Alan,
Hi Alan,
What I was implying is that ultimately everyone's idea of right and wrong is subjective to their own self.
I would agree, except that you seem to be simply stating something which seems fairly obvious. What interests me is how it is constituted and from where does this personal view of right and wrong come from. I am fairly confident that you and I would disagree somewhat on the answers to these questions.
The concept of deliberately doing something wrong is also subjective.
As regards the idea that one can deliberately do something which contravenes one's own inherent views of right and wrong, this may well be true, but the reasons for doing such things could be decidedly complex, and bring into play such emotions as self aggrandisement, self preservation, fear, altruism, empathy, love, hate etc. or even attempting to balance a personally accepted 'wrong' action with what is perceived as an alternative which the individual regards as even 'more wrong'(the lesser of two evils).
Other people's ideas of right and wrong are irrelevant.
You love these all encompassing statements, don't you? Well, no I don't agree. I think that we can be greatly influenced by other people in the direction of our moral thinking be it through our culture, upbringing, rational judgment etc.
Your own conscience will discern right from wrong, taking into account all your built in instincts, experiences and knowledge.
Although I might have a different idea to you of where conscience comes from, because people's consciences can sometimes lead to contradictory approaches to moral situations, congratulations, you have just given a statement that supports the idea of morality as being relative rather than objective in nature. It does seem, however, to contradict your original statement that I took issue with, which was:' Even though we are aware of what is right, our God given freedom allows us choose to do what we perceive to be wrong, just because we want to.'
It is the act of deliberately doing something which you personally know is the wrong thing to do which demonstrates the human attribute of free will.
I'm not particularly interested in your bringing of the idea of 'free will' into this particular discussion as it has been so extensively covered before. However, What about those who choose the 'right' thing to do? Are they not exercising 'free will' in your eyes too? After all they make decisions. Why select those who are 'doing something which you personally know is the wrong thing to do' as illustrating your concept of 'free will'. There can be many competing elements to a person's character making decisions extremely difficult. It is quite often the case that an honest decision is reached, for instance, that is nevertheless accompanied by a sense of remorse/guilt. It can be also the case that a person may make a decision which is purely selfish, knows that it is generally considered wrong, accepts that it is wrong and he/she doesn't have any pangs of conscience about this at all. I really don't see this as any sort of argument for the existence of 'free will'.
