This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Amorality article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||
|
There is a negative POV in this article towards the concept of amorality. The intro points out negative examples of amorality, such as people with anti-social personality disorder and points to business corporations as a whole as being amoral - very opinionated POV. Amorality is not merely a psychological concept but a philosophical concept. From a philosophical context, amorality claims that morality is socially-constructed. It is true that there is the negative example of people with anti-social personality disorder are amoral and do not have the emotional capacity to feel morality, but there are positive examples, i.e. savant autistic geniuses who have limited to no emotional response due to strong autism.-- R-41 ( talk) 19:09, 26 November 2011 (UTC)
"if this behavior is a voluntary response to ethical norms, then animals do have morality"
This is tautological as ethical norms presuppose morality. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 222.152.244.110 ( talk) 08:10, 3 January 2013 (UTC)
the section about batman and the killing joke is bizarre and out of place. the length and detail of it seems incongruent with the rest of this article. Prefetch ( talk)
When it was originally added, it was just a small description, similar to the Steinbeck example. A later editor disagreed with the example, and gave the large paragraph detailing it. Further editors made it flow better... but agreed it is largely out of place. I've left the base example, but removed all the details. TimOertel ( talk) 18:06, 16 January 2015 (UTC)
This article sucks — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.202.89.58 ( talk) 04:33, 11 November 2013 (UTC)
Moral nihilism Vote Merge Amorality Vote Merge All three of these positions should be handled by the same entry. All some form of rejection of morality, almost always closely tied together and asserted together. I think "Moral Skepticism" is the entry to unify all of these positions/concepts under because "skepticism" and "moral skepticism" is the label most often used by philosophers to discuss these issues in both ethics and epistemology. - Atfyfe ( talk) 23:13, 29 March 2013 (UTC)
I strongly DISAGREE with merging "moral nihilism" with "amorality", since they are entirely different and unrelated things. The first commenter above states that in their opinion they are both "some form of rejection of morality", but this is wrong, since amorality is precisely *not* a rejection of anything. A rock is amoral. A tree is amoral. A person who has no moral agency is amoral. None of these beings reject morality. A being who rejects morality is *immoral*, not amoral. - KS 21 Oct 2013 — Preceding
unsigned comment added by
Ksolway (
talk •
contribs) 10:08, 21 October 2013 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Amorality. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 18 January 2022).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 04:40, 4 July 2017 (UTC)