Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Moral superiority is the belief or attitude that one's position and actions are justified by having higher moral values than others. It can refer to: Morality, when two systems of morality are compared Moral high ground; Self-righteousness, when proclamations and posturing of moral superiority become a negative personal trait
Self-righteousness (also called sanctimony, sententiousness, and holier-than-thou attitudes) [1] [2] is an attitude and belief of moral superiority derived from a person deeming their own beliefs, actions, or affiliations to be of greater virtue than those of others. [3]
Ethics (also known as moral philosophy) is the branch of philosophy which addresses questions of morality. The word "ethics" is "commonly used interchangeably with 'morality' ... and sometimes it is used more narrowly to mean the moral principles of a particular tradition, group, or individual."
The traditional project of education itself may be seen as defending a type of moral high ground from popular culture, perhaps by using critical pedagogy: its proponents may themselves be accused (rightly or wrongly) of seeking a false and unjustified sense of superiority thereby. [5]
Virtue signalling is the act of expressing opinions or stances that align with popular moral values, often through social media, with the intent of demonstrating one's good character. The term virtue signalling is frequently used pejoratively to suggest that the person is more concerned with appearing virtuous than with actually supporting the ...
Victim mentality can be developed from abuse and situations during childhood through adulthood. Similarly, criminals often engage in victim thinking, believing themselves to be moral and engaging in crime only as a reaction to an immoral world and furthermore feeling that authorities are unfairly singling them out for persecution. [4]
Natural science can help humans understand the natural world, but according to Bernard Davis, it cannot make policy, moral, or behavioral decisions. [7] Davis considers questions involving values — what people should do - to be more effectively addressed through discourse in social sciences, not by restriction of basic science. [ 7 ]
He writes that in the prehistoric state "the value or non-value of an action was derived from its consequences" [1] but that ultimately "[t]here are no moral phenomena at all, only moral interpretations of phenomena." [2] For strong-willed men, the "good" is the noble, strong, and powerful, while the "bad" is the weak, cowardly, timid, and petty.