Objective Morality
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
05-04-2014, 11:16 AM
RE: Objective Morality
(05-04-2014 11:13 AM)Revenant77x Wrote:  What do you think objective means?
Quote:By your definition your counter argument here is worthless as it is an appeal to emotion not fact.
I asked you a direct question: What do you think objective means if it doesn't mean what the definitions say it means?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
05-04-2014, 11:35 AM
RE: Objective Morality
(05-04-2014 11:16 AM)Artie Wrote:  
(05-04-2014 11:13 AM)Revenant77x Wrote:  What do you think objective means?
Quote:By your definition your counter argument here is worthless as it is an appeal to emotion not fact.
I asked you a direct question: What do you think objective means if it doesn't mean what the definitions say it means?

Objective Morality would be one that is not dependant upon situation or outside circumstance. It is black and white, either an action is right or wrong under all contingencies. Culture and Time would not affect it, if something is Objectively Immoral it would be universally agreed upon.

This of course is not reality and thus why there is no such thing.

(31-07-2014 04:37 PM)Luminon Wrote:  America is full of guns, but they're useless, because nobody has the courage to shoot an IRS agent in self-defense
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 4 users Like Revenant77x's post
05-04-2014, 11:39 AM
RE: Objective Morality
(05-04-2014 11:35 AM)Revenant77x Wrote:  Objective Morality would be one that is not dependant upon situation or outside circumstance. It is black and white, either an action is right or wrong under all contingencies. Culture and Time would not affect it, if something is Objectively Immoral it would be universally agreed upon.

This of course is not reality and thus why there is no such thing.
Please quote any source defining "objective" or "objective morality" as you have described above.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
05-04-2014, 11:48 AM
RE: Objective Morality
(05-04-2014 11:39 AM)Artie Wrote:  
(05-04-2014 11:35 AM)Revenant77x Wrote:  Objective Morality would be one that is not dependant upon situation or outside circumstance. It is black and white, either an action is right or wrong under all contingencies. Culture and Time would not affect it, if something is Objectively Immoral it would be universally agreed upon.

This of course is not reality and thus why there is no such thing.
Please quote any source defining "objective" or "objective morality" as you have described above.

(05-04-2014 11:11 AM)Artie Wrote:  "The very definition of "objective" is "not influenced by personal feelings or opinions in considering and representing facts." " based on facts rather than feelings or opinions : not influenced by feelings". http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/defini.../objective http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/objective What do you think objective means?


http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Objective_morality

Quote:Objective morality is the idea that a certain system of ethics or set of moral judgments is not just true according to a person's subjective opinion, but factually true. Proponents of this theory would argue that a statement like "Murder is wrong" can be as objectively true as "1 + 1 = 2." Most of the time, the alleged source is God, or the Kantian Categorical Imperative; arguably, no objective source of morality has ever been confirmed, nor have any a priori proofs been offered to the effect that morality is anything other than subjective. Kant ultimately fails, because he is perceptibly committed to Christian morality, which guides his arguments.


If something is factually true then it would be true regardless of situations such as time periods or culture. Do you disagree and if so why?

(31-07-2014 04:37 PM)Luminon Wrote:  America is full of guns, but they're useless, because nobody has the courage to shoot an IRS agent in self-defense
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like Revenant77x's post
05-04-2014, 11:52 AM
RE: Objective Morality
I will address multiple responses in chronological order.

(05-04-2014 01:32 AM)Artie Wrote:  
(03-04-2014 11:19 PM)Full Circle Wrote:  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 won't add or subtract anything to this story. I will tell a different story about two other tribes in the same situation. These tribes decided to join together for the common good instead of warring with each other. And now these people from my original two tribes flourish and produce lots of children as one tribe while your tribes continue to fight and kill members of each others tribes. Which approach do you think would be more successful evolutionary wise?

You are making a Strawman argument by asking about success in evolution, meanwhile the question of Moral Objectivity remains. Instead of answering the questions you imagined a different story, exactly what I asked you not to do. So in this case you are sidestepping my questions.

(03-04-2014 11:19 PM)Full Circle Wrote:  Q: What can be objectively said of the actions performed by Tribe 1 in this scenario?
(05-04-2014 08:05 AM)Artie Wrote:  A: That since those actions lead to less well-being and chances of survival for all they are objectively immoral.

In the example I give this is patently false. Tribe 1 can only survive if they procreate. The "well-being" of Tribe 1 is survival either the tribe survives or it does not.

(05-04-2014 09:37 AM)Artie Wrote:  
(05-04-2014 09:22 AM)Revenant77x Wrote:  Ok then list all the circumstances that ever person in the world would agree that killing another person is not immoral.
When this another person is threating to kill your child or wife or husband and the only way you have to stop him is kill him.

Do you realize that you just discredited your own argument?
By giving an example of when killing another person is not immoral you made morality subjective. Congratulations!

“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
[+] 3 users Like Full Circle's post
05-04-2014, 12:03 PM
RE: Objective Morality
(05-04-2014 11:48 AM)Revenant77x Wrote:  http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Objective_morality

Where on this page does it say anything about and I quote you:
"It is black and white, either an action is right or wrong under all contingencies. Culture and Time would not affect it, if something is Objectively Immoral it would be universally agreed upon." I specifically asked you to provide a source to support this. Where is it? I will answer your question(s) when you have provided some sources where they define "objective" and "objective morality" as you personally define it.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
05-04-2014, 12:04 PM
RE: Objective Morality
(05-04-2014 12:03 PM)Artie Wrote:  
(05-04-2014 11:48 AM)Revenant77x Wrote:  http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Objective_morality

Where on this page does it say anything about and I quote you:
"It is black and white, either an action is right or wrong under all contingencies. Culture and Time would not affect it, if something is Objectively Immoral it would be universally agreed upon." I specifically asked you to provide a source to support this. Where is it? I will answer your question(s) when you have provided some sources where they define "objective" and "objective morality" as you personally define it.

If something is factually true then it would be true regardless of situations such as time periods or culture. Do you disagree and if so why?

(31-07-2014 04:37 PM)Luminon Wrote:  America is full of guns, but they're useless, because nobody has the courage to shoot an IRS agent in self-defense
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like Revenant77x's post
05-04-2014, 12:24 PM
RE: Objective Morality
(05-04-2014 11:52 AM)Full Circle Wrote:  In the example I give this is patently false. Tribe 1 can only survive if they procreate. The "well-being" of Tribe 1 is survival either the tribe survives or it does not.
This doesn't make sense so I'll answer generally. The best chances the people of tribe 1 has to survive and procreate is to make peace with tribe 2 and join forces in having and raising children in peace instead of raping and killing. Hence raping and killing objectively immoral.

(05-04-2014 09:37 AM)Artie Wrote:  When this another person is threating to kill your child or wife or husband and the only way you have to stop him is kill him.
Quote:Do you realize that you just discredited your own argument?
By giving an example of when killing another person is not immoral you made morality subjective. Congratulations!
Subjective is when it depends on the opinion of the person not the situation. The definition of subjective is "based on or influenced by personal feelings, tastes, or opinions." Not "based on the situation". I'm sorry, but you are so confused that I don't see how I can get through to you so I will stop answering until you have a rational and logical comment or question.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
05-04-2014, 12:30 PM
RE: Objective Morality
(05-04-2014 12:04 PM)Revenant77x Wrote:  If something is factually true then it would be true regardless of situations such as time periods or culture. Do you disagree and if so why?
Can you stop procrastinating and simply quote some sources defining "objective" and "objective morality" as you define them here!? "It is black and white, either an action is right or wrong under all contingencies. Culture and Time would not affect it, if something is Objectively Immoral it would be universally agreed upon."
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
05-04-2014, 12:31 PM
RE: Objective Morality
(05-04-2014 12:24 PM)Artie Wrote:  
(05-04-2014 11:52 AM)Full Circle Wrote:  In the example I give this is patently false. Tribe 1 can only survive if they procreate. The "well-being" of Tribe 1 is survival either the tribe survives or it does not.
This doesn't make sense so I'll answer generally. The best chances the people of tribe 1 has to survive and procreate is to make peace with tribe 2 and join forces in having and raising children in peace instead of raping and killing. Hence raping and killing objectively immoral.

(05-04-2014 09:37 AM)Artie Wrote:  When this another person is threating to kill your child or wife or husband and the only way you have to stop him is kill him.
Quote:Do you realize that you just discredited your own argument?
By giving an example of when killing another person is not immoral you made morality subjective. Congratulations!
Subjective is when it depends on the opinion of the person not the situation. The definition of subjective is "based on or influenced by personal feelings, tastes, or opinions." Not "based on the situation". I'm sorry, but you are so confused that I don't see how I can get through to you so I will stop answering until you have a rational and logical comment or question.

We get that a lot around here, someone gets put into a corner and they move the goalposts, initiate personal attacks or go on the "I'm ignoring you" bandwagon. You aren't the first, just the latest.

“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
[+] 2 users Like Full Circle's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: