Is slavery wrong?

[obfuscator]

I recently had a very interesting discussion about the morality of slavery, in which some interesting points were brought up that I hadn't heard before. I'm curious to see what the majority think about this.

 

Post away (and please explain your viewpoint if you choose "other" or if the poll doesn't properly represent your feelings).

 

Curious to see how this pans out.

[K4ylan]

I'm going to say yes to this...

 

 

Although from the point of the slaveholder, I can fully understand how they could be viewed as just tools or property. I can't say I would have given owning slaves a second thought if I had.

[Giordano]

Could you post some of the 'pro-slavery' arguments from your discussion? I'm seriously drawing blanks here, besides blunt profits.

[obfuscator]

Could you post some of the 'pro-slavery' arguments from your discussion? I'm seriously drawing blanks here, besides blunt profits.

Well the argument I encountered was not that slavery was necessarily acceptable, but that it was not particularly wrong just because it was acceptable at the time.

[Sy_Accursed]

Slavery is quite obviously wrong to anyone with a sense of morality. All humans are people not a commodity or tool to be traded or sold.

[K4ylan]

Slavery is quite obviously wrong to anyone with a sense of morality. All humans are people not a commodity or tool to be traded or sold.

 

Again, that depends on your point of view. Right now, everyone would, without a doubt, say 'yes it is immoral', but back then it wasn't thought immoral by those who owned slaves.

 

But no one is going to argue that slavery is still moral in the twenty-first century.

[obfuscator]

Slavery is quite obviously wrong to anyone with a sense of morality. All humans are people not a commodity or tool to be traded or sold.

 

Again, that depends on your point of view. Right now, everyone would, without a doubt, say 'yes it is immoral', but back then it wasn't thought immoral by those who owned slaves.

 

But no one is going to argue that slavery is still moral in the twenty-first century.

Does that mean it was moral to own slaves?

[Sy_Accursed]

Slavery is quite obviously wrong to anyone with a sense of morality. All humans are people not a commodity or tool to be traded or sold.

 

Again, that depends on your point of view. Right now, everyone would, without a doubt, say 'yes it is immoral', but back then it wasn't thought immoral by those who owned slaves.

 

But no one is going to argue that slavery is still moral in the twenty-first century.

 

Well yeah obvious it wasn't wrong at the time considered to be at the time.

But given the question "is slavery wrong?"

Past context is irrelevant, only modern context as "is" marks present tense.

 

Also slavery was seen as moral back then as blacks were deem racially inferior and heathen and it was considered a kind act to bring them to civilisation and teach them to speak "god's language" and the bible etc.

[Giordano]

Yeah, thread title is misleading to modern time.

 

But was it moral back then? No. Is it moral now? No. Was it ever moral? No.

[obfuscator]

Yeah, thread title is misleading to modern time.

 

But was it moral back then? No. Is it moral now? No. Was it ever moral? No.

Good point. Added subtitle.

[stevepole]

I voted no, not because I think it is morally right to own slaves, but because it is a crucial part in the development of every major civilization so without slavery the world as we know it would not exist.

[Ember]

.

[Orpheus]

I see it as a necessary evil for countries that are developing, as it's unfortunately a need. Think about it: Without slavery, America would not have gotten this far, nor would other major civilizations. Afterwards, there's no reason to treat another human being as property. Human lives are not priced the same as objects, and never will be. Even then, I'd prefer slaves to be treated as human beings.

 

Back then? Morally, probably wrong but a necessary evil. Now and in the future? Wrong entirely as there's no need under that definition.

[Sy_Accursed]

Slavery is quite obviously wrong to anyone with a sense of morality.

With your sense of morality, I hope you mean.

 

Any sense of morality that devalues any subset of humans to the state that they can treated as animals and thus become slave is highly flawed and does not deserve status as "morality" in modern times.

[Orpheus]

Slavery is quite obviously wrong to anyone with a sense of morality.

With your sense of morality, I hope you mean.

 

Any sense of morality that devalues any subset of humans to the state that they can treated as animals and thus become slave is highly flawed and does not deserve status as "morality" in modern times.

And who the hell are you to determine what "morality" is? Do you know what's universally "right" and "wrong"? The key word is universal here.

[Ember]

.

[Sy_Accursed]

Slavery is quite obviously wrong to anyone with a sense of morality.

With your sense of morality, I hope you mean.

 

Any sense of morality that devalues any subset of humans to the state that they can treated as animals and thus become slave is highly flawed and does not deserve status as "morality" in modern times.

And who the hell are you to determine what "morality" is? Do you know what's universally "right" and "wrong"? The key word is universal here.

 

Not for everything, but I can say without a shadow of a doubt it is wrong to treat any human as a slave. There is no reason at all to treat any human as fundamentally lesser than any other human.

 

Yes humans are animals but that's a whole other issue, I don;t see any other animal forming civilisations and such so there's a line to be drawn between how they are treated and how a human is treated.

[michel555555]

I see it as a necessary evil for countries that are developing, as it's unfortunately a need. Think about it: Without slavery, America would not have gotten this far, nor would other major civilizations. Afterwards, there's no reason to treat another human being as property. Human lives are not priced the same as objects, and never will be. Even then, I'd prefer slaves to be treated as human beings.

 

Back then? Morally, probably wrong but a necessary evil. Now and in the future? Wrong entirely as there's no need under that definition.

 

I'm curiouse. Why was it a "necessary evil"? Sure it provided a big labour pool but you still needed to feed, water, ect slaves and keep them healthy or risk the spread of disease. So any gains made by having a bigger labour pool to tend crops build buildings ect might have been negated by the resources needed to maintain them.

[nine naked men]

I think slavery as it has happened in the past is wrong, but... I dunno, I think it could work in a way that's not wrong. Not based on skin colour, etc, but a legitimate occupation. But of course it sounds miles better on paper than it would if it were ever implemented in a way, so yeah. Other, I guess.

[Orpheus]

I see it as a necessary evil for countries that are developing, as it's unfortunately a need. Think about it: Without slavery, America would not have gotten this far, nor would other major civilizations. Afterwards, there's no reason to treat another human being as property. Human lives are not priced the same as objects, and never will be. Even then, I'd prefer slaves to be treated as human beings.

 

Back then? Morally, probably wrong but a necessary evil. Now and in the future? Wrong entirely as there's no need under that definition.

 

I'm curiouse. Why was it a "necessary evil"? Sure it provided a big labour pool but you still needed to feed, water, ect slaves and keep them healthy or risk the spread of disease. So any gains made by having a bigger labour pool to tend crops build buildings ect might have been negated by the resources needed to maintain them.

 

It might have, but what's happened in the past is done, we can't quite change what's occured, only what's ahead. If there were records of the amount of food and resources used for slaves vs the amount accomplished, we could figure that much out, but alas, records probably don't exist anymore.

 

Also, before we hit that tangent like topics tend to roll off into: Affirmative action. It's gotta go. I don't care if it's to "make up" or whatever. No one should get an advantage just because of how they were born, it's completely unreasonable. Hell, one of the MIT admissions members actually outright stated somewhere that using affirmative action in an admission essay wouldn't work.

[Sy_Accursed]

I think slavery as it has happened in the past is wrong, but... I dunno, I think it could work in a way that's not wrong. Not based on skin colour, etc, but a legitimate occupation. But of course it sounds miles better on paper than it would if it were ever implemented in a way, so yeah. Other, I guess.

 

I think you are referring to servants or general labourers (eg farm labourers etc).They offer a whole range of occupations starting from the kind 0 qualification stuff through to highly qualified that encompasses all of what servants were; it where butlers and maids and cleaners etc all stem from.

 

Also @Orpheus alas nothing there heaps of records about. It's not like its THAT ancient history, there's still people who were slaves alive (just about, or there were a few years bk) and there definitely many of their children/grand children who were born shortly after abolition.

If you speak to an expert in the field they could probably tell you loads of figures and statistics.

 

And ugh Affirmative action stuff annoys me no end. It's basically the reverse of old school racism in disguise; eg there's some american fund thing (iirc) to help black people go to college, when they tried to make a white equivalent it was deemed racist; yet the black one isn't because its helping kids who were never slaves and never had unequal rights but just happen to of been born into a race that was enslaved a few hundred years back.

[Will H]

The problem with slavery is that it allows one person to harm another, and laws are in place to prevent people from harming others. Therefore, under a state of law, slavery should be illegal. No need for morality here.

 

 

If we're trying to build a civilisation to improve the wellbeing of the people, taking the slavery approach negates the point of the whole thing.

[Giordano]

I see it as a necessary evil for countries that are developing, as it's unfortunately a need. Think about it: Without slavery, America would not have gotten this far, nor would other major civilizations.

I disagree. If slavery advanced us, why aren't we using the technology and customs of the late 19th/early 20th century? In the last century we advanced more than all of mankind combined.

 

Why? The industrialization in the 19th century is what led to our situation today and that was with underpaid factory workers, not slaves. In America, for instance, the northern states were much more industrialized than the south. And we know in the north slavery was illegal.

 

Britan banned slavery in 1836: close to the start of the industrial revolution. For the next fifty years other European nations banned slavery and the clinging hope of feudalism changed to industrialization.

 

What we needed was a large number of unskilled laborers, which came from the centuries of feudalism, which is different than slavery.

[Ember]

.

[Ginger_Warrior]

I almost voted 'No' just to troll this whole thread.