Is there or has there been a society that is based around morals?

Question

The UK certainlly isnt, and most are derived around laws which make people happy, mostly the rich ones. So has there ever been a society based solely on morals? What is right and wrong?

Answer 1

Right and wrong? Morals? There is nothing universal what is right, wrong and moral - those terms are, as far as I know, defined by some kind of religion and given to us as being the divine truth: Though shall not kill etc. Without really knowing I should say that the basics rules of the Christian/jewish/muslim sociaty was set very early somewhere in the middle east. Based on this right/wrong/morals laws where formed and basically all nations have today law systems that via the Roman law are based on these intial right/wrong/morals.



So in one sence: All (current) sociaties are based on right and wrong and moral.



Now, and even more interesting, is there a universal right and wrong and moral. And what should that be based on? Is it always "wrong" to kill another human being? And what about animals? Is it "wrong" to steal when you are starving? Is it wrong to have sex with many partners spreading your genes (natrual law no, christian moral yes)? Where are the limits for what is morally accepted? Homosexuality? Incest? Nekrofelia, pedofilia, ....? And where should we put the limit of what is legal?



So another short answer: All sociaties are based on what we consider to be right and wrong and the current level of what we consider to be morally acceptable....

Answer 2

The problem of a society based on morals is that who is going to define what those morals are? Some of the answers so far have talked about religions and I don't think morals and religions necessarily have to be handfasted. One can have morals without religion.



Whenever one chooses a government or has a government run and ruled by a few (in comparison at least to the total population) you will get the human factor involved in which many are more concerned about their own welfare as opposed to the welfare of the masses.



In order to totally be a government that keeps true to the morals of the community, one would have to have group agreement on how everything is run. That would include agreeing on morals and values. I believe that has been the goal of many of the communes that have been attempted, and mostly failed.



I think we have to be content with leaders who respect the values and morals of the majority and don't try to make up their own rules as they go along.



That's one of the problems with the gov in the US right now. You may be able to run an oil company by "flying by the seat of your pants" but when it comes to guiding a nation, that method fails miserably.

Answer 3

Many societies claim to be based on Morales but its rather for show then practice. You could pick a number of societies throughout time like that.



The ancient Chinese where a good example of a society that lived and died by there's though.



I can't think of one modern society that has a strong morale code thats actually followed through by all the people.

Answer 4

I would argue that it is ethics that you are really going after, not morals. Morals are all mixed up in religion, while ethics are based in humanism -- that is, how do we run a society with the least human suffering possible? There are countries out there that truly strive for that. Sweden and other Nordic democratic socialist countries, I would say, run their countries ethically. Canada tries to as well. For example, having a national health care system so that anyone who is sick, regardless of their ability to pay, can be seen by a doctor, is an ethical thing to do. (I'm not talking about free boob jobs, but I am talking about free plastic surgery for cleft palates,, etc.)

Answer 5

i disagree with you. The founding basis for our entire legal system is morality. Look at one of our primary rules - do not kill. That's a moral motion, not any other sort. And what's wrong with laws that make people happy? As for your asserton that the UK has laws that only wants to make rich people happy, I would point you to the fact that we are a welfare state. We are one of the few countries in the world that do this, as an effort to ensure that there is a respectable degree of life for everyone. This isn't essential for a society to function - it's a moral choice.

Answer 6

I think U.K.was the most stable country based on morals..



Generally even if there was exploitation and even if the poor was ignored..the society gave value to God..and to His Laws and morality..until Thomas Hobbes who ignored God and the devine right of the king(actually the king is let by God,,but God has the right to change it), and initiated the contract betwwn the governement and the people. As I said, Thomas Hobbes was very stupid , because the poeple cannot make a contract, because the king rules for the name of God, not for the name of people, because God made the world, not the poeple, and because God made the people, and the people didn't make themselves.Sothe king will have a divine right as long as the king acknowledges God..When the king will no longer acknowledge God, then the king will rule according only to the will of people and as long as the people will want.

JJ Rousseau also ignored God, but he obtain a fame because he spoke against slavery ..and so..But i think they did a mistake, because actually they were very ignorant. They should have known that the one who rules the world must rule according to the will of God..only and empowered by Him..So i think that they were blinded with hate because of the abuses the kings did. although there were a solution of choosing another king as God did in Israel , an a king chosen with the will of God given to His priests..Instead of this, they proposed a governement chosen by people and leading as long as the people want(Rousseau )while Hobbes said that the contract between people and government cannot be broken. But only the word of God is absolute and cannot be broken.

Answer 7

Morality is from the Latin moralitas "manner, character, proper behavior. Therefore you can not expect that all people believe in three principles. Governments are worth than people in this regards. But percentage of believers and the people who act based on morality is different in different societies.

Answer 8

afghanistan was while it was under the control of the taleban.



they used to bury women who were accused of adultery alive (you didn't even need to prove the case), and hold public executions for homosexuals in the football grounds.



they also gave osama bin laden's radical muslims a base to carry out 9/11 from.



the taleban were deeply moral people. they always knew they were right.

Answer 9

How can there be when everyones morals are different?

What you classify as right or wrong isn't going to be universally agree is it?

Who says what is right and what is wrong? Its just your judgement and your opinion. Which isn't going to be shared by other people.

Answer 10

yeh, most societies that are religious law like islmaic society's that have shariah law based on religious morals, however although law generally is a set of imperitives they mostly have moral/practical stems, i don't think any society has believed its laws to be immoral but naturally morals are subjective.

Answer 11

i began out to come to a decision those sort of issues while my dad noted the chimney pipe interior the attic and stated; "that's the place santa clause comes down on christmas", .... finding at that skinny 4 inch tin pipe I figured some thing grew to become into incorrect. there grew to become into no way in God's blue jewel of a planet that fat guy could desire to in good condition with the aid of that pipe! NO way! For years afterwards I learnt of alternative lies we call "white lies" and hiding the reality so as that we don't harm somebody else's thoughts. Then I learnt that there is in no way an easy flesh presser, in no way! they are able to't tell the reality; in any different case they would not in any respect get elected. They let us know what we ought to pay attention, they do what we choose them to do. greater advantageous than eighty% of the politicians that are honorary M.C.s interior the infamous "gay delight parade day" hate the assumption of it yet for political reasons? they'll lie with the aid of their civil servant tooth and grin and bear it for our votes. Do you somewhat think of all the money the countries international are throwing on the recession is going to stay sparkling of a melancholy? Uh-uh. The likes of Obama and his friends are conscious of it won't however the common public looks to think of that the government can restoration it so off they pass to do what we choose for our votes. that is going to no longer artwork yet they are going to do it. we are living in lies from day one to the final day of our life. I learnt that very early in life, yet I lived in a state of denial until i grew to become into in my overdue Nineteen Thirties and purely accepted it because of the fact the way of the international. i do no longer worry with the way of the international anymore, I purely stay the perfect i will with what I somewhat have and pray the stable Lord will shelter me now. The lies i do no longer pay interest to anymore, no longer from the media nor the neighbours.

Answer 12

There are no absolutes.



Anything built by humans is in some form busted at the foundation. Just the way it is.

Answer 13

richest is most of the time out of values there is no good no bad no right no wrong

Answer 14

Saudi Arabia

Iran

Vatican

soviet union

peoples republic of north Korea



problem is people get the government they deserve

Answer 15

the bahais faith

Answer 16

Yes...the muslim minority....traditional and selective

Answer 17

youre a dumba-ss.