Another attack on moral subjectivism
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
26-06-2015, 03:30 PM
RE: Another attack on moral subjectivism
(26-06-2015 03:29 PM)Stevil Wrote:  
(26-06-2015 02:42 PM)tear151 Wrote:  and what is the meaningful difference between this and moral nihilism?
I am a moral nihilist.

Oh yes I remember you now Stevil hello again.

"A witty quote means nothing"
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
26-06-2015, 03:30 PM
Another attack on moral subjectivism
(26-06-2015 03:29 PM)tear151 Wrote:  
(26-06-2015 03:28 PM)TheBeardedDude Wrote:  Society defines morality. Whether they are good or not is subjective and contextual. Once again, it's not black and white good or bad.

If you're immoral by a society's definitions, you'll lose some of the benefits of society. Perhaps your freedom or your sexual attractiveness to a mating female/male or your life if your immorality is deemed dangerous enough.

Again, I said earlier, if I'm immoral in a way that benefits me, that point is irrelevant to normative morals.

Only if it benefits you more than a society does and as long as you can avoid societal consequence.

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, 03:32 PM
RE: Another attack on moral subjectivism
(26-06-2015 02:54 PM)Tomasia Wrote:  
Stevil dateline=' Wrote:  Context is important for people who don't believe in objective morality.

No, context is important for folks who don't subscribe to moral absolutism. Moral realist/objectivist that don't subscribe to absolutism, believe things are right and wrong given a particular context.
Who gets to decide on the moral correctness given the context? This seems open to personal subjectivity.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
26-06-2015, 03:32 PM
RE: Another attack on moral subjectivism
(26-06-2015 03:30 PM)TheBeardedDude Wrote:  
(26-06-2015 03:29 PM)tear151 Wrote:  Again, I said earlier, if I'm immoral in a way that benefits me, that point is irrelevant to normative morals.

Only if it benefits you more than a society does and as long as you can avoid societal consequence.

We seem to have different ideas of what morality is, in that case we definetly agree on the actual consequences so to speak.

"A witty quote means nothing"
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
26-06-2015, 03:32 PM
RE: Another attack on moral subjectivism
"In its descriptive sense, "morality" refers to personal or cultural values, codes of conduct or social mores. It does not connote objective claims of right or wrong, but only refers to that which is considered right or wrong. Descriptive ethics is the branch of philosophy which studies morality in this sense.

In its normative sense, "morality" refers to whatever (if anything) is actually right or wrong, which may be independent of the values or mores held by any particular peoples or cultures. Normative ethics is the branch of philosophy which studies morality in this sense." Wikipedia.com

TBD,

This thread is talking about morality in the normative sense. If you think this thread is talking about morality in the descriptive sense, then you are TOTALLY missing the point. We all know that different societies hold different common values, most of us learned this at a very young age. Nothing new, and not much to talk about there.

This thread exists because non-religious people have no business claiming the rightness or wrongness of any action. Our (the nihilists) problem is that many atheists make moral claims.

To claim that murder for fun is wrong, sounds as silly to a nihilist as claiming that wearing socks with sandals is wrong. In reality, we're talking about preferences, the rightness or wrongness is only an illusion.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Matt Finney's post
26-06-2015, 03:34 PM
Another attack on moral subjectivism
(26-06-2015 03:32 PM)tear151 Wrote:  
(26-06-2015 03:30 PM)TheBeardedDude Wrote:  Only if it benefits you more than a society does and as long as you can avoid societal consequence.

We seem to have different ideas of what morality is, in that case we definetly agree on the actual consequences so to speak.

Probably because you believe morality is how one "ought to behave" when I reject that as relevant at all. Morality is a behavior, and not all animals (including within a species) behave the same way.

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
[+] 1 user Likes TheBeardedDude's post
26-06-2015, 03:34 PM
RE: Another attack on moral subjectivism
(26-06-2015 03:29 PM)TheBeardedDude Wrote:  
(26-06-2015 03:27 PM)Stevil Wrote:  We don't euthanise animals for the crime of being immoral.
We euthanise animals to remove them as a threat to humans.

As a threat to society. Which is the same reason we remove human threats from society if they are immoral enough.
The immoral judgement is unnecessary. All we need to determine is if they are dangerous to society.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
26-06-2015, 03:34 PM
Another attack on moral subjectivism
(26-06-2015 03:26 PM)Stevil Wrote:  I don't have to answer your question "Why do some people believe in morality" Just as the atheist doesn't have to answer the question "Why do some people believe in gods?", Just as the skeptic doesn't have to answer the question "Why do some people believe in ghosts or luck or..

Of course you don't have to answer that question. But if you wanted to persuade people, or argue that morality is an illusion make a convincing case for this, then attempting to answer that question would help.

The common objection made by those who disagree with the moral nihilist position, is that the arguments are too simplistic. And I can't say they are entirely without warrant. It's not hard to see why other atheists reject these views quite strongly. Even if in the end their objections are not well articulated.

"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, 03:34 PM
RE: Another attack on moral subjectivism
I'd be interested in Stevil and Bucky discussing this.

"A witty quote means nothing"
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
26-06-2015, 03:36 PM
Another attack on moral subjectivism
(26-06-2015 03:32 PM)Matt Finney Wrote:  "In its descriptive sense, "morality" refers to personal or cultural values, codes of conduct or social mores. It does not connote objective claims of right or wrong, but only refers to that which is considered right or wrong. Descriptive ethics is the branch of philosophy which studies morality in this sense.

In its normative sense, "morality" refers to whatever (if anything) is actually right or wrong, which may be independent of the values or mores held by any particular peoples or cultures. Normative ethics is the branch of philosophy which studies morality in this sense." Wikipedia.com

TBD,

This thread is talking about morality in the normative sense. If you think this thread is talking about morality in the descriptive sense, then you are TOTALLY missing the point. We all know that different societies hold different common values, most of us learned this at a very young age. Nothing new, and not much to talk about there.

This thread exists because non-religious people have no business claiming the rightness or wrongness of any action. Our (the nihilists) problem is that many atheists make moral claims.

To claim that murder for fun is wrong, sounds as silly to a nihilist as claiming that wearing socks with sandals is wrong. In reality, we're talking about preferences, the rightness or wrongness is only an illusion.

Only if you don't believe that morality is a behavior defined by a society such that something can be deemed morally right or wrong within a certain context at any given 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
Post Reply
Forum Jump: