Another attack on moral subjectivism
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
26-06-2015, 02:58 PM
Another attack on moral subjectivism
(26-06-2015 02:57 PM)Tomasia Wrote:  
(26-06-2015 01:56 PM)TheBeardedDude Wrote:  This is why we don't hold inanimate objects accountable when they seemingly break our moral guidelines. Like a volcano erupting and killing people. That isn't morally right or wrong, because the volcano isn't a member of society, which is where the level at which the moral rules are applied to.

We don't hold other animate objects beyond humans as morally accountable either.

Bullshit. We euthanize animals that kill humans all the time.

Being nice is something stupid people do to hedge their bets
-Rick
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
26-06-2015, 02:59 PM
Another attack on moral subjectivism
(26-06-2015 12:43 PM)TheBeardedDude Wrote:  
(26-06-2015 12:31 PM)tear151 Wrote:  your argument was addressed in the video.

No, it wasn't because it defined morality not as a behavior but as a value. It tried to argue that values can't be derived from things that "are/is" but morality is something that is "are/is" when I define it as a behavior, like altruism.

So your defining morality as a particular observation of how people actually behave? Not as as how they ought to behave? Because that's how the video defined it.

"Tell me, muse, of the storyteller who has been thrust to the edge of the world, both an infant and an ancient, and through him reveal everyman." ---Homer the aged poet.

"In Him was life, and the life was the Light of men. The Light shines in the darkness, and the darkness did not comprehend it."
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
26-06-2015, 03:01 PM
Another attack on moral subjectivism
(26-06-2015 02:59 PM)Tomasia Wrote:  
(26-06-2015 12:43 PM)TheBeardedDude Wrote:  No, it wasn't because it defined morality not as a behavior but as a value. It tried to argue that values can't be derived from things that "are/is" but morality is something that is "are/is" when I define it as a behavior, like altruism.

So your defining morality as a particular observation of how people actually behave? Not as as how they ought to behave? Because that's how the video defined it.

I don't give a fuck how the video defined it. It's a YouTube video, not dogma.

Being nice is something stupid people do to hedge their bets
-Rick
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
26-06-2015, 03:04 PM (This post was last modified: 26-06-2015 03:08 PM by Tomasia.)
Another attack on moral subjectivism
I think the problem for Stevil, Tear, Matt Finey, that without a persuasive argument that explains why our perceptions of morality, our language is seeped in oughts, why we are so inclined to believe morality is objective, the case their selling becomes a hard one, and simplistic because it ignores this perception from being accounted for.

You're telling me that morality is an illusion, while the person on the other end strongly believes it to be real. You'd have to explain that illusion somewhat persuasively if you expect folks to accept your views.

"Tell me, muse, of the storyteller who has been thrust to the edge of the world, both an infant and an ancient, and through him reveal everyman." ---Homer the aged poet.

"In Him was life, and the life was the Light of men. The Light shines in the darkness, and the darkness did not comprehend it."
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
26-06-2015, 03:05 PM
Another attack on moral subjectivism
(26-06-2015 03:04 PM)Tomasia Wrote:  I think the problem from Stevil, Tear, Matt Finey, that without a persuasive argument that explains why our perceptions of morality, our language is seeped in oughts, why we are so inclined to believe morality is objective, the case their selling becomes a hard one, and simplistic because it ignores this perceptions from being accounted for.

You're telling me that morality is an illusion, while the person on the other end strongly believes it to be real. You'd have to explain that illusion somewhat persuasively if you expect folks to accept your views.

You don't know what I'm telling you because you reject it before you read it.

Being nice is something stupid people do to hedge their bets
-Rick
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
26-06-2015, 03:07 PM
Another attack on moral subjectivism
(26-06-2015 03:01 PM)TheBeardedDude Wrote:  
(26-06-2015 02:59 PM)Tomasia Wrote:  So your defining morality as a particular observation of how people actually behave? Not as as how they ought to behave? Because that's how the video defined it.

I don't give a fuck how the video defined it. It's a YouTube video, not dogma.


A video that highlights the views of pretty much every moral nihilist here, that you're arguing with.

"Tell me, muse, of the storyteller who has been thrust to the edge of the world, both an infant and an ancient, and through him reveal everyman." ---Homer the aged poet.

"In Him was life, and the life was the Light of men. The Light shines in the darkness, and the darkness did not comprehend it."
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
26-06-2015, 03:07 PM
RE: Another attack on moral subjectivism
(26-06-2015 02:47 PM)TheBeardedDude Wrote:  
(26-06-2015 02:42 PM)tear151 Wrote:  and what is the meaningful difference between this and moral nihilism?

Apparently it is the difference about how one defines the terms associated with morality and behavior.

I think that is the case, I don't think we disagree on the actual functions going on, I still hold morality should not be used as a word in your system, it allows moral language and for you to jump to objective morality again without even you noticing.

"A witty quote means nothing"
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
26-06-2015, 03:08 PM
Another attack on moral subjectivism
(26-06-2015 03:07 PM)Tomasia Wrote:  
(26-06-2015 03:01 PM)TheBeardedDude Wrote:  I don't give a fuck how the video defined it. It's a YouTube video, not dogma.


A video that highlights the views of pretty much every moral nihilist here, that you're arguing with.

And? The fuck do I care? Just because they believe it, doesn't mean it's true.

Being nice is something stupid people do to hedge their bets
-Rick
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
26-06-2015, 03:09 PM
Another attack on moral subjectivism
(26-06-2015 03:07 PM)tear151 Wrote:  
(26-06-2015 02:47 PM)TheBeardedDude Wrote:  Apparently it is the difference about how one defines the terms associated with morality and behavior.

I think that is the case, I don't think we disagree on the actual functions going on, I still hold morality should not be used as a word in your system, it allows moral language and for you to jump to objective morality again without even you noticing.

I wouldn't say objective, I'd say defined at a specific point in time based on context and current moral systems.

Being nice is something stupid people do to hedge their bets
-Rick
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
26-06-2015, 03:10 PM
Another attack on moral subjectivism
Which is why I believe we can look retroactively at actions (say 100 years ago) and realize it wasn't immoral at the time, but is now. (Whatever "it" is, like slavery)

Being nice is something stupid people do to hedge their bets
-Rick
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: