Objective Morality
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
03-04-2014, 10:20 PM (This post was last modified: 04-04-2014 01:53 AM by EvolutionKills.)
RE: Objective Morality
(03-04-2014 02:49 PM)Artie Wrote:  
(03-04-2014 11:46 AM)EvolutionKills Wrote:  When someone views their death as an improvement of their well-being; their survival instinct is at odds with their perceived well-being. If continued survival and progress towards well-being are both objectively good, is suicide objectively good or bad?
Bad because it has negative effects on the well-being of family and friends and the whole society.

You are weighing the consequences of the death of the individual on others. That is not objective morality, that is consequentialism. You've still not answered whether or not suicide is objectively good or bad (or as Banjo points out, potentially neither) in and of itself.



(03-04-2014 02:49 PM)Artie Wrote:  
(03-04-2014 11:46 AM)EvolutionKills Wrote:  Once again, you are misusing 'objectively' fucktard. We do not all know 'objectively' that "having children in a stable loving family and relationship and stable society enhances the well-being and chances of survival for the children and everybody". While I generally agree with the sentiment, it is not an objective 'fact', nor do we all 'know' it.
So you really require some objective statistics to "know" that this is an objective fact?

Yes, anyone who cares about what is true does. It's clear that you don't have a fucking clue what an objective fact is.

Objective
-(Of a person or their judgment) not influenced by personal feelings or opinions in considering and representing facts:
-Not dependent on the mind for existence; actual:
http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/us/def.../objective

Fact
-A fact (derived from the Latin factum, see below) is something that has really occurred or is actually the case. The usual test for a statement of fact is verifiability, that is whether it can be proven to correspond to experience. Standard reference works are often used to check facts. Scientific facts are verified by repeatable experiments.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fact

So do I need more than your's or mine's intuition or emotions to determine if something is an objective fact? Yes, I do; because I'm concerned with whether or not the things you are claiming are objectively true or not. You don't have any clue how to approach a discussion with even a modicum of scientific rationality and objectivity.



(03-04-2014 02:49 PM)Artie Wrote:  
(03-04-2014 11:46 AM)EvolutionKills Wrote:  
(03-04-2014 02:49 PM)Artie Wrote:  Rape is immoral because it diminishes chances of survival and well-being for the victim, child and everybody. What else do you mean?
How does it diminish the survival of the victim?
Are you saying that rape doesn't diminish the well-being and survival of the victim? Just google "rape victim kills herself".

Once again, Consequentialism is not Objective Morality.



(03-04-2014 02:49 PM)Artie Wrote:  
(03-04-2014 11:46 AM)EvolutionKills Wrote:  I'm asking just about rape, not any possible violence in addition to the rape; as it is possible to perform a rape on someone who is comatose or passed out without the use of excessive force.
What's the point of this comment?

You're arguing rape is bad because of the consequences (once again, making your moral judgement subjective) of decreased survival, which I presumed to mean from violence because you didn't specify how the rape victim suffered a loss to her survival. You're making claims without backing up your assertions with anything, let alone facts.



(03-04-2014 02:49 PM)Artie Wrote:  
(03-04-2014 11:46 AM)EvolutionKills Wrote:  In addition who's well-being is objectively more important, the victim's or the rapists? See, you can't even answer the question...
The well-being of both the victim and the rapist is important of course. Unless you think being known as a rapist enhances the well-being and survivability of the rapist? http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-...arges.html

Once again fucktard, an appeal to consequences does nothing to show that rape is objectively immoral. Facepalm

Nor does it answer which of their well-beings is objectively superior and worthy of more consideration, and if one even is superior, to what degree and how do we measure it?


Fuck, this is like trying to have a conversation about geometry, and you're arguing with me that 2+2=5 because reasons... Dodgy

[Image: E3WvRwZ.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like EvolutionKills's post
03-04-2014, 11:19 PM (This post was last modified: 03-04-2014 11:31 PM by Full Circle.)
RE: Objective Morality
@Artie

Imagine the following scenario:

A small, isolated tribe in the Amazon jungle has just lost it's last breeding female, let's call them Tribe 1.
The closest tribe is a rival clan, Tribe 2, that competes with them for food. These two tribes have gone to war with one another many times.

Tribe 1 knows that without breeding females they are doomed and their genes will not be passed on.
They mount an offensive and manage to kidnap a few young women from Tribe 2. They kill several of the young men protecting them during the raid.

The men from Tribe 1 rape the captured women immediately upon their triumphant return to their village.


Q: What can be objectively said of the actions performed by Tribe 1 in this scenario?
Q: Was the kidnapping justified?
Q: Was the killing justified?
Q: Were the actions of Tribe 1 immoral?
Q Were the actions of Tribe 1 psychopathic?

ps When answering this question just stick to the "facts" of the story, don't add or subtract anything, don't suppose any other external criteria.

(I use the Amazonian tribes in this example but what I just described has been going on since before the dawn of homo sapiens and all throughout our history.)

Let me remind you of this exchange:
(03-04-2014 02:46 AM)Artie Wrote:  
(03-04-2014 02:33 AM)EvolutionKills Wrote:  Rape is conducive to the continuation and survival of my genes. Facepalm
That would be the answer of a sociopath with faulty hard-wiring who doesn't understand that in a society the negative consequences of rape such as the act of violence, producing an unwanted child etc is detrimental to well-being and survival for everybody and hence immoral.

“I am quite sure now that often, very often, in matters concerning religion and politics a man’s reasoning powers are not above the monkey’s.”~Mark Twain
“Ocean: A body of water occupying about two-thirds of a world made for man - who has no gills.”~ Ambrose Bierce
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 4 users Like Full Circle's post
04-04-2014, 01:23 AM
RE: Objective Morality
Why not simply use the story of the Rape of the Sabine women?

Artie, you mention suicide and postulate whether it is good or bad. Have you considered it may be neither?

NOTE: Member, Tomasia uses this site to slander other individuals. He then later proclaims it a joke, but not in public.
I will call him a liar and a dog here and now.
Banjo.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Banjo's post
04-04-2014, 02:16 PM
RE: Objective Morality
(03-04-2014 12:00 PM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  Rats have empathy. Is THAT "morality" ?
Empathy is the ability to understand and share the feelings of another. Morality is the ability to differentiate between "right" and "wrong".
Quote:There are all kinds of situations where the "taking of life" is considered as moral. What is an acceptable situation to "murder" someone is entirely situational. Your over-simplifications do not serve you.
Please learn the difference between "taking of life" or "killing" and "murder".
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
04-04-2014, 02:27 PM
RE: Objective Morality
(03-04-2014 07:59 PM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  Please explain how exactly the "same" *objective* process hard wires people differently. Do you have ANY idea how utterly STUPID that sentence is ?
If it's the SAME, and "objective", then the results should be the same.
Jesus H. Fucking Christ. April Fools Day is past.
Well, I guess the existence of dwarfs and basketball players disprove evolution then because they are obviously different...
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
04-04-2014, 03:10 PM
RE: Objective Morality
(03-04-2014 10:20 PM)EvolutionKills Wrote:  You don't have any clue how to approach a discussion with even a modicum of scientific rationality and objectivity.
You write about morality yet you can't write a paragraph without insulting the person you talk to. I give up this conversation and simply leave you with this: "An objective basis for morality can be found in an evolutionary account of its origin and development." http://www.percepp.com/morality.htm
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
04-04-2014, 03:17 PM
RE: Objective Morality
Artie, have you actually read the article you linked? Clearly the author is leaving it to human choice to devise a moral code. He is not saying evolution led to one particular moral objectivity.

Read his conclusion.

But this potential international morality still lacks the motivation and sense of purpose which can give life to individual and group morality. Group selection, while it may in the long run produce 'better' moral codes for the individual and the group, has no obvious application at the level of the world-system, the group of all nations. Or perhaps we should see in the forms taken by incipient international morality referred to above, the motivation and purpose which can make inter-societal morality a reality. The new force is not group selection but species selection. If absence (or deficiencies) of a world inter-societal moral code can now threaten the existence of the human race -- and it can, in nuclear catastrophes, AIDS, destruction of the ozone layer, poisoning of the seas and the forests -- then there is reason to construct a world moral code, and reason to make sure that it is observed. At the level of the group of all groups, the human race, as well as at the level of the individual, morality could become objective. And this world-objective morality would reside not in the institutions, the bureaucracies, the apparatus, but in the individual. The many levels of morality, stretching up to the morality between societies, between states, would be integrated within the individual consciousness

NOTE: Member, Tomasia uses this site to slander other individuals. He then later proclaims it a joke, but not in public.
I will call him a liar and a dog here and now.
Banjo.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
04-04-2014, 04:05 PM
RE: Objective Morality
(04-04-2014 03:17 PM)Banjo Wrote:  Artie, have you actually read the article you linked? Clearly the author is leaving it to human choice to devise a moral code. He is not saying evolution led to one particular moral objectivity.
Could you read it again? Here are some of the important parts: "An objective basis for morality can be found in an evolutionary account of its origin and development." ... "morality has an objective physiological and neurological basis". [My emphasis]. He is simply saying that the species should be seen as one group and share the same objectively evolved moral codes. Such as for example the Golden Rule.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
04-04-2014, 04:54 PM (This post was last modified: 04-04-2014 04:57 PM by Baruch.)
RE: Objective Morality
(04-04-2014 04:05 PM)Artie Wrote:  
(04-04-2014 03:17 PM)Banjo Wrote:  Artie, have you actually read the article you linked? Clearly the author is leaving it to human choice to devise a moral code. He is not saying evolution led to one particular moral objectivity.
Could you read it again? Here are some of the important parts: "An objective basis for morality can be found in an evolutionary account of its origin and development." ... "morality has an objective physiological and neurological basis". [My emphasis]. He is simply saying that the species should be seen as one group and share the same objectively evolved moral codes. Such as for example the Golden Rule.

I used to be an Artie and try justify long esoteric reasons for "objective absolute morality" back in my religious days.
Now I just rape & pillage with the occasional baby eating.

Its quite amazing that when one leaves the whole absolute objective morality thing not much changes and one carries on with pretty much golden rule behavior.
At the end of the day there is some objectivity because all humans share similarities in biology & central nervous system - and for that matter cultural similarities for example concepts such as property.
With the example of property: Once a shared concept such as property exists then by necessity there will be concepts such as theft and society must make rules about preventing theft to protect the concept of property. This is not even uniquely human as other animals have notions or their own territory and will cooperate and fight with each other over territory. Morality is one evolutionary route to reach stability in such circumstances where there is a balance between aggression and cooperation as a group and between groups - and this is necessary hence why I said there is some objectivity to morality.
Non of what I say has to be religious - Aristotle and others from secular traditions have also developed rational criteria for a moral code which allows the "thriving of the polis" i.e if civilization is to continue so must moral codes out of necessity.
Of course one can pick and question the motive of "thriving of the polis" or "Eudimonia" (=well being as a human goal) - if someone disagrees with this then the whole moral case collapses. However if one agrees with the outcome for wellbeing of the group, the nation, city, polis, family etc then out of necessity many moral rules are objective because there are restricted, limited routes to achieving such goals.

However as full circle pointed out with the tribe 1 & 2 senario's
http://www.thethinkingatheist.com/forum/...#pid539104
there can be no absolute because unusual circumstances will change the criteria for what constitutes well being, Eudimonia, thriving etc...

...and by the way - full circles analogy is found in the bible when the midianites are all allowed by God to be murdered except the virgins who are rape booty. So the bible allows rape as a good moral action in some circumstances which crushes the idea of a generalized absolute moral code such as "do not rape under any circumstances."

A wise man proportions his belief to the evidence -
David Hume


[Image: images?q=tbn:ANd9GcRhOs7rUrS5bRKvWS7clR7...gNs5ZwpVef]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Baruch's post
04-04-2014, 05:03 PM
RE: Objective Morality
(04-04-2014 04:05 PM)Artie Wrote:  
(04-04-2014 03:17 PM)Banjo Wrote:  Artie, have you actually read the article you linked? Clearly the author is leaving it to human choice to devise a moral code. He is not saying evolution led to one particular moral objectivity.
Could you read it again? Here are some of the important parts: "An objective basis for morality can be found in an evolutionary account of its origin and development." ... "morality has an objective physiological and neurological basis". [My emphasis]. He is simply saying that the species should be seen as one group and share the same objectively evolved moral codes. Such as for example the Golden Rule.

What forces the entire species to see itself as one group with one goal ?

True that a highly desirable goal would be "Eudimonia" = well being or thriving for the group and I agree we should ideally cooperate to achieve this and one method would be via setting up shared moral codes.
However if two groups have limited resources and joining together even further diminishes their resources then cooperation and shared moral codes may diminish well being ! This is not far fetched but common throughout history.

A wise man proportions his belief to the evidence -
David Hume


[Image: images?q=tbn:ANd9GcRhOs7rUrS5bRKvWS7clR7...gNs5ZwpVef]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: