What Exactly Does "Objective" Morality Mean?
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
01-02-2018, 09:45 AM
RE: What Exactly Does "Objective" Morality Mean?
(01-02-2018 09:37 AM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  
(01-02-2018 09:29 AM)Robvalue Wrote:  Well case in point, someone already beat me to it.

Let's say we discovered torturing those innocent babies that keep coming up is objectively moral. Would Tom then give the go-ahead for doing this? Or would he ignore this "moral fact" in favour of his own opinion? If morality is to be objective, it does not require itself to happen to correlate with what anyone feels is right or wrong, or how they think it should be determined. Can't have it both ways.

Again, I'd say I don't give a shit what "objective morality" has to say about it, and I'd make my own decision.

There is no "objective morality".
There may be moral systems which claim to be "objective moral systems", but the fact is, a choice is considered, and that's a complex, mostly unconscious war of possible actions.

Moral activity and morality more not the same.
If a terrorist took a baby hostage, and said to you, either YOU torture and kill this baby right now, OR I blow up this building with 5,000 people in it, right now .. you would have to pause for a few seconds to think about what is moral IN THAT SITUATION. It's not "subjective" and it's not "objective". The situation at hand is evaluated with many inputs.

I agree with you, it's a nonsense concept. I'm just presenting the possible results to someone who claims it is real, to see if they can handle it.

I have a website here which discusses the issues and terminology surrounding religion and atheism. It's hopefully user friendly to all.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
01-02-2018, 09:50 AM
RE: What Exactly Does "Objective" Morality Mean?
(01-02-2018 09:39 AM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  
(01-02-2018 09:30 AM)Tomasia Wrote:  No but I can tell you what certain words mean or imply, particularly when those meanings are further supported by even the most basic dictionary definitions.

Oh really ? You can ?
Define your god.
Laugh out loadLaugh out loadLaugh out load

I did:

http://www.thethinkingatheist.com/forum/...pid1294517

Quote:BTW, .... no. All you can do is say what they mean to you, unless you got your Certificate in Mind Reading at your fake school.

No, I can say what they mean in even their most basic definitions. And point out that your notions of morality would either fall into one definition or the other. That according to these definitions, if it's not subjective, than it's objective.

"Tell me, muse, of the storyteller who has been thrust to the edge of the world, both an infant and an ancient, and through him reveal everyman." ---Homer the aged poet.

"In Him was life, and the life was the Light of men. The Light shines in the darkness, and the darkness did not comprehend it."
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
01-02-2018, 09:52 AM (This post was last modified: 01-02-2018 09:57 AM by epronovost.)
RE: What Exactly Does "Objective" Morality Mean?
The modern classification of ethical/moral systems isn't based on a dichotomy between subjective and objective, but cognitivism and non-cognitivism. While one could indeed try to place schools of thought on morality and ethics in an objective and subjective category, this would be considered as inappropriate in philosophy right now.

Personnaly, I would describe myself mostly as some sort of universal prescriptivist, thus a non-cognitivist.

PS: cognitivism is the idea that morality and ethics makes proposition and thus can be true or false, while non-cognitivism state that morality and ethics doesn't make proposition thus cannot be true or false.

Freedom is servitude to justice and intellectual honesty.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes epronovost's post
01-02-2018, 09:52 AM
RE: What Exactly Does "Objective" Morality Mean?
(01-02-2018 09:45 AM)Robvalue Wrote:  
(01-02-2018 09:37 AM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  There is no "objective morality".
There may be moral systems which claim to be "objective moral systems", but the fact is, a choice is considered, and that's a complex, mostly unconscious war of possible actions.

Moral activity and morality more not the same.
If a terrorist took a baby hostage, and said to you, either YOU torture and kill this baby right now, OR I blow up this building with 5,000 people in it, right now .. you would have to pause for a few seconds to think about what is moral IN THAT SITUATION. It's not "subjective" and it's not "objective". The situation at hand is evaluated with many inputs.

I agree with you, it's a nonsense concept. I'm just presenting the possible results to someone who claims it is real, to see if they can handle it.

Do you believe both objective morality and subjective morality are nonsense concepts, or just objective morality?

"Tell me, muse, of the storyteller who has been thrust to the edge of the world, both an infant and an ancient, and through him reveal everyman." ---Homer the aged poet.

"In Him was life, and the life was the Light of men. The Light shines in the darkness, and the darkness did not comprehend it."
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
01-02-2018, 09:59 AM (This post was last modified: 01-02-2018 10:02 AM by Bucky Ball.)
RE: What Exactly Does "Objective" Morality Mean?
(01-02-2018 09:50 AM)Tomasia Wrote:  
(01-02-2018 09:39 AM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  Oh really ? You can ?
Define your god.
Laugh out loadLaugh out loadLaugh out load

I did:

http://www.thethinkingatheist.com/forum/...pid1294517

Quote:BTW, .... no. All you can do is say what they mean to you, unless you got your Certificate in Mind Reading at your fake school.

No, I can say what they mean in even their most basic definitions. And point out that your notions of morality would either fall into one definition or the other. That according to these definitions, if it's not subjective, than it's objective.

Really ? So you actually had to look up in a dictionary the definition of what you claim you worship ? LMAO You definition of a god is incoherent and debunked in 5 seconds. Do try harder.
http://www.thethinkingatheist.com/forum/...pid1299657
No you can't do anything of the sort. NOTHING is "objective" if it's passed through a human brain for consideration, (and if it's "objective", there goes "free will"). No one can tell me how I think, and BTW above I totally blew your "not torturing babies is a moral fact" out of the water. Oh well. Not very good on this topic either I see.

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein It is objectively immoral to kill innocent babies. Please stick to the guilty babies.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
01-02-2018, 10:01 AM
RE: What Exactly Does "Objective" Morality Mean?
(01-02-2018 09:52 AM)Tomasia Wrote:  
(01-02-2018 09:45 AM)Robvalue Wrote:  I agree with you, it's a nonsense concept. I'm just presenting the possible results to someone who claims it is real, to see if they can handle it.

Do you believe both objective morality and subjective morality are nonsense concepts, or just objective morality?

You didn't answer the question, I see.

Subjective morality is what we observe: everyone decides for themselves what they think is acceptable and not acceptable. So that's perfectly coherent and consistent with reality.

I have a website here which discusses the issues and terminology surrounding religion and atheism. It's hopefully user friendly to all.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
01-02-2018, 10:06 AM
RE: What Exactly Does "Objective" Morality Mean?
(01-02-2018 09:52 AM)Tomasia Wrote:  Do you believe both objective morality and subjective morality are nonsense concepts, or just objective morality?

Yes

Facepalm

The division in that way is the fallacy of the excluded middle, (black and white thinking). We do get that you religionists need it boiled down to two simplistic categories.
It's like a dog whistle to religionists. They start salivating like a Pavlovian dog when they see these terms.

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein It is objectively immoral to kill innocent babies. Please stick to the guilty babies.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
01-02-2018, 10:12 AM
RE: What Exactly Does "Objective" Morality Mean?
I like that distinction in objectivity. Although, I think that it cannot be successfully argued that moral determined by a god is objective.

(01-02-2018 08:12 AM)RobbyPants Wrote:  
(01-02-2018 12:05 AM)Robvalue Wrote:  In my experience with debating theists, it means, "In my black-and-white world where I demand there is a definitive answer to everything, whether that makes sense or not".

That, followed by being attacked if you say you don't believe in it. They immediately jump to asking me if something abhorrent (child rape is a common one) is "wrong". If I say "objectively, no", I get attacked for not believing child rape is wrong. When I say that subjectively, I feel it is, they say "well, that's just your opinion!" (obviously). When I agree and say that's basically how all of humanity handles it and these tend to be cultural assumptions, I get told "you can't get an ought from an is", then they'll ask the exact same question of "is X wrong", with X becoming increasingly vile. It's so disturbing.

I mean, it's a great way to be dismissive. If I step away from the debate for a day and come back, I get brushed off as "that guy who doesn't think child rape is wrong", and at that point, I honestly have no interest in correcting them.

It's cases like that where, especially if you're discussing with a Christian theist, you can point out that the Bible really doesn't condemn child rape. Or rape at all. Nor does it condemn slavery.

I believe, personally, that all of these are objectively wrong. And they are objective because such actions are without any doubt harmful to the victim's wellness- and they create far more harm than "good". If they make a claim that these actions are objectively wrong because their god deems it so, then they are incorrect. They are actually arguing that these moral codes are subjective since they are based on another being, or a "subject".

So they think that these moral actions are subjective, and based on the opinions of a god that they feel sets the bar for morality- and that their god didn't actually say that these things are bad (and instead gave instructions on how to accomplish some of these actions morally), and that they themselves believe these actions to be immoral, they are themselves more morally good than their own god.

I've seen Matt Dilahunty take this route in discussing morality with Christians who call into the Atheist Experience. Though they don't usually end the call in agreement, I feel like it's a successful approach.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Emma's post
01-02-2018, 10:16 AM
RE: What Exactly Does "Objective" Morality Mean?
(01-02-2018 10:01 AM)Robvalue Wrote:  
(01-02-2018 09:52 AM)Tomasia Wrote:  Do you believe both objective morality and subjective morality are nonsense concepts, or just objective morality?

You didn't answer the question, I see.

Subjective morality is what we observe: everyone decides for themselves what they think is acceptable and not acceptable. So that's perfectly coherent and consistent with reality.

Okay so just to further clarify, based on the definition of subjective:

sub·jec·tive
səbˈjektiv/Submit
adjective
1.
based on or influenced by personal feelings, tastes, or opinions.

Do you believe that morality is a matter of personal feelings, tastes, or opinions?

Would you say your belief that torturing innocent babies just for fun is morally wrong, is an expression of your personal feelings on the subject, like we might say of your taste in music or fashion?

"Tell me, muse, of the storyteller who has been thrust to the edge of the world, both an infant and an ancient, and through him reveal everyman." ---Homer the aged poet.

"In Him was life, and the life was the Light of men. The Light shines in the darkness, and the darkness did not comprehend it."
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
01-02-2018, 10:37 AM (This post was last modified: 01-02-2018 10:45 AM by Bucky Ball.)
RE: What Exactly Does "Objective" Morality Mean?
(01-02-2018 10:16 AM)Tomasia Wrote:  
(01-02-2018 10:01 AM)Robvalue Wrote:  You didn't answer the question, I see.

Subjective morality is what we observe: everyone decides for themselves what they think is acceptable and not acceptable. So that's perfectly coherent and consistent with reality.

Okay so just to further clarify, based on the definition of subjective:

sub·jec·tive
səbˈjektiv/Submit
adjective
1.
based on or influenced by personal feelings, tastes, or opinions.

Do you believe that morality is a matter of personal feelings, tastes, or opinions?

Would you say your belief that torturing innocent babies just for fun is morally wrong, is an expression of your personal feelings on the subject, like we might say of your taste in music or fashion?

Fallacy of the False Analogy, and reductio ad absurdam. Unless you accept a "list" from somewhere of options for every and all situations, all situations that call for a moral consideration are subjective, as they reference learned memories, and there is nothing objective about them. The bullshit of the false equivalence of babies with fashion is just so fucking stupid, it's beyond stupid. Even the MOST conservative religious institutions have Ethics courses. Tomato never took one, I see.

You said you were a Christian. The god you referenced as the sourse of objective morality one would therefore assume is Yahweh Sabaoth, the Christian god. He told his Chosen People to kill innocent babies.

"Deuteronomy, chapter 7

1: "When the LORD your God brings you into the land which you are entering to take possession of it, and clears away many nations before you, the Hittites, the Gir'gashites, the Amorites, the Canaanites, the Per'izzites, the Hivites, and the Jeb'usites, seven nations greater and mightier than yourselves,
2: and when the LORD your God gives them over to you, and you defeat them; then you must utterly destroy them; you shall make no covenant with them, and show no mercy to them.
3: You shall not make marriages with them, giving your daughters to their sons or taking their daughters for your sons.
4: For they would turn away your sons from following me, to serve other gods; then the anger of the LORD would be kindled against you, and he would destroy you quickly.
5: But thus shall you deal with them: you shall break down their altars, and dash in pieces their pillars, and hew down their Ashe'rim, and burn their graven images with fire.
6: "For you are a people holy to the LORD your God; the LORD your God has chosen you to be a people for his own possession, out of all the peoples that are on the face of the earth.
16: And you shall destroy all the peoples that the LORD your God will give over to you, your eye shall not pity them; neither shall you serve their gods, for that would be a snare to you.

Deuteronomy, chapter 20

16: But in the cities of these peoples that the LORD your God gives you for an inheritance, you shall save alive nothing that breathes,
17: but you shall utterly destroy them, the Hittites and the Amorites, the Canaanites and the Per'izzites, the Hivites and the Jeb'usites, as the LORD your God has commanded;
18: that they may not teach you to do according to all their abominable practices which they have done in the service of their gods, and so to sin against the LORD your God.

Also relevant is the following from Joshua, chapter 11

10: And Joshua turned back at that time, and took Hazor, and smote its king with the sword; for Hazor formerly was the head of all those kingdoms.
11: And they put to the sword all who were in it, utterly destroying them; there was none left that breathed, and he burned Hazor with fire.
12: And all the cities of those kings, and all their kings, Joshua took, and smote them with the edge of the sword, utterly destroying them, as Moses the servant of the LORD had commanded.
13: But none of the cities that stood on mounds did Israel burn, except Hazor only; that Joshua burned.
14: And all the spoil of these cities and the cattle, the people of Israel took for their booty; but every man they smote with the edge of the sword, until they had destroyed them, and they did not leave any that breathed."

https://www.bethinking.org/bible/old-tes...s-killings

"Happy is the one who seizes your infants and dashes them against the rocks."
Psalm 137-9

I guess you think your god changed his mind, then.

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein It is objectively immoral to kill innocent babies. Please stick to the guilty babies.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like Bucky Ball's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: