I think there are two fundamental questions: Is there such thing as right and wrong? And if so, how does one know what is right and what is wrong?
A commenter below says right and wrong are only human constructs, but that raises the question of "which humans?" Arthur Leff calls this the "grand sez who?" Is right and wrong a preference, as I might prefer meat to cheese? If so, then who's to say my preferences are more or less valid than anyone else's?
Most people act as if there is a right and wrong beyond preference. Public discourse is full of criticism of "wrong" behaviors and attitudes. Is it wrong to be racist (for example)? Is it wrong to dislike cheese? Are those two different? Why?
I think they are different, and I'd bet most people do, too. If right and wrong are merely human preferences, then no one's "right" is better than my "right." If right and wrong is a human construct we're just arguing about which cheese tastes better.
But I do believe that right and wrong exist, and I believe that God determines what is right and wrong. My motivation to do right and avoid wrong (not that I do it well) is to please God. I'd like to be the kind of man that pleases God. And that's enough for me.
To answer your original questions - the fundamental moral tenets of all the great world religions are pretty much the same (not to say all religions are the same or equally true, but the moral teachings are the same). Follow them.
Do it because it's right, and you're a person who does the right thing. You're not a loser if you're pleasing God.
> And if so, how does one know what is right and what is wrong?
It all boils down to life and death. Right is anything that promotes life, wrong is anything that brings death.
This usually translates to right being anything that brings pleasure, while wrong anything that causes pain. After all that's how the brain is wired.
On the other hand we are social creatures and sometimes there is conflict, something that is right for the individual maybe is wrong for the community. It is widely accepted that right of the many is greater than the right of the one, and hence we have the laws.
So yes, there is right and wrong, and they are very clearly defined.
The problem that the OP has, is that most individuals in his country do what is right for themselves but wrong for the many and hence OP feels like a sucker because she/he does what is wrong for herself/himself but right for the many.
But if we go back to the roots of right and wrong, if most of the people in the community choose to do the wrong thing, then doing the right thing is not doing the right thing anymore.
Confused? Let me give you an example. Let's say we have 10 persons locked in a room. Each day we give a stick of bread to a random person. The community has decided that every day they will share the bread among all of them, as it is the best for the community(nobody will die of starvation). In this case, when you get the bread it is very clear that the right thing to do is to share it.
Now what happens if the majority of the individuals in the room, don't do the right thing, and don't share the bread when they get it, but keep it for themselves?
If a person gets the bread is it right to keep it to herself/himself or to share it?
Surprisingly the right thing to do, both for the individual and for the community, is to keep it, as the community will not really benefit if that person starves to death.
Of course, something even better would be for that person to try to convince everybody to start sharing the bread again.
A commenter below says right and wrong are only human constructs, but that raises the question of "which humans?" Arthur Leff calls this the "grand sez who?" Is right and wrong a preference, as I might prefer meat to cheese? If so, then who's to say my preferences are more or less valid than anyone else's?
Most people act as if there is a right and wrong beyond preference. Public discourse is full of criticism of "wrong" behaviors and attitudes. Is it wrong to be racist (for example)? Is it wrong to dislike cheese? Are those two different? Why?
I think they are different, and I'd bet most people do, too. If right and wrong are merely human preferences, then no one's "right" is better than my "right." If right and wrong is a human construct we're just arguing about which cheese tastes better.
But I do believe that right and wrong exist, and I believe that God determines what is right and wrong. My motivation to do right and avoid wrong (not that I do it well) is to please God. I'd like to be the kind of man that pleases God. And that's enough for me.
To answer your original questions - the fundamental moral tenets of all the great world religions are pretty much the same (not to say all religions are the same or equally true, but the moral teachings are the same). Follow them.
Do it because it's right, and you're a person who does the right thing. You're not a loser if you're pleasing God.
Good luck to you!