For those atheists that believe in objective morality, can you prove it?
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
12-03-2014, 10:10 AM
RE: For those atheists that believe in objective morality, can you prove it?
(11-03-2014 11:03 PM)EvolutionKills Wrote:  If it's situationally dependent, then it is subjective. There might be an objective answer as to which option is more or less moral in any given choice; but that all depends upon the situation. Your choice and it's morality is subject to the situation at hand. We can attempt to objectively gauge our options, but the basis is still subjective. Using suffering as a gauge of morality is subjective; it is not valued by those following a form of divine command theory, they do not value suffering as a gauge of morality and it simply does not factor into what they consider moral or immoral.

Also if your lying gets the person tortured for 10 years, but your telling the truth gets them killed (and they are innocent); is your lying now still considered immoral? Or has your evaluation changed? If it has, then you're operating on subjective morality. If your basic choice didn't change regardless of whether this was 1940's occupied Poland or 1960's deep south of the United States, it is not now magically objective...

I don't see that being situational makes it subjective. A complete set of rules per situation would negate that.

However, morality is subjective, therefore situational.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
12-03-2014, 10:24 AM
RE: For those atheists that believe in objective morality, can you prove it?
(12-03-2014 10:10 AM)IndianAtheist Wrote:  
(12-03-2014 09:52 AM)natachan Wrote:  He didn't try. He's a coward.
according to you cowards are immoral? lol you're a funny guy.
Quote:Morality is to live up to what is best within ourselves. It is the seeking of our happiness and well being. By this logic a man who loses his leg has two choices: he can mope about it his whole life or he can try to adapt and move forward. The second action is moral, since it works towards his happiness and well being. The first does not and is immoral. Understand it is not US who are to judge him, but the only judge that matters is the man himself.
Hmm.. looks like you have a totally different meaning of morality altogether.

For me morality is simply a sense of right&wrong and it obviously differs from person to person like you&me and that's why its subjective not objective.
I know I'm an odd gal. We're all odd here Tongue

As I stated, I see morality as an internal contract with the self. It guides decisions as to right and wrong. My point in the above was that it not only governs interpersonal interactions but also internal decisions.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
12-03-2014, 10:28 AM
RE: For those atheists that believe in objective morality, can you prove it?
(12-03-2014 09:56 AM)natachan Wrote:  It is a betrayal of the self. Succumbing to it is immoral.

How do you betray yourself? That seems nonsensical. You can give yourself a goal, and either succeed or not, whether you succeed or not is not immoral because there is no betrayal. The self just is, and you can set a goal and try for it; but someone who does not is not 'betraying' themselves, they are simply being themselves. Their self just happens to be someone who isn't heavily goal oriented or motivated in that way.

This sounds less like any form of objective morality, and more like you just don't like unmotivated people. Dodgy


(12-03-2014 10:08 AM)natachan Wrote:  
(12-03-2014 09:58 AM)donotwant Wrote:  Sounds like a failure of morality.
Morality is to live up to what is best within ourselves. It is the seeking of our happiness and well being. By this logic a man who loses his leg has two choices: he can mope about it his whole life or he can try to adapt and move forward. The second action is moral, since it works towards his happiness and well being. The first does not and is immoral. Understand it is not US who are to judge him, but the only judge that matters is the man himself.

Then be aware that your definition of 'morality' is so out that as to be considered specious. Not that you're wrong, but I find your seeming lack of any regard for empathy and social context to be a troubling gap in your assessment.

[Image: GrumpyCat_01.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
12-03-2014, 10:32 AM
RE: For those atheists that believe in objective morality, can you prove it?
(12-03-2014 10:28 AM)EvolutionKills Wrote:  
(12-03-2014 09:56 AM)natachan Wrote:  It is a betrayal of the self. Succumbing to it is immoral.

How do you betray yourself? That seems nonsensical. You can give yourself a goal, and either succeed or not, whether you succeed or not is not immoral because there is no betrayal. The self just is, and you can set a goal and try for it; but someone who does not is not 'betraying' themselves, they are simply being themselves. Their self just happens to be someone who isn't heavily goal oriented or motivated in that way.

This sounds less like any form of objective morality, and more like you just don't like unmotivated people. Dodgy


(12-03-2014 10:08 AM)natachan Wrote:  Morality is to live up to what is best within ourselves. It is the seeking of our happiness and well being. By this logic a man who loses his leg has two choices: he can mope about it his whole life or he can try to adapt and move forward. The second action is moral, since it works towards his happiness and well being. The first does not and is immoral. Understand it is not US who are to judge him, but the only judge that matters is the man himself.

Then be aware that your definition of 'morality' is so out that as to be considered specious. Not that you're wrong, but I find your seeming lack of any regard for empathy and social context to be a troubling gap in your assessment.

HAHAHAHA!
[Image: giphy.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
12-03-2014, 10:32 AM
RE: For those atheists that believe in objective morality, can you prove it?
(12-03-2014 10:10 AM)Chas Wrote:  I don't see that being situational makes it subjective. A complete set of rules per situation would negate that.

However, morality is subjective, therefore situational.

Would it even be possible to have a complete set of rules that encompassed every contingent? Even if you could, I can't think of any guiding principle or valuation you could use for determining these rules that is not itself subjective.

[Image: GrumpyCat_01.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
12-03-2014, 10:34 AM
RE: For those atheists that believe in objective morality, can you prove it?
(12-03-2014 10:32 AM)EvolutionKills Wrote:  
(12-03-2014 10:10 AM)Chas Wrote:  I don't see that being situational makes it subjective. A complete set of rules per situation would negate that.

However, morality is subjective, therefore situational.

Would it even be possible to have a complete set of rules that encompassed every contingent? Even if you could, I can't think of any guiding principle or valuation you could use for determining these rules that is not itself subjective.

So we're fucked or what?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
12-03-2014, 10:40 AM
RE: For those atheists that believe in objective morality, can you prove it?
(12-03-2014 10:32 AM)donotwant Wrote:  
(12-03-2014 10:28 AM)EvolutionKills Wrote:  How do you betray yourself? That seems nonsensical. You can give yourself a goal, and either succeed or not, whether you succeed or not is not immoral because there is no betrayal. The self just is, and you can set a goal and try for it; but someone who does not is not 'betraying' themselves, they are simply being themselves. Their self just happens to be someone who isn't heavily goal oriented or motivated in that way.

This sounds less like any form of objective morality, and more like you just don't like unmotivated people. Dodgy



Then be aware that your definition of 'morality' is so out that as to be considered specious. Not that you're wrong, but I find your seeming lack of any regard for empathy and social context to be a troubling gap in your assessment.

HAHAHAHA!
[Image: andrew-laugh.gif]

Laugh all you want jackass, your stupidity doesn't make your arguments any more valid. I'm acknowledging that natachan and I have a fundamental disagreement on how we interpret and gauge morality. I happen to find his reasoning less than compelling, but that doesn't make my own take on morality objectively better than his. So what if I can't accuse him of being objectivly inferior? Fucking forbid that we might have to debate, and we might not be able to convince each other of the soundness of our respective positions; that's life! If we were trying to create legislation to govern morality for society, we might have to *gasp* compromise! Because he simply is not objectively wrong; I acknowledge this, while you seem content to mock it. Color me not impressed.

[Image: GrumpyCat_01.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
12-03-2014, 10:42 AM
RE: For those atheists that believe in objective morality, can you prove it?
I'm not coloring you I'm laughing at your response about unmotivated people. So according to you all morals are subjective. So are we fucked or what?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
12-03-2014, 10:42 AM
RE: For those atheists that believe in objective morality, can you prove it?
Quote:Then be aware that your definition of 'morality' is so out that as to be considered specious. Not that you're wrong, but I find your seeming lack of any regard for empathy and social context to be a troubling gap in your assessment.

I don't understand this statement. I donate time and money to the Red Cross. I feel empathy for those who are injured and in need of help. But how does my empathy change the morality of my actions? The empathy is a result of my value of human life and human potential. It is not primary and independant, but a secondary result of my values. My values have guided my actions, the empathy is a secondary result of those values.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
12-03-2014, 10:44 AM
RE: For those atheists that believe in objective morality, can you prove it?
(11-03-2014 12:59 PM)shimmyjimmy Wrote:  Can you show me how morals acquire the ability to leap out of your brains, or of any other brain for that matter, and become an 'object'? If so, by what process does this occur?

I
Could kill you.
Ask yourself...

Why I do not.

[Image: klingon_zps7e68578a.jpg]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: