Do you live by a code of morals, and if so, why?

Ralt · 2015-01-07T21:29:38+00:00

As you said, holding and living by a code of morals could inhibit yourself from taking the best option for yourself. As such, I act in self-interest over everything, and do my best to disregard any morality that is still within me. I'm sure I won't ever remove it fully, I was raised Mormon and cults really know how to fuck a person up. Nonetheless my code of morals is to strive to not have any. Always acting in your best self-interest will get you much farther than concerning yourself with whether something to you is immoral or moral.

Take the whole wife-fucking nonsense that was blowing around in TRP for a good while and probably still is. My view is that morality should not be factored in whatsoever, but you should weigh risk and reward and act accordingly to whatever seems to reap the best rewards while minimizing risk. Everything else is extraneous and doesn't matter. If in any situation you stand to benefit and risk little, it's probably a decent idea.

This needs to be combined with the 38th Law of Power in every day living. "Think as you like but behave like others". If you advertise this amorality, people will judge you and dislike you, generally. Hold your cards close to your chest, and exercise risk vs reward calculation in letting others know that you operate this way. You should exude a moral framework and agree with others who make judgement calls, so they don't pick up on your amorality. When it comes to make a decision though, drop the sheepskin you wear and act the wolf, and execute the decision most likely to bring you prosperity.

smokingmonkey420 · 2015-01-15T03:19:13+00:00

I think Machiavelli said it best.

"Upon this a question arises: whether it be better to be loved than feared or feared than loved? It may be answered that one should wish to be both, but, because it is difficult to unite them in one person, is much safer to be feared than loved, when, of the two, either must be dispensed with. Because this is to be asserted in general of men, that they are ungrateful, fickle, false, cowardly, covetous, and as long as you succeed they are yours entirely; they will offer you their blood, property, life and children, as is said above, when the need is far distant; but when it approaches they turn against you. And that prince who, relying entirely on their promises, has neglected other precautions, is ruined; because friendships that are obtained by payments, and not by greatness or nobility of mind, may indeed be earned, but they are not secured, and in time of need cannot be relied upon; and men have less scruple in offending one who is beloved than one who is feared, for love is preserved by the link of obligation which, owing to the baseness of men, is broken at every opportunity for their advantage; but fear preserves you by a dread of punishment which never fails."

Our greatest fear, is our fear of loss. This is why the one willing to walk away in a relationship holds all the power. It can be extrapolated to any tangible aspect in a persons life but most of all would be a persons life. How far you are willing to take it depends on you.

leftajar · 2015-01-19T08:32:36+00:00

I've chosen to live my life morally because it increases good feelings and reduces bad ones.

One of my parents was emotionally abusive. Without warning, I was yelled at, shamed, and intimidated. It didn't happen all the time, but it doesn't have to in order to stoke the fear.

After an entire childhood of that, it became very easyto experience feelings of guilt, shame, and embarrassment. My childish coping mechanism was to become a hardcore people-pleaser

This lasted most of my life. One of the things that helped me kick the habit, was that I formed a professional relationship with a guy who I later learned was a sociopath. He sensed my weakness, and preyed on my guilt in order to extract money and free work. It sucked horribly, but it taught me something.

There's no appeasing a sociopath; no matter how charming I was, it didn't reduce the abuse. I had to turn inside myself, and learn how to calibrate my feelings to my own self-judgment rather than another's judgment.

Morality was the key component of how I started to self-validate. When I felt negative social feelings arise, my first response was to check my own actions. Did I behave in a moral way? I ponder the question for as long as it takes. If I decided that my behavior was moral, then I hold my ground. If it wasn't, then I apologize and try to make it right.

This, for me, was a game-changer. For the first time in my life, I started to be honest with myself. My confidence has gone up lot.

While I embraced morality as a way to address negative feelings, it produces a ton of positive feelings too. Your subconscious knows, on some level, if you're doing bad shit. You get that feeling of, "this isn't right." If you do that too much, your subconscious tells you you're bad. Better to have the subliminal thought of, "I'm a good person. I'm a warrior for the light. I'm one of the good ones."

I recommend morality, it was an improvement for me over amorality. And, btw, I still get laid just fine.

M0RKET · 2015-01-08T18:23:04+00:00

I'm young (24) and my worldview is still evolving. So what I'm going to say wouldn't be true 1 year ago (for example). My parents (don't live with them anymore) are a moralistic bunch, but somehow I treat people better even though I'm not. There is some lag between what I intellectually believe my morals should be and what I actually feel in real life situations. Specifically, I strive to be completely selfish, amoral and deceptive (aka a sociopath). That's my ideal. But a lot of time my natural honesty, directness and straightforwardness get in the way. I often feel strongly compelled to say what I actually think instead of what I know I should say. But I don't judge myself too harshly, because my understanding of what the right things to say are came to me relatively recently. Now it's just a matter of internalizing this knowledge, overriding the old habit and adopting this new one. With willpower and perhaps some self-hypnosis I'm sure I'll get there eventually. As to how far I'm willing to go... Intellectually - no limit. But my feelz actually do restrain me oftentimes. But it's ok. I know that with new experiences I will get opportunities to act in new ways and gradually expand my comfort zone for harming other people. I've done it before and I'll do more of the same. To sum it up, I'm still a "normal" guy at this point, but my aim is to be ruthless. And I will get there little by little. Taking it slow. I know it will come

Redpillc0re · 2015-01-09T13:54:20+00:00

Ethics has been the subject of philosophers since time immemorial. There are no moral absolutes for sure, but there is no man without morals. Everything we do is an expression of our moral code. Even amoralism (i.e. complete utilitarianism) is a moral philosophy. I think TRPers often forget the vast differences between the moral codes of people.

I highly recommend this book for a concise but surprisingly deep review of moral philosophy: http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0199773556/ref=oh_aui_detailpage_o01_s00?ie=UTF8&psc=1

Now, closer to your question, for what it's worth i have always aligned myself closer to the Stoics, and i m getting closer and closer over the years. So yes, i do follow a moral code, although i continuously scrutinize it as well. In the end , it DOES matter whether you have lived your life morally as a source of ultimate satisfaction that you will get in the end of your life. I would think, if i had to give up all morals to become king of the world, i would feel a sense that i've betrayed myself in the end and be equally dissatisfied.

It's obviously not an answerable question, and one that will be with you for your entire life.

connor1003 · 2015-02-06T14:30:54+00:00

Well, given that "to be moral" means "to do what one should do," the question of "why be moral" is nonsensical. You're really asking whether one should adhere to deontologist (engage in morally sound actions because they're morally sound) ethics as opposed to consequentialist ethics (act in ways that bring about the best consequences).

RedBigMan · 2015-03-15T20:32:29+00:00

Yes. Because at the end of the day I still need to be able to live with myself. Plus I am pretty sure I would hate living in a world without any morals at all.

trplurker · 2015-01-09T04:40:50+00:00

Morals and other rules regarding conduct existed as a way to socialize and regulate how men interact with each other for the purpose of building society. They only function if everyone follows them and enforces them. The moment they are no longer enforced then they lose all utility and value. That being said, historically the current moral code was rarely applied to the ruling elite, who often used the existing moral laws as a way to further their own power over the mass's.

So from this position I can state that morals do indeed have value, they have a purpose and fairly good at accomplishing that purpose. As someone who has come to understand this, morals no longer have meaning or value to myself. Any rules I do follow I do so purely out of a pragmatic / utilitarian point of view. I do not kill my enemies not because I believe in the immorality of murder but because existing laws would make it risky to do this and I chose to avoid unnecessary risk.

2015-01-08T13:36:29+00:00

What is your objective for asking these questions? It seems you already know. One's best course of action is independent from this thing called "morality".

The world is just a system where agents exchange power and control. An aware agent will implement actions by which he will increase his own advantage over all other agents doing whatever it is necesary to obtain the advantage. If other agents do not know how to implement thier own best cours of action, then the ones who can will take advantage over the latter ones.

The most efficient way to take all the possible advantage from an agent A is to make believe agent A that: whithin the exchange of power and control he (agent A) is getting power and control from the other agent (let's call this agent M), but the reality of things is that agent M makes agent A believe that power and control is getting exchanged. And the utter level is to make agent A LIKES and be even PROUD of this exchange, agent A is REALLY HAPPY to do this exchange! When in fact agent A was duped since the beginning. Wars are not fought in the same meta-level, one wins not fighting directly but giving a system to the opponent where the opponent believes he is winning when IN FACT he is losing. Isn't that sublime?

I tried to describe my "code of morals", but it should really be called a "decision making model" https://archive.today/7CwJV

Thus, my answer does not respond to your requirement as expressed in your last sentence, if I correctly understood what you mean by "morals".

And a little attack to your argumentation also: it could seem you are trying to "hamster" the fact that: is not necessary bad for one to use this thing called "morality".

token_stache · 2015-01-11T05:35:19+00:00

More honor than morals. It's less about other people more about being proud of myself as a man. I don't think it's in line with a lot of societies views on morality but in the end the most important thing is how we judge ourselves.

People should build their own code. From what they admire who they want to be instead of what ever was forced on them through accidents of geography and time period.

wurding · 2015-02-19T13:44:32+00:00

sorry but not going into a deep philosophical answer but basically: I am not a nihilist. Life has value when you live according to values. Some red pillers sound like Alistair Crowley with their moral ambiguity. Ethics, or rather morals, make a civilisation. The people who live without them are the same who perpetuate the beta bluepull bs that everyone parrots in these modern times.

andronicus251 · 2015-06-09T06:47:29+00:00

I have avoided inner conflicts and feelings of guilt my entire life by following a moral compass. In my pre-teen and teen years, I discovered that in order to enjoy the thrill of victory, I had to win without resorting to trickery, treachery, or cheating.

To win this way meant that I had succeeded on talent and merit alone, and truly deserved whatever prize I acquired. If I lost I knew I had given it my absolute best shot and so had nothing to be ashamed of.

I think that most of the turmoil and unhappiness experienced today comes from the resonating strings of guilt plucked by violating one's code of ethics.

tldr; For a clear conscience and smooth sailing, always do the honorable thing.

Johnny10toes · 2015-01-07T19:57:18+00:00

[permanently deleted]

DorianAnderson · 2015-01-08T19:08:55+00:00

I work to rid myself of a lifetime of indoctrination into other individuals morals and definitions of good and bad.

However, I have come to accept an objective morality based on biology. It's not individualistic, and I suppose it's even altruistic.

On our most basic level, we exist to fuck and birth and continue our line and our species. Yet, I question whether there is an actual imperative to continue our species ( single-celled organisms don't give a shit about helping out another organisms of the same species). Anyway, we exist to continue our genetic line and an effect of that is the continuation of the species as a whole.

So, while small, simple organisms or animals have no notion of the greater species, we humans do.

I think we have reached a point or will have to soon, where it is no longer purely about the individualistic biological imperative. Instead, the most important goal should be extension of humanity as a race.

Therefore, I define "Good" as anything that benefits the future generations, increases the overall chance of survival of the race, or improve the state of the Earth (because by fucking it up, we are just fucking ourselves. The earth will bounce back, we won't). Our collective actions currently are a big fuck you to our progeny.

Therefore, I define "Bad" as anything that hinders or harms the future generations, decreases our overall chance of survival as a species, or destroys the earth.

Because I really want humanity to last for millions of years. To spread out among the stars and keep exploring the perception we call reality and life. (yea yea therefore it's my subjective morality, I know)

Tl;dr: An "objective" moral system based on biology states that one, or one's actions, are good if they increase the chance of humanity surviving as a species. One is bad if you do anything to hinder that.

AFPJ · 2015-02-25T22:21:45+00:00

More like a guideline of morals. Code sounds like rule & we know how rules end up in the real world. Why? Operating as a benevolent psychopath is in my own best interest. People are smart, you can't always fool everyone - and even when you can, its often just unnecessary mental overhead. It's in your own best interest to genuinely benefit others whenever doing so does not detract from yourself or your goals because what goes around often comes around.

There is nothing wrong with being selfish: to deny one's inherent selfishness is a great sin against self-actualization.

Being openly selfish makes you predictable, which gives others comfort. Because life isn't a zero sum game, you can almost always find a way for everyone to win - a selfish asshole who makes those around him win is a good leader.

Nitzi · 2015-03-30T02:06:48+00:00

RedPill115 · 2015-05-14T08:07:42+00:00

The most ammorally effective strategy for morality is - follow morality with other people who follow it and who's it's effective for. Don't follow it for the other groups.

Say you have 3 other guys. You want to all rent a house and have parties. Invite girls, get drunk, get laid.

You have a basic code of morality - if you invite a girl, no one else tries to sleep with her at that party. You only get 1 girl. Ditto if she's your girlfriend.

In this scenario, everyone wants to invite a girl they're interested in. At least if they can get a decent party going. You invite a girl. She invites her friends. Girls come over, girls have a good time, you have a good time, you get the legitimate social proof from your friends, you get laid/girlfriend/whatever.

But let's say you start off with the same idea, but in reality everyone is trying to steal everyone else's girl. Pretty soon - no one wants to invite the hot girl they know to the party. She doesn't come, she doesn't invite her friends to come, pretty soon your "party" is just a sausage fest.

And that's the basis for morality - all members of the group follow certain rules and all members benefit moreso than they would without a moral code.

The problem is after that, you get 3 kinds of people:
1. People who don't understand or can't get themselves to follow them. 2. People who try to appear to be following the rules but are actually just working around them. These people start being hated once it's figured out. They're either kicked out the group, cause the group to dissolve, or the group is big enough that their drawbacks can be overlooked.
3. People who try to write the rules for their own ends and benefit.

The reason to follow group morality, is if you benefit more by following it personally, because the group as a whole gets more than each individual would on their own.

IVIaskerade · 2015-05-17T16:15:26+00:00

Yeah:

Don't get caught.

ohbehavebaby · 2015-01-08T14:44:31+00:00

If you have not read the gervais principle series by the ribbon farm go ahead. Essentially he makes a point that the irreversible uncovering of the nihilistic quality of life can lead to fundamental changes in not only how we act but who we are. When you discover the absence of meaning you can either: a) create your own meaning and values (morals)

or b) understand the values these have amongst others and utiluize them as a tool for gaining power.

The problem with a) is that you need to delude yourself into believing meaning exists once having discovered it isn't, however if you manage to handle the cognitive dissonance that arises from conflicting beliefs you can search happiness and fulfill your ego with respect to these morals. Now in order to truly live by these new rules of integrity, justice or whatever you will find happiness in yourself but no longer in others who are not fully capable of grasping the nature of nihilism. You will not connect with consumerism and loopholes and inconsistencies in other people's morals. This is hard and ultimately only satisfactory if you find a society (or group of friends) who share these same morals. As with any system of values it has limitations, as nothing can be reduced to rules, not at this level (maybe in physics).

The other option is to detach yourself fully from the mask of morality and become truly amoral. This is dangerous and irreversible. Moral loses its value. The same way brithdays lose their value, or santa clause as you grow old. Something which is seen through can no longer have value. It only has value to others and thus you use arguments which comply with the particular values of different people in order to influence in one way or another. This means giving up happiness, there is no half way. It is a glimpse at freedom and at the same time a certain doom.

If you are interested read up on the gervais principle. Venkat explains it much better than me.

Aerobus · 2015-01-08T03:04:29+00:00

Yes I do because I believe adhereing to a code of morals will help my interactions with other people. While I may not view everyone (i.e. women) equally, I will, at the least superficially, treat people equally so that I am not suspected in believing in anything other than liberal bullshit. I act fair and just in all my dealings so that people treat me fairly and justly, and behind their backs I do what I want.

My code of morals are not rigid. I fully embrace certain morals over others. Whenever I decide to act a certain way or do something, I ask myself: how will this benefit me? More often than not, acting by a code of morals that align with what society considers moral will benefit me. However, for some things, especially interactions with women, adhering to society's morals is useless.

Ultimately, I live my life the way I want to.

StevenLaBerge · 2015-01-08T09:12:11+00:00

I would say my reason for being moral is that it makes me happy. I don't enjoy inflicting pain onto others, it makes me miserable. I also believe, that everybody should have his own set of morals and ethics.

MisterDorimant · 2015-01-17T11:43:38+00:00

Fuck morals. I will do as I please.

All one needs to survive this world is an understanding of ethics and how to exploit the law of the land to work to one's own selfish advantage.

RPanarchist · 2015-05-19T16:58:56+00:00

The only "moral" needed and the one I live by is the NAP

Rhunta · 2015-01-08T08:31:24+00:00

I am a christian and really believe in God and the bible. And the reason I have those morals is for myself. I can walk without feeling guilt and I can grow faster when feeling good.

asd1100 · 2015-01-08T12:13:18+00:00

Yes, for the same reason I wear pants.

It's "the right thing to do."

I will replace for the sake of semantics moral behavior with polite behavior. Morality implies a ethical standard, while I am arguing for a socially arbitrary already established standard.

Aggressive, conflictual, "impolite" behavior is shortsighted, reflexive and immature. A true red piller(man that understands reality and the degree of control he has over it), should observe, analyze and act optimally at all times. That optimal action is almost always calm, calculated and precise. Reality is a very complex system and there is literally no reason to ever take a reactive sledgehammer to a complex system.(unless it is for entertainment or release, but unless that is your end goal that is not an optimal behavior).

Now unless you are functionally a psychopath, all behavior will have internal effects as well as external effects. This is where a case can be made for true morality, but from my perspective we are not moral beings intrinsically so our inner moral standards are also social projections we internalized. So the same rules apply.

TL;DR : I strive to behave in a "polite" fashion, because it makes life easier, it's more sustainable and pleasant, by avoiding pointless conflicts, but externally and internally.

2015-01-08T13:06:57+00:00

[permanently deleted]

jerrytheman1998 · 2015-01-07T20:27:54+00:00

Yes because I strongly believe in karma. You will get back what you give to the universe so it might as well not all be bad stuff

Title	Do you live by a code of morals, and if so, why?
Author	deepthrill
Upvotes	27
Comments	78
Date	January 7, 2015 7:53 PM UTC (11 years ago)
Subreddit	Posted in /r/AlreadyRed
Original Link	https://old.reddit.com/r/AlreadyRed/comments/2rnsjm/do_you_live_by_a_code_of_morals_and_if_so_why/
Archive Link	https://theredarchive.com/r/AlreadyRed/do-you-live-by-a-code-of-morals-and-if-so-why.1124223 https://theredarchive.com/post/1124223

Comments