisdom or intellect.
The word onerous puts your reply close to what many philosophers believed in when contemplating aout this issue. Your last statement, in generalized form, holds ground but opens the door for further discussion.

4

Re: Moral Worth

could it be, Intelliphant that moral actions bear nothing save their own satisfaction for having been carried out.?

5

Re: Moral Worth

Peace IntelliPhant and Dushwari

The way I see it is simply more than the dichotomy of reward based action to rewardless action.

Purpose, Virtue, Struggle

The moral act done for an immediate prize or caution from an immediate chastisement is what governs our faculty of purpose. The moral act done for no other reason than to satisfy an internal state of balance is what we call virtue, but for those people who follow a moral act when it could be a counter-intuitive action to make such as putting oneself in harms way to protect an innocent provided it is done with no other 'purpose' except pleasing Allah (SWT) is a great moral act.

Doing something for gaining recognition by our peers is called invisible shirk. It is like a black ant crawling on a black stone, on a moonless night. So Islamically an act done like this is not moral at all, because it is only done so one can be called moral.

Islamically furthermore it is not always immoral to do things in selfish nature, so long as the selfish aspect is rooted in something of the ghaib. This is probably because the reward is never immediate and by being selfish regarding Jannah it means one must have a strong enough faith to want it in that manner. It therefore further suggests that belief in the ghaib and doing good to obtain that is better than simply undertaking our function in accordance to a SENSE of right and wrong which lies in us all, fitrah. Purpose of the akhira supersedes purposelessness whereas purpose for the dunya cannot be better than purposelessness.

6

Re: Moral Worth

Peace IntelliPhant

Now I guess I understand your question.

1) Basic desire
2) Reason
3) Beside reason

Provided the moral learning is based on reason (i.e. save life, because) then it is more superior to act upon it even if it defies the immediate inclination for example self-preservation.

7

Re: Moral Worth

knowledge of one's affinity and consequent position is essential to hold dear then. for instance towards, Almighty.

8

Originally Posted by IntelliPhant

An act of altruism under the influence of;
1) Intrinsically induced inclination
2) Deductively acquired perception of responsibility, with or without
any conception of corollary.
3) Strictly under law, even thwarting genetic inclination.
which one of above carries more moral worth?

I don't think i would categorize (3) they way it is in the question. There is Altruism under law, e.g. in the form of taxes - a part of our taxes going toward global aid, as suggested by the 1% Strategy and similar concepts. This is very different from a genetic disposition to be charitable. So if I move this to (1), so the categories will be: (1) intrinsically induced inclination, genetic inclination (2) Deductively acquired perception of responsibility, with or without any conception of corollary and (3) strictly under law.

So, to attempt to answer your qs, i would say (3) isnt an act of individual altruism at all but by the government. That still has moral significance but perhaps not on a personal basis.
There is more inclination to believe that (1) and (2) holds the greatest moral significance, and it may seem so, but if someone were to just give x amount every month to charity A, but in the event of a world crisis, they do not give anything because they already give x every month, does that mean their act of giving to charity A is no longer morally significant? to answer this, there would need to be a better definition of what is "moral worth" and what you mean by "carrying moral worth"

So in true Philosophical manner, I think i've managed to be confusing....

9

To me, and of course to many others, it is hard to conceive an absolute “good” within, and perhaps beyond, this mortal world without qualification, except a good will. Intelligent creation like human has many characteristics like wisdom, wit, intrepidity, intellect and many others , are undoubtedly good but can be very mischievous if not accompanied with “good will”; in essence what constitutes character is not in the manifestation of the will but in will itself. And that perhaps answers Dushwari’s question; moral worth is not merely conditioned with the outcome of the actions, but a noble intention can stand any or every test to be accepted to uphold the highest moral worth. A good will is good not because of what it performs or effects, not by its aptness for the attainment of some proposed end, but simply by virtue of the volition; that is, it is good in itself, and considered by itself is to be esteemed much higher than all that can be brought about by it in favor of any inclination.

Having said that, I must also admit that a good will is a metaphysical entity therefore can not be measured other than in its manifestation. My initial question was not to measure moral worth in actions, not even in the outcome of actions but in that elapsed time that constitutes a delay in a “will” and its manifestation; the intellectual journey between a good/bad will and its manifestation is the journey of reasoning, rationale and justification*. Purpose, Virtue and Struggle* constitutes a phase where reason interacts with the will, a perfectly noble action with noble results might have been polluted with entirely selfish cognition, example of which can be found in a computer dealer who sells a computer to an ignorant person at the same price at which he would sell it to a very know ledged person; his action seemingly quite noble is polluted with the desire to safeguard his business’s reputation does not carry high moral worth

I agree with you, brother Pyah, that we are blessed by Allah (SWT) that where as we are rewarded for the good intentions alone, and are not held accountable for the bad intentions unless put into actions with bad results. In your second reply, you have used word “desire” as synonymous to inclination, to a great extent they do overlap in meaning but where as root cause of desire is not without knowledge of purpose, inclination is more intrinsic; analogy of these can be found in two young kids one of whom wants to be a doctor and other paints from the early childhood without knowing about it. An act of altruism under the influence of a desire may or may not be same as under inclination. For example a very rich person can donate a piece of land for a hospital does carry moral worth but may be less than a man who helps an old lady to cross the road, under intense heat and immense rush hours without knowing that he is doing a noble act<O:p</O:p

HinaS, to me third category carries more moral worth, however I agree to the fact that my articulation might have been week, if I have to rephrase it I will rephrase it not as an act of altruism but an act of duty under law, though still tempted to call it “altruism” because law itself would not let a bad deed done even under good intentions; but for the sake of understanding, and for the lack of better word, call it duty.<O:p</O:p

An action done from duty derives its moral worth, not from the purpose which is to be attained by it, but from the maxim by which it is determined, and therefore does not depend on the realization of the object of the action, but merely on the principle of volition by which the action has taken place, without regard to any object of desire.

Duty is the necessity of acting from respect for the law. I may have inclination for an object as the effect of my proposed action, but I cannot have respect for it, just for this reason, that it is an effect and not an energy of will. Similarly I cannot have respect for inclination, whether my own or another's; I can at most, if my own, approve it; if another's.
<O:p
These are, by no means, conclusive remarks from me, I would love to discuss more, and correct myself in the light of replies from wise people like you
<O:p</O:p
Thanks for sharing

10

Re: Moral Worth

Level (L)
Intent (I)
Disposition (D)

If Level is the range of the deeds effect say small acts of kindness to a massive campaign; and the Intent is the scale :

For ones ego, For no apparent or conscious reason, For fairness without ego, For pleasing God;

and Disposition is the ability at the time, i.e. richness, strength, etc.

So based on this and how I think I have understood the above discussions ...

Moral Worth (MW) = (L x I) / D

The higher the level and intent but lower the disposition for having those intentions and/or doing that greatness of deed is great in moral worth.

So according to this it becomes easier to classify the extremes by certain examples.

So an example for the least moral worth:

A rich powerful scholar who gives a small coin to a child in public for the intention of satisfying his own ego. Islamically this is not even accepted as charity, and the reward for giving that coin is already obtained, i.e. the sense of self-worth. As a powerful person he could have given more, and as a scholar he should know how to correct his intentions.

An example of the best moral worth:

A poor person not learned gives his food to a visitor when he himself will go hungry for the intent of pleasing his Lord. Giving up ones own right i.e. sacrifice is greater than charity. He could have shared his food or not given any and would not be accountable. As a poor person his act was greater and as a person who is not learned his act is one that is full of Iman. It sort of makes it clear why being pious and at the same time unlettered is a sublime trait. A trait of our prophet (SAW).

11

Re: Moral Worth

This is a very nice way to put some digital logic into a philosophical concept. I am sure you are software engineer by profession. are you Psyah?.

12

Peace bro IntelliPhant

Not quite. I am a Quality Engineer ... I basically look for problems and try to solve them using what I can ... programming moreover scripting is used a lot in my analyses.

I am pleased you like this approach. May I be guided.

13

Re: Moral Worth

thanks intelliphant and brother psyah, nice discourse. i will take the liberty to say that morality would have us ideally, ideally... carry our actions to ends and through means that are both m o r a l, but many a times in life,
we do run into people who have no morals or scruples.

14

Re: Moral Worth

Thanks, Psyah, Dushwari and Hinas, Psyah your quest for "quality assurance" is etched in your threads/replies also. Dushwari is wise and pragmatic as always.

15

First of all, I am really impressed by the vocabulary of the participants here. I was too lazy to open up dictionary to get the meaning of all the words and phrases used in the discussion here, but I will definitely do that soon. Anyway, to start with, option 3 reminds me of Singapore straight away.

I have a small concern about options 1 & 3. You have used two adjectives in 1 & 3:

1- Intrinsically Induced
3- Genetic Inclination

In my humble opinion, both are closely linked and in many case can actually be one. However, if I have understood it correctly, on first occasion you have used this to point to naturally good behavior and the second time you have used it to point to naturally evil instincts. You have to decide first if we are intrinsically good or bad.

Your 2nd option "Deductively Acquired" is not independent of the other two as well. How do you deduct? I feel, deduction is based on part instincts and part learned behavior. I feel, at times, we give ourselves too much credit for actions we take.

I would like to give an example: Suppose I see a child in need. I would rush to help him/her. Thinking of any reward, divine or worldly, is the last thing that will come into my mind. Most likely, the adrenaline rush in my body will make me overlook the immediate dangers in the surroundings. After the act has been completed (or may be during the act itself), only then I will think about my own deed and/or reward. Hence, I feel that it may not be my good nature or the fear of God that prompted me to help the child, but my programming through religious teachings, society, environment, etc that made me do the act.

Hence, IMHO regardless of the means (1, 2, 3), the end is the same and if no mal-intent was part of the act, all hold equal same moral worth.

16

Re: Moral Worth

are we to judge the moral worth or not, as individuals?

17

Thanks WitcDoc for your share, you are absolutely decorous in saying that option 1 and option 3 are same, however and perhaps you missed the divisive word that puts a schism on the literal meanings of the two.

There are two ways to contemplate, ponder and excogitate about a philosophical problem or an issue, one of them being "deductive logic" may , in most simple form, be understood as a way to accept something on behalf of some one who is considered at much higer moral or academic level; in true deduction one would rarely be congnitive about the issue presented as an object for the dedutive logic

I would politely disagree with your conclusion, leaving an open invitation for further excursus.

18

.

19

Re: Moral Worth

My belief teaches me that if done in an impartial manner or with all the tools and information at hand all people will come to the same conclusion regarding moral worth or else it cannot be a criterion upon which we will be Judged.

20

Re: Moral Worth

ideally yes. brother psyah. but the argument of relative truth seems to have more valance, howcome?