Are morals, teachable?

[ItsMeItsMe1989]

Can you teach, morals

[TurboKid]

I think so and in terms of optimizing self-interest although I think it's a highly counter-intuitive game, if you will, like Poker. You have to be results-independent to evaluate the soundness of your decisions. For example, even a pair of aces pre-flop in Texas Hold Em will lose to smaller pairs about a fifth of the time. Yet it wins 4/5 times and so it's clearly never a good decision to fold aces pre-flop for someone who thinks logically about it, but some beginners will fold aces in a tournament setting because they got burnt in the past and start making poor decisions out of short-term temptations strongly persuading them against making the best long-term decisions.

Like Poker, a sound moral decision can punish you severely in the short run even if it's the most optimal long-term decision. So it's a very difficult game to master. For example, I think the Golden Rule is the soundest strategy towards optimizing survival given many unknowns. A person who treats strangers well instead of maliciously will tend to net more allies than enemies. Yet there are no guarantees and someone abiding by the Golden Rule might end up getting betrayed and killed for it. It's still arguably the best long-term strategy but it can be tempting to violate it because we're navigating unknowns and probabilities, not guarantees.

[TurboKid]

One of the most difficult ones for me to put in terms of optimizing self-interest is some of the masculine morals like never running away from a challenge to a fight. Actually, that might be highly contextual as to what the optimal decision is in terms of self-interest for the most logical being.

Yet the way I rationalize why a man should err towards never shying away from a challenge to a fight is that most of us are creatures of habits. If we get into the habit of running away in such contexts, first we may not be able to protect loved ones when they are in danger and not just ourselves, and also we might easily end up being conquered and yield too much footing to any adversary who challenges us.

[TurboKid]

There's also reputation and so forth which has cascading impacts. So I think there's a logical argument for why at least a man, as a creature of habit, and not a machine, and one thrust into a social context should err away from cowardice in such contexts in order to optimize his own self-interest.

[TurboKid]

I think there's actually something reasonably objective about morality if we had God-like knowledge of the consequences of all possible actions. For example, there are many styles of playing Poker like tight-aggressive, loose-passive, maniacal, tight-passive nitty, etc, and the favored style often depends on subjective criteria like the personality and preferences of the Poker player which is also influenced by their upbringing.

Yet all of those subjective styles would be irrelevant if we could see our opponent's hole cards. If I can see your cards and had that sort of omnipotent knowledge, there is no question as to whether I should bet/raise, call, or fold with my hand. I fold the inferior hand and call/raise with a superior one. The difficulty is that we can't see each other's cards, and in life and moral contexts, we can't perfectly predict the full-blown consequences of our actions.

So I think that's where the subjectivity comes in to fill the unknown gaps and provide general guidelines for people navigating highly nuanced and contextual circumstances that could potentially involve a gazillion relevant variables. Yet I think even in spite of all the complexity and unknowns, there are some moral guidelines that are clearly superior to others in terms of optimizing self-interest/survival.

[najekim]

Since morals are very subjective, all one can do is to offer up what they think morals should be as suggestions only. For example, you may believe that everyone should be modestly (another subjective term) dressed throughout life while I believe clothes are unnecessary for a full life.

[GrimmGothBabe]

Yes, I carry many morals from what my parents taught me and I didn't think it was very likely to be taught but now that I'm a parent I see more n more that what I teach shapes my kid including the morals I teach. Things that parents do tend to stick a lot more than other people tho.. I also know it depends on the kid but out of the 13 kids I see on a regular basis it mostly seems to be the case rarely do kids pick up things as well from other people until they are much older around 10 do they start grabbing more from outside influence.

[Poppy_girl]

Yeah, they defines our character and personality...

[CaliDad]

Morals are defined by society. They are always taught... by parents, by schools, by elders. The major problem comes when a small segment of society tries to impose its concept of morals on everyone else...

[madgoat]

Part of your moral compass comes from you. It's genetic. But another part comes from society, your parents, and others around you.
So we can try to show/teach you the best practice but it's effectiveness will be down to you and your environment.

[lolman95]

Absolutely! Most of your moral teachings have been taught. Your religion, mannerism, what behavior is good/bad. Now don't confuse morals with compassion or empathy. Morals are mostly standards of acceptable behavior, and hence quiet teachable.

[LZPanzer]

A person's morality is usually pretty well cemented once they hit their early teens. Yeh people can change later in life but generally there core values are set by the early teens.

[OddBeMe]

Yes. I’m in the nurtured camp of nature-versus-nurture when discussing sadists and such. There’s a small % of hereditary or brain damage, but criminality is mostly learned through family and systemic abuse.

[twis7]

you can teach ideology. morals seem to evolve over time, so, yes. the longer someone is subjected to a certain idea of morality, the harder it is to change that idea.

[Aakash_Hangargi]

Yes, it's teachable but the real question is would someone learn and implement it

[princeofromance]

Yes, We wouldn't know right from wrong without learning it through our parents or some or authority figure close to us.

[Philyouup]

morals are subjective, anything subjective is certainly teachable. question is, are they unteachable

[anylolone]

To some extent, up until 8 years of age and only to 97% of the population.

[NoManTwo]

People are born selfish idiots.

They need to be taught not to be narcissistic.

[HHHHIHHHHHIHHHH]

yes, they are mostly taught

[PinkGiraffee]

Absolutely. That’s what good parenting involves

[fonduegirl]

Not a fun lesson so hard pass

[g0dof_GaG]

Why wouldn’t they be huh

[PeacefulRainDrop]

I dont think so

[jshm2]

Well... obviously.

[Jamie05rhs]

Of course you can.

[JackBlackHeartAttack]

Yes g

[deeks1121]

Absolutely

[michael1469]

Yes they are.