Objective Morality
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
06-04-2014, 03:21 PM
RE: Objective Morality
(06-04-2014 03:02 PM)Artie Wrote:  
(06-04-2014 02:45 PM)Stevil Wrote:  You are generalising when you say <Humans call this behavior "moral"> because of course only some humans would, on the contrary some humans would not call it "moral".
Who ...
Me.
(06-04-2014 03:02 PM)Artie Wrote:  ...and would that change the objective fact that statistically on the average people who help each other are more likely to survive than people who murder each other?
It's a difficult conversation (discussing morality) without first agreeing on what morality is.
If I am extremely selfish, then I am only interested in my own survival, if I recognise that if I attempt to murder people then it puts my own life in danger because the people I attempt to murder, they will be motivated to use extreme force against me. Their loved ones will also be motivated against me. And also the community/society in general will be motivated to use force to nutralise me. So it is in my best selfish interests not to murder people.
Does this make me a moral person?

Regarding helping others. If I help someone in the hope that someday they will help me (in my own hour of need), does this mean that my motives to help are because of morality or because of selfishness?


(06-04-2014 03:02 PM)Artie Wrote:  To save others at the cost of myself.
I would rather myself live than four random strangers. My own selfish survival insticts tell me not to be a hero, but to act in self preservation. Are you able to explain to me why my own act of self preservation would be deemed objectively to be immoral?
I don't believe in "sacrifice for the greater good", I am human and I want to live.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
06-04-2014, 03:24 PM
RE: Objective Morality
(06-04-2014 03:21 PM)Stevil Wrote:  
(06-04-2014 03:02 PM)Artie Wrote:  Who ...
Me.
(06-04-2014 03:02 PM)Artie Wrote:  ...and would that change the objective fact that statistically on the average people who help each other are more likely to survive than people who murder each other?
It's a difficult conversation (discussing morality) without first agreeing on what morality is.
If I am extremely selfish, then I am only interested in my own survival, if I recognise that if I attempt to murder people then it puts my own life in danger because the people I attempt to murder, they will be motivated to use extreme force against me. Their loved ones will also be motivated against me. And also the community/society in general will be motivated to use force to nutralise me. So it is in my best selfish interests not to murder people.
Does this make me a moral person?

Regarding helping others. If I help someone in the hope that someday they will help me (in my own hour of need), does this mean that my motives to help are because of morality or because of selfishness?


(06-04-2014 03:02 PM)Artie Wrote:  To save others at the cost of myself.
I would rather myself live than four random strangers. My own selfish survival insticts tell me not to be a hero, but to act in self preservation. Are you able to explain to me why my own act of self preservation would be deemed objectively to be immoral?
I don't believe in "sacrifice for the greater good", I am human and I want to live.


Stevil I am curious, have you ever heard of The Prisoner's Dilemma? As an Amoralist how would you approach that situation?

(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
06-04-2014, 03:49 PM
RE: Objective Morality
(06-04-2014 03:24 PM)Revenant77x Wrote:  Stevil I am curious, have you ever heard of The Prisoner's Dilemma? As an Amoralist how would you approach that situation?
Hadn't heard of it before.
It's an interesting dilemma.

I assume I won't know what the other prisoner has done until after I have played my hand.

Scenario 1.
Other prisoner stays silent.
Option 1 - I point the finger at the other person. I go free but he goes to prison for 2 years.
Option 2 - I don't point the finger and both of us go to prison for 1 year.
In scenario 1 it is in my best interests to point the finger

Scenario 2.
Other prisoner points the finger at me.
Option 1 - I point the finger at the other person. Both of us go to prison for 2 years
Option 2 - I don't point the finger and I go to prison for 3 years.
In scenario 2 it is in my best interests to point the finger.

So it seems that it is always in my own best interests to point the finger. This is what I would do.

But of course, in reality, the code of the underworld is not to Narc. People that Narc end up dead. It that case it would not be in my best interests to point the finger. I would be ousted from the gang, I would be forced to go into hiding, my own life, my family's lives, my loved ones' lives would all be at stake.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Stevil's post
06-04-2014, 04:11 PM
RE: Objective Morality
(06-04-2014 03:31 AM)Baruch Wrote:  Juries dont disagree all the time. They can disagree some of the time - and depending on the case and evidence available. Your generalization is fallacious.
It is of course possible that there is an elaborate set up or conspiracy and hence mistakes can be made - but it doesnt follow mistakes are always made. Your inductive reasoning from some mistakes are made to mistakes always made is invalid.

I said nothing about "mistakes". You misinterpreted something. What that was I have no clue.

The fact that countless subjective decisions, learning events, and opinions go into any one "moral choice", jury decision, the way any event is individually viewed, proves there is no such thing "as "objective morality" .

I never said "all judgements are faulty or flawed". I said they were DIFFERENT. That is the point. There is no AGREEMENT. THAT was the point. There is no "objective morality" as all there are are many individual opinions were vary widely on any particular act or moral position.

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein God has a plan for us. Please stop screwing it up with your prayers.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Bucky Ball's post
06-04-2014, 11:43 PM
RE: Objective Morality
You can say that I must do whatever it takes to ensure survival of the species and that is what's moral but... I mean what is the point of civilization unless I can break free from my evolutionary violent past? So fuck evolution as a source of morality.

Besides which evolution is about survival of genes. I bear close resemblance but not 100% to every other human. If it's all about survival of *my* genes then I should go rape lots of women, according to this idea. (Precisely contrary to the golden rule).

Which once again. You have an *opinion* that the source of morality should be evolution, and you have an *opinion* that that is embodied by the golden rule. These opinions are not shared by me or others.

I agree that a large part of what we call moral is driven by evolution. Such as not murdering people randomly etc. One could even call analyze these behaviours and say that one is better than the other for survival.

But what you're saying by calling this 'morality' is that at all times I *should* behave in line with evolution and I disagree. There is no 'this is right', 'this is wrong' about evolution. Speciation is what occurs when different lineages of animals try different strategies to get ahead.

I'm kinda rambling here but my point is there is no way to say that a particular action will result in benefit to the species. What if we're competing for resources? Is it then moral for me to wipe out you and all your family? 'Cos that'll be better for survival. If all of us survive including you and your family there won't be enough for everyone. Better to kill you.

So again, it's still *your opinion*, all of this. And therefore, what is subject to each individual's opinion is subjective, even though there may be broad agreement. You can say that there is an objective morality but if you can't *exhibit* it, I am perfectly free to disagree, and to say that I find it unlikely. Similar to how one can say that there is a God, but until you can show me one, I am free to disagree.

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
07-04-2014, 01:22 AM
RE: Objective Morality
... and can anyone remind me again why the universe gives a flying fuck about the survival of humans?

Huh

Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes DLJ's post
07-04-2014, 01:29 AM
RE: Objective Morality
(07-04-2014 01:22 AM)DLJ Wrote:  ... and can anyone remind me again why the universe gives a flying fuck about the survival of humans?

Huh

Sentient kitty can openers.

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
[+] 2 users Like morondog's post
07-04-2014, 01:58 AM
RE: Objective Morality
(07-04-2014 01:22 AM)DLJ Wrote:  ... and can anyone remind me again why the universe gives a flying fuck about the survival of humans?

Huh

For the entertaining horror that we collectively provide. Very much like a trainwreck video, though I would certainly not advocate for the train wreck happening. Only the video of it. Minus its reality. So.... digital. But I guess train wrecks are part of the train wreck of humanity as well. Train wrecks have a part to play in the train wreck?

Am I drunk or something??
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
07-04-2014, 02:12 AM
RE: Objective Morality
(07-04-2014 01:29 AM)morondog Wrote:  
(07-04-2014 01:22 AM)DLJ Wrote:  ... and can anyone remind me again why the universe gives a flying fuck about the survival of humans?

Huh

Sentient kitty can openers.

Ah! And putting sentient kitties in cans is objectively immoral Angry

Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like DLJ's post
07-04-2014, 02:14 AM
RE: Objective Morality
(07-04-2014 01:58 AM)Charis Wrote:  ...
Am I drunk or something??

I was wondering that.

Nice stream of consciousness though Smile

Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes DLJ's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: