4 ms·

I don't mean immoral. I mean amoral. From grammarist: The adjective immoral means contrary to established moral principles. Immoral actions are corrupt, unet

I don't mean immoral. I mean amoral. From grammarist: The adjective immoral means contrary to established moral principles. Immoral actions are corrupt, unethical, sinful, or just wrong. Amoral means (1) neither moral nor immoral, or (2) lacking moral sensibility. So while immoral and amoral might share a little common ground, there is a clear distinction: immoral things are bad, and amoral things are either neutral from a moral perspective or simply removed from moral considerations.

mkr-hn 13y ago
Are you talking about religious morals or humanist morals? No one I know lacks moral sensibility. Some of them even derive their set from religion. I had a look at my own OED, and it agrees with your definition. It's still not an accurate depiction of the morals of anyone I know.
- melindajb 13y ago
  Lucky you! (and I mean it). I more think about it this way--and hey, if I chose the wrong word, do correct me. When we are changing the world with our technology we don't really stop to think about all the people who will be put out of work by it. We don't as a community really care much about the impact of our companies on our communities (giving to local arts organizations and volunteer efforts in SF are not rising concurrently with population or wealth). To be fair, this thinking isn't limited to milennials, it's just that as children they were more likely to have been raised without the early foundation of morals which are usually taught by religion. I do not in any way mean to imply religion is necessary for morals, just statistically that's how most people get them. I also don't mean to imply milennials are criminals, just that well, it doesn't occur to them to think sometimes about the impact of their choices; or if they do, they don't care. Hell, maybe I was that way in my 20s and I've conveniently forgotten it...so maybe it's a function of youth. The brittleness though? absolutely. Most of them are deeply insecure, fundamentally needing a lot of praise. I don't mind , because that's the kind of leader/manager I like to be; but adversity is hard for them to deal with. I sometimes think one's attitude toward all this is dependent on when one arrives in the area; for myself having arrived during the bust of 2002 I feel perpetually like "winter is coming." for those for who it has always been prosperous springtime, it's hard to realize how important it is to squirrel away money, karma, connections, etc. Random musings. YMMV.
  - erikpukinskis 13y ago
    I don't think religious attendance necessarily means moral education. Some people do get that out of religion, many do not. Some in fact get ammunition for frameworks of immorality. My feeling is that, today as a hundred years ago, the bulk of moral education comes from watching and interacting with other humans. Parents, teachers, friends, and neighbors hurting you, helping you, being hurt by you, being helped by you, and discussing all of the above.
    - melindajb 13y ago
      Never said it did. If one wanted to, one could argue the baby boomers were pretty amoral and self-oriented; leading to millennials seeing and adopting that.

mkr-hn 13y ago

Are you talking about religious morals or humanist morals? No one I know lacks moral sensibility. Some of them even derive their set from religion. I had a look at my own OED, and it agrees with your definition. It's still not an accurate depiction of the morals of anyone I know.

melindajb 13y ago
Lucky you! (and I mean it). I more think about it this way--and hey, if I chose the wrong word, do correct me. When we are changing the world with our technology we don't really stop to think about all the people who will be put out of work by it. We don't as a community really care much about the impact of our companies on our communities (giving to local arts organizations and volunteer efforts in SF are not rising concurrently with population or wealth). To be fair, this thinking isn't limited to milennials, it's just that as children they were more likely to have been raised without the early foundation of morals which are usually taught by religion. I do not in any way mean to imply religion is necessary for morals, just statistically that's how most people get them. I also don't mean to imply milennials are criminals, just that well, it doesn't occur to them to think sometimes about the impact of their choices; or if they do, they don't care. Hell, maybe I was that way in my 20s and I've conveniently forgotten it...so maybe it's a function of youth. The brittleness though? absolutely. Most of them are deeply insecure, fundamentally needing a lot of praise. I don't mind , because that's the kind of leader/manager I like to be; but adversity is hard for them to deal with. I sometimes think one's attitude toward all this is dependent on when one arrives in the area; for myself having arrived during the bust of 2002 I feel perpetually like "winter is coming." for those for who it has always been prosperous springtime, it's hard to realize how important it is to squirrel away money, karma, connections, etc. Random musings. YMMV.
- erikpukinskis 13y ago
  I don't think religious attendance necessarily means moral education. Some people do get that out of religion, many do not. Some in fact get ammunition for frameworks of immorality. My feeling is that, today as a hundred years ago, the bulk of moral education comes from watching and interacting with other humans. Parents, teachers, friends, and neighbors hurting you, helping you, being hurt by you, being helped by you, and discussing all of the above.
  - melindajb 13y ago
    Never said it did. If one wanted to, one could argue the baby boomers were pretty amoral and self-oriented; leading to millennials seeing and adopting that.