Sound bites (bytes?) and perception--FAR more important today than morals and ethics. How antiquated!

 

I would say that ethics and morals have been replaced by good intentions.

 

O tempora o mores! O bullshit!

There are few things that piss me off more than otherwise intelligent people who seem to think that folks in days gone by were paragons of behavior compared to people today.

 

Just because it's immoral or unethical to you doesn't mean such is the case to everyone.

I happen to believe that unprotected pre-marital sex is not immoral. It may, however, not be wise. There is a difference between foolish and immoral. I also believe that divorce is not immoral. People make mistakes and sometimes those mistakes must last a lifetime, for instance losing an arm or a leg to a saw blade. Marriage is not one of these. There will, of course, be long lasting effects of the marriage. That does not, however, mean that it is immoral to attempt to correct a mistake.

Drinking and smoking, within limits, are not immoral either. And the immorality of drinking or smoking to excess comes not from the drinking or smoking, but from the excess - the same as excess eating, or sleeping, etc. Just because something is not healthy or is illegal does not make it immoral. The immorality comes from the breaking of the law, not the act itself. Smoking pot is not immoral, whether unhealthy or not. Breaking the law to smoke pot is (borderline) immoral. I say borderline because we now get into the discussion of integrity - standing up for what you believe. If you believe that the laws are wrong, should you break them and be immoral by breaking them or do you sacrifice integrity on the altar of politics (or someone else's morality) and retain part of your morality?

 

I don't define my moral beliefs according to external laws (either civil or religious), generally speaking. My system of morality is based more on avoiding harm to other people (and to a much lesser extent, animals and plants).

 

Me too! ...Huh?

I'm pretty sure if I said 'black', Mike would say 'white' by reflex.

 

I wasn't even talking about morality, rather merely providing common examples of failures of integrity and discretion.

I certainly do not believe folks of yesteryear were paragons of virtue. But, liars of yesteryear were not as pathological as they are today, they knew they were lying rather than calling it misspeaking, theirs were more lies of commission rather than today's clever practice of lies of omission. Cheaters back then didn't enjoy it quite as much as they do today; it wasn't nearly as profitable back then; and the consequences of getting caught back then was worse. Thievery is just as old a profession as prostitution, but they didn't Madoff with as much back then as today.

 

I tend to think the reporting is just better today.

every snippet and sound bite is recorded, parsed and analyzed.

so the feedback in the system results in modified behavior where people parse there words very carefully.
so if you want too be a weasel it becomes a skill of survival.

there were scumsucking weasels then, there are scumsucking weasels now.

 

^^ Well said.

 

So if the ethical man knows it's wrong to cheat, and doesn't, and the moral man doesn't cheat either, then doesn't that muddy up the explanation?