Objective Morality
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
06-04-2014, 06:48 AM
RE: Objective Morality
(06-04-2014 06:38 AM)Revenant77x Wrote:  He knows I caught him in a no win situation. Thats why he is crying about a definition I gave him ages ago
This is the definition you gave me ages ago. "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." Can you simply give me a quote from any reputable source defining Objective Morality this way?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
06-04-2014, 07:14 AM (This post was last modified: 06-04-2014 07:17 AM by DLJ.)
RE: Objective Morality
(06-04-2014 06:48 AM)Artie Wrote:  ...
Can you simply give me a quote from any reputable source defining Objective Morality this way?

I don't think Rev was quoting... just trying to help you understand the general consensus here after this topic has been gone over countless times.

But to be honest, I'm finding some of this thread somewhat bewildering.

Some are talking about objective IS's (objective anal dildos) and others are talking about objective OUGHTs

Huh

Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
06-04-2014, 07:39 AM
RE: Objective Morality
(06-04-2014 07:14 AM)DLJ Wrote:  I don't think Rev was quoting... just trying to help you understand the general consensus here after this topic has been gone over countless times.
But can somebody show me some quotes from official neutral objective sources confirming that the general consensus here reflects actual fact? For example, can somebody quote an official neutral objective source confirming that: "if something is Objectively Immoral it would be universally agreed upon."? Or that "an action is right or wrong under all contingencies"?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
06-04-2014, 07:56 AM
RE: Objective Morality
(06-04-2014 03:27 AM)EvolutionKills Wrote:  But as for human perception, thought, and interaction? Given our current biological underpinnings, I'd say that pure objectivity for us is an impossibility; one that would require a fundamental reworking of our biology and physiology to overcome, so far as I can tell from my limited and subjective perspective.

I agree with you.

Prof. J. Prinz considers morality a culturally conditioned response, learned in other words. He explains in this short piece for Philosophy Now.
http://philosophynow.org/issues/82/Moral...d_Response
Further reading: http://www.amazon.com/Emotional-Construc...0199571546
If culturally conditioned then it is not objective.

Then there is Hume's Law:

"In every system of morality, which I have hitherto met with, I have always remark'd, that the author proceeds for some time in the ordinary ways of reasoning, and establishes the being of a God, or makes observations concerning human affairs; when all of a sudden I am surpriz'd to find, that instead of the usual copulations of propositions, is, and is not, I meet with no proposition that is not connected with an ought, or an ought not. This change is imperceptible; but is however, of the last consequence. For as this ought, or ought not, expresses some new relation or affirmation, 'tis necessary that it shou'd be observ'd and explain'd; and at the same time that a reason should be given; for what seems altogether inconceivable, how this new relation can be a deduction from others, which are entirely different from it.[2]"

read more here
http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Hume's_law
http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/hume-moral/

I take this to mean an "aught" is not an "is". So moral doctrines practiced or observed by one person or group do not by fiat require that they hold true for other groups.

"Aught" in Hume's Law says to me he regarded morality as subjective. Have I interpreted this properly?

“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
06-04-2014, 08:02 AM
RE: Objective Morality
I'd say yes you have.

I never read Hume. Maybe I should...

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
06-04-2014, 08:49 AM (This post was last modified: 06-04-2014 10:02 AM by WindyCityJazz.)
RE: Objective Morality
[Image: h00FAD87C]

“Religion was invented when the first con man met the first fool.” - Mark Twain
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
06-04-2014, 12:08 PM
RE: Objective Morality
(05-04-2014 02:58 PM)morondog Wrote:  
(05-04-2014 06:57 AM)Artie Wrote:  If in doubt just go by the Golden Rule and you would be objectively correct.

Your opinion. Therefore subjective.

Comment?

We'll love you just the way you are
If you're perfect -- Alanis Morissette
(06-02-2014 03:47 PM)Momsurroundedbyboys Wrote:  And I'm giving myself a conclusion again from all the facepalming.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes morondog's post
06-04-2014, 12:33 PM (This post was last modified: 06-04-2014 01:51 PM by Artie.)
RE: Objective Morality
(06-04-2014 12:08 PM)morondog Wrote:  Your opinion. Therefore subjective. Comment?
A vampire bat is a social animal. A vampire bat will share its food with sick or starving roost mates. This behavior is the Golden Rule in action, instinct hard wired into their brains by evolution not subject to the subjective opinion of the individual bat. Simply the instinctively objective "right" behavior in that situation ensuring the survival of as many vampire bats as possible. We are also social animals hence we have the same hard wiring which is also why the Golden Rule or the ethic of reciprocity is the best known universal moral code. So I advice following the Golden Rule. If you doubt it's based on instinct simply ask anybody who on pure reflex has put themselves in harms way for others without first taking the time to form a "subjective opinion" on whether or not to act.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
06-04-2014, 12:41 PM
RE: Objective Morality
(06-04-2014 12:33 PM)Artie Wrote:  A vampire bat is a social animal. A vampire bat will share its food with sick or starving roost mates. This behavior is the Golden Rule in action, instinct hard wired into their brains by evolution not subject to the subjective opinion of the individual bat. Simply the instinctively objective "right" behavior in that situation ensuring the survival of as many vampire bats as possible. We are also social animals hence we have the same hard wiring which is also why the Golden Rule or the ethic of reciprocity is the best known universal moral code. So I advice following the Golden Rule.

Still your opinion mate.

Aztec society held that the world would end unless the Gods were given blood sacrifice. Their moral code was not wiped out by evolution but by Spanish guns. It was a perfectly working moral code though.

Plenty of other species do not follow the golden rule anyway.

Please state the golden rule according to you.

We'll love you just the way you are
If you're perfect -- Alanis Morissette
(06-02-2014 03:47 PM)Momsurroundedbyboys Wrote:  And I'm giving myself a conclusion again from all the facepalming.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes morondog's post
06-04-2014, 01:16 PM
RE: Objective Morality
(06-04-2014 12:33 PM)Artie Wrote:  A vampire bat is a social animal. A vampire bat will share its food with sick or starving roost mates. This behavior is the Golden Rule in action, instinct hard wired into their brains by evolution not subject to the subjective opinion of the individual bat.
Burying beetles will eat some of their own offspring if they don't think there is enough food to go around.
Therefore it is objectively good to eat your offspring.

There is a difference between behaviour and moral beliefs.
Behaviour is what is done. Moral beliefs is a belief in whether than behaviour was good or bad.
A vampire bat feed the sick is a behaviour.
If you were to understand the morality behind that behaviour you would need to ask the vampire bat for an explanation as to why it feed the sick.
If it told you "because it was the right thing to do" then that would be morality.

Do you know why the vampire bat feeds the sick?

Do you think the same applies to the Burying beetle eating its young "because that was the right thing to do"?


Evolution leads to behaviours that are likely to improve survival and procreation. Evolution does not care about right or wrong.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like Stevil's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: