"I know it's wrong, but I still want to do it"

"I know it's wrong, but I still want to do it"


Why does it happen that someone explains a certain action this way?
Why do something when you know and believe it is wrong?


Please discuss, make comments.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

well, i think it's a conflict between what other's thaught you you should do, and what you think you should do. when we say "i know it's wrong" we really don't refer to our own morals. it seems to me like a reference to an established views of the majority that stands in conflict with your own. that way when you say "i still want to do it" it is a true reflection of what you believe in.

additionally, i think the effect on your person of the action is important. so, for example, if you're going to steal something, it benefits you so you may still "want to do it," yet you know it's wrong because if someone did it to you you'd be pissed. this really highlights the dicotomy of morals and that there is a difference between morals as they apply to others and as they apply to id ;-D

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Put simply, our desires do not always coincide with our ethics or reason. I believe this is more common than not. "I'm overweight but I still want that chocolate bar." "I'm married but I want to have sex with that person." Desires are largely driven by physiology, an emotional and visceral reaction, while ethics and reason are largely intellectual. Not that different desires cannot be in conflict too but I think that tends to be expressed as an emotional dilemma rather than, "I know it's wrong but...".

But I think that this conflict, this ability to override or alter one's emotions and desires or not is the very thing that defines us as sentient and 'human'. It is the foundation of responsibility and freedom, that we are not complete slaves to our physiological drives, that we have the capacity to override them. We have the ability to take a longer or larger view of the situation into account and override our immediate desires. For the capacity to predict the consequences of actions is not enough one must be able to act upon that understanding

~Raithere

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Fallen Angel,

Surely.

But there is one important thing: Our personalities are not static, our moral standards, values and habits may change with time. What once seemed to be imposed on us ("You should not smoke!"), later on can turn out to be good for us, and we even accept it (After smoking for many years, the person gets ill, and barely survives, and decides that that imposed directive "You should not smoke!" was a good one).

What if other directives that we feel are imposed on us by the society may also turn out to be positive for us?
What if they turn out to be negative for us, even though they were originally regarded as positive by the society?
What position towards society and its morals will the person who says "I know it's wrong, but I still want to do it" take?


Also, can you imagine that anyone could say "I know it's wrong, but I still want to do it" -- or are such wonderings about morality typical only for a certain group of people?

 

I download music because it is right.

 

Everything is permissible – but not everything is beneficial or constructive, and we should not be enslaved or addicted by anything. Nothing can gain authority over us unless we let it, and we don't have to fear things will turn out negatively if we act in the interest of good interests. Unless we have trouble controlling ourselves, that is - and we do:

People find this law at work: When we want to do good, evil is right there waiting. Because in our minds we delight in the good, the pure and the beautiful; but we see another law at work: our physical desires, our nature, wages war against the law of our mind and makes us a prisoner of it.

If we let our physical needs dictate our choices, we can't be free from them. If you know it's wrong, don't do it. You do run the risk of alienating yourself from a society that does let pleasure and immediate gratification dictate their behaviour, because you are separating yourself from their thinking - but that's why it's called a choice.

(paraphrased, courtesy from Paul)

 

do it. live in the moment and screw the future, we'll worry about it when it gets here

 

live for the now, consequences sponsequences.

 

"Let's eat and drink, for tomorrow we die" - code of the Epicurians, the law of pleasure and immediate gratification mentioned above.

 

Instant gratification hurts so many in this world. Just look at nature, dying around us. True happiness can't be found through material things anyway. It's all in your mind.

 

It just shows that it isn't actually wrong. Its something you've been lead to believe is wrong, and yet your natural instincts tell you it is right. Nothing could be more conclusively "right" than an instinctual urge when you really think about it.

 

There are many things in life that others do that you may think is great until you do them and find out otherwise sometimes. When you were very young and you saw others drinking liquer you thought that must be good until you started drinking and found out how sick it can make you when you start hurling all over the place. Then you become an alcoholic and kill someone while you're driving a car.

People are always wanting to do things that they know they shouldn't only because they think they are going to be the ones that can "handle" whatever it may be.That's where they screw up for most of the time they cannot and problems occur that they can't cope with. Better off not doing foolish things to start with and you just may avoid the pitfalls in life, then again you probably won't listen and do them anyway.

 

Cosmictraveler,

So it's basically about "jumping into a river and thinking you won't get wet".

 

More like jumping off of the bridge into the water without first checking out how deep the water really is and thinking you won't get killed or injured is my drift.

 

Cosmictraveler,

A scary emphasis. But I totally agree. "Common knowledge" isn't as bad and vain as some would like to think. Older people can know better, and one should listen to them.

 

I love walnuts they are one of my favorite foods. Recently I became violently allergic to them overnight. I ate some one month and then tried to eat some the next. I thought my life was in jeopardy. Figuring that there was some mistake I tried a few bites at a later time. I had the same resulting traumatic experience. I now know that eating walnuts will result in severe digestive distress. This does not stop me from eating them it just reduces the joy that eating them brings. It also forces me to plan their consumption around the bed rest that eating them requires. I know that they are bad for me but I still eat them because I refuse to let anything including my stomach beat me.

 

In the battle betweeen the heart and the mind ( intellect ) the heart will always win.
That is not to say that our hearts do not evolve over time. But "I want" is a statement of love for something. An ambition to fulfill that love.

The heart is by far harder to change that the mind.

 

maybe if we look at it like this

Mind - I want
Heart - I love
Groin - I lust

All variations of love.

When there is conflict as the thread suggest it is only a battle of love(s)

A fight between rationality ( the love of) and a love that is counterproductive to the overall well being of the "lover"

 

Lust is a variation of love?

"Variation"?

:bugeye:

 

i'm gratified, why do i care about others?

cheeze-its on a foggy morning with nice music never fail to make me happy. truly happy.

and older people can be senile.

you are generalizing.

yes, society has some bearing on it. but the statement is, "I know it's wrong." which would imply that you know the consequences, and the ways your actions could lead to those consequences. so the knowledge that the act is wrong is more than the bland proscription of society. perhaps it is foolishness. it could be an inability to "do the right thing." [as with nicotine addiction or OCD] but perhaps it is simply not caring. what is life without experience afterall?