David Wong Quotes

We have never stopped sin by passing laws; and in the same way, we are not going to take a great moral ideal and achieve it merely by law.

If you ask anyone, what is morality based on? These are the two factors that always come out: One is reciprocity, … a sense of fairness, and the other one is empathy and compassion.

Morals were restrictive, but they were grounded on human experience.

There are a few dogmas and double standards and really regrettable exports from philosophy that have confounded the thinking of scientists on the subject of morality.

One has only as much morality as one has philosophy and poetry.

Moralism doesn't produce morality; it produces immorality.

That we occasionally violate our own stated moral code does not imply that we are insincere in espousing that code.

Morality is either a social contract or you have to pay cash.

Morality is truth in full bloom.

The most important human endeavor is the striving for morality in our actions.

I'm very interested in why we do good things, or bad things, and where moral judgments come from.

For many people, morality means a set of rules governing the disposition on one's genital organs; or a set of injunctions against lying, stealing, or killing except when such acts are sanctioned by church or state.

The rules of morality are not the conclusion of our reason.

My work is based on the assumption that clarity and consistency in our moral thinking is likely, in the long run, to lead us to hold better views on ethical issues.

Our moral traditions developed concurrently with our reason, not as its product.

Our morality is based on so many factors: of where we were born, who we were born to, what values were instilled in us, what values we chose, the way that our lives have shaped us. That dictates so much of what we assume is our morality, and also the culture, all of these things.

The science of morality is about maximizing psychological and social health. It's really no more inflammatory than that.

Contemporary moral philosophy has found an original way of being boring, which is by not discussing moral issues at all.

The world of empirical morality consists for the most part of nothing but ill will and envy.

Each of us has a vision of good and of evil. We have to encourage people to move towards what they think is Good.

The whole history of man is continuous proof of the maxim that to divest one's methods of ethical concepts means to sink into the depths of utter demoralization.

Morality is always derivative. It stems from one's worldview.

Moral philosophy is nothing else but the science of what is good, and evil, in the conversation, and society of mankind. Good, and evil, are names that signify our appetites, and aversions; which in different tempers, customs, and doctrines of men, are different.

Really great moral teachers never do introduce new moralities: it is quacks and cranks who do that.

I think that moral philosophy is useful for framing questions, but terrible at answering them. I think moral psychology is booming right now, and we're making a lot of progress on understanding how we actually work, what our moral nature is.