Objective Morality
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
08-04-2014, 02:22 PM (This post was last modified: 08-04-2014 02:37 PM by Artie.)
RE: Objective Morality
(08-04-2014 01:42 PM)Stevil Wrote:  
(08-04-2014 01:45 AM)Artie Wrote:  Yes of course, when two people agree to inflict pain on each other in order to determine who is best at it and who can take the most then it's consentual and perfectly fine. Smile
On the one hand you say it is objectively immoral to cause pain and suffering but on the other hand you say it is OK if the participants consensually agree to inflict pain and suffering on each other.
The Golden Rule. If you don't mind that somebody inflicts pain on you which obviously you don't if you are a boxer, you can inflict pain on the other boxer. If in other situations you would mind being inflicted pain upon, don't inflict pain on the other. Both are obviously objectively correct.
Quote:So in order to resolve this dispute we need to have an objective method of discovery. You stated that evolution was the basis for morality so we would need to look to evolution to see if boxing is fine.
Can you please explain how evolution shows that unconsensual assault is wrong but consensual boxing is right?
Because inflicting pain on the other if the other doesn't want to be inflicted pain upon would lead to the other inflicting pain on you or his friends might even kill you in revenge. If you are a boxer inflicting pain on another boxer there are no negative ramifications on anybody but yourselves, both agree on the procedure, the boxer inflicting pain doesn't risk retaliation from anybody, there are minimal negative effects for others than the boxers.

(08-04-2014 01:45 AM)Artie Wrote:  It wasn't your subjective opinion that you should be born with a survival instinct. But since you were born with a survival instinct it is objectively morally right for you to perform actions promoting self preservation.
Quote:So if I am starving and I come across a couple (star crossed lovers) having a picnic. Is it moral for me to kill them and eat their picnic food?
Please relate your reasoning in terms of evolution.
No it isn't moral because their friends would kill you in revenge and evolution is about survival of as many as possible including yourself. The moral thing to do would simply be to ask them for some food.
Quote:Another question for you.
Given that the DNA copy process generally has "mistakes" and that only some mistakes are beneficial and that many mistakes are detrimental. And given that detrimental mistakes can be inherited thus making the future human population weaker then is it immoral for us to use medical science to allow the carriers of these detrimental mistakes to survive and procreate.

Please give your moral/immoral reasoning in terms of evolution.
We don't know which other genetic "mistakes" lurk in their DNA that might prove valuable in the future. In certain parts of Africa people have sickle cell disease but it would be pretty stupid not allowing them to survive and procreate because it protects from malaria and statistically more people would die from malaria than die from sickle cell disease. (I have simplified greatly to make the point.)
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
08-04-2014, 02:31 PM
RE: Objective Morality
(08-04-2014 02:14 PM)Impulse Wrote:  
(08-04-2014 01:49 PM)Artie Wrote:  I think you mean evolution can't be subjective because it doesn't have any thoughts, feelings and perceptions. That is why it is objective not subjective.
No, that is why it is neither. Did you read the definitions of objective?
Here is one: "Uninfluenced by emotions or personal prejudices". Evolution doesn't have any "emotions or personal prejudices". http://www.thefreedictionary.com/objective
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
08-04-2014, 02:45 PM
RE: Objective Morality
(08-04-2014 02:31 PM)Artie Wrote:  
(08-04-2014 02:14 PM)Impulse Wrote:  No, that is why it is neither. Did you read the definitions of objective?
Here is one: "Uninfluenced by emotions or personal prejudices". Evolution doesn't have any "emotions or personal prejudices". http://www.thefreedictionary.com/objective

Wrong again Bob...

Are you guy done playing with this fuktard yet? Can we pack him up and be done with him already? Drinking Beverage

[Image: E3WvRwZ.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
08-04-2014, 03:00 PM (This post was last modified: 08-04-2014 03:09 PM by Impulse.)
RE: Objective Morality
(08-04-2014 02:31 PM)Artie Wrote:  
(08-04-2014 02:14 PM)Impulse Wrote:  No, that is why it is neither. Did you read the definitions of objective?
Here is one: "Uninfluenced by emotions or personal prejudices". Evolution doesn't have any "emotions or personal prejudices". http://www.thefreedictionary.com/objective
What you are missing is evolution doesn't have feelings, thoughts, perceptions, or prejudices and it therefore doesn't even have the possiblity of being influenced by them. It's just not in the playing field with objectivity and subjectivity - those are only in the realm of living humans.

Edit:
If this helps, it's like you're trying to say that since a rock isn't happy, therefore it must be sad. But no, it's neither because emotions don't apply to a rock.

I am not accountable to any God. I am accountable to myself - and not because I think I am God as some theists would try to assert - but because, no matter what actions I take, thoughts I think, or words I utter, I have to be able to live with myself.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
08-04-2014, 03:26 PM (This post was last modified: 08-04-2014 03:41 PM by Bucky Ball.)
RE: Objective Morality
The statement that "survival is of MORE value" (to us) than non-survival, is itself a "subjective" (non-objective) concept. His entire thesis is based on an unexamined (false) premise. Survival IS a subjective value, itself. It is possible to conceive of a system, (and instances) where survival might not be the optimal value. The survival of any one class or group, usually means something else does not survive. The valuation of what survives as more valuable than what did not, is subjective.

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
08-04-2014, 03:37 PM
RE: Objective Morality
46 pages of trying to teach ONE person about TWO words.

This is why he may not be accepted into college and if accepted, will have an extremely hard time grasping the information, let alone agreeing with it.

I predict death by Professor Pumpernickel in the library with a screen projector.

Insanity - doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 6 users Like Rahn127's post
08-04-2014, 10:24 PM
RE: Objective Morality












Drinking Beverage

[Image: E3WvRwZ.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
08-04-2014, 11:44 PM
RE: Objective Morality
(08-04-2014 02:14 PM)Impulse Wrote:  Did evolution sit down and say to itself: it is my objective opinion that organisms should have a survival instinct then? Wink
No, evolution wouldn't need to. "2. Having actual existence or reality." (Evolution actually exists in reality and produced the survival instinct even without any humans on the planet to have any subjective or objective opinion about it). "existing independently of perception or an individual's conceptions:" (evolution produced the survival instinct without any individuals needing to have any perceptions or conceptions about it). http://www.thefreedictionary.com/objective
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
09-04-2014, 12:08 AM
RE: Objective Morality
Evolution also produced individuals in groups who were willing to die for the survival of the group. Thus your point is again proven to be bullshit.

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
09-04-2014, 12:12 AM
RE: Objective Morality
(08-04-2014 11:44 PM)Artie Wrote:  
(08-04-2014 02:14 PM)Impulse Wrote:  Did evolution sit down and say to itself: it is my objective opinion that organisms should have a survival instinct then? Wink
No, evolution wouldn't need to. "2. Having actual existence or reality." (Evolution actually exists in reality and produced the survival instinct even without any humans on the planet to have any subjective or objective opinion about it). "existing independently of perception or an individual's conceptions:" (evolution produced the survival instinct without any individuals needing to have any perceptions or conceptions about it). http://www.thefreedictionary.com/objective

Natural selection does exist; selecting that as your valuation of morality, deciding to use 'evolution' as your moral yardstick, is still subjective. It's like you're doing your best to bastardize Harris' arguments for his 'Moral Landscape' all the while missing the point. Facepalm

In a universe full of nothing but rocks, 'natural selection' and 'evolution' wouldn't be applicable, and neither would 'intelligence' or 'morality'. Unless you're going to argue that morality is an objective aspect of reality, like gravity or the weak and strong nuclear forces (which would still exist in a universe of nothing but rocks). But it wouldn't, evolution and natural selection are meaningless in a universe with nothing but rocks in it, thus both are subject to the existence of living agents, and thus not objective. Q.E.D.

There is a difference between doing our best to make the objectively best decisions we can within any moral valuation system, and the subjective basis upon which we select one such system over another. Making seemingly objective decisions within a subjective system doesn't magically make the system itself objective.

We're done here, go the fuck home. Drinking Beverage

[Image: E3WvRwZ.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes EvolutionKills's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: