absolute morality
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
22-01-2012, 08:28 AM
RE: absolute morality
(22-01-2012 07:37 AM)ohhaimark Wrote:  I'm not sure I follow. Would the existence of absolute morality mean that there is an absolute right/wrong answer to everything? Or just to some specific cases like the one I mentioned?
IMO

Just in specific cases. The more you specify, the more you can tell whether something is absolute. (note that it is almost impossible to specify everything)

how about an offbeat example Smile
  • I beat a man up: (really dark gray)
  • I beat a man up: It was self defence (dark gray)
  • I beat a man up: It was self defence, I was armed with a gun (I could have shot him) (gray)
  • I beat a man up: it was self defence, I was armed with a gun (I could have shot him) I am an actor in a movie, it was fake (light light gray)

So if you're already assuming that they are molesting the infant just for fun, I'm inclined to say gray-near-to-black. However... Child molesting for fun could have been quite normal in cultures from the past where they explained such a deed as "character building". Hard for us to understand that, since we tend to see the world trough western humanist glasses version 2012. However, this explains that there where situations where child molesting was acceptable.

so... yes, morals -even severely bad morals- are relative.
but that doesn’t make you a fucking child molester!

Observer

Agnostic atheist
Secular humanist
Emotional rationalist
Disclaimer: Don’t mix the personal opinion above with the absolute and objective truth. Remember to think for yourself. Thank you.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Observer's post
22-01-2012, 10:04 AM
RE: absolute morality
Zero-state morality is absolute to the individual. This is the morality people have; where the moral code operates without thought. This other bullshit is bullshit.

The games they are playing involve ethical standard, which is itself a product of civilization. Being civilized is finding certain things offensive; these monkeys are depending upon an appeal to emotion to cloud rational thought. Rationally, it can be said we're not child molesters; implying otherwise tends to cause the hands to curl into fists. See that fist? That's the morality, that's what they don't get; the same ethical standard that allows them to play these word games protects them from the ass-whipping they deserve.

I've got their religion in 4 - I love Gwyneth Paltrow. She's the good, I'm the evil, I love is the moral. Any questions? Big Grin

[Image: 10339580_583235681775606_5139032440228868471_n.jpg]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes houseofcantor's post
07-02-2012, 10:04 AM
RE: absolute morality
I love how these types of arguments those people use try to use the "either/or" logic.

It's like me saying....
"I have a ball in my closed hand, prove that it's white."
"I can't prove that."
"If you can't prove the ball is white, then the ball must be black."

And even if you could prove the ball was not one particular color, that does not automatically make it another specific color, it only means it's not that color.

I don't know if what I said even makes sense. I think I lost a chunk of brain cells just trying to go through that morality "quiz"..... Tongue

[Image: ae1n9c.jpg]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
07-02-2012, 12:40 PM
RE: absolute morality
(21-01-2012 12:09 PM)ohhaimark Wrote:  Hi! Today I stumbled upon this site today: http://www.proofthatgodexists.org

One of the questions are if you believe in absolute morality or not. To support their view that it does exist they chose the following example:
"Molesting children for fun is/is not absolutely morally wrong."

I agree that molesting children is not absolutely morally wrong if it would for example save all humanity, but given that the purpose is pleasure, how would you defend that child molestation is not absolutely morally wrong?

Here's my answer to you:
in ancient Greece it was considered customary, in fact almost a social obligation for grown men to take under their wing young boys. They would mentor the boys, but they'd also have sex with them. Nobody at that time thought there was something wrong with it, and in fact Greek authors don't seem to regret having been subjected to it as boys, nor hold grudges.
In other cultures, girls are married off at a time we in our society still consider them children. These cultures think nothing of it, and in fact women are usually brought up with the idea that getting married and having children is the highest and only purpose of a woman. In fact, for them being chosen at a later age is a bit like being picked last, while being picked early is flattering.

Having said all this, it seems pretty obvious that morality on this subject seems to be relative, specifically relative to culture and time. The question "isn't molesting children an absolute evil" is a loaded question because it already contains in itself the moral judgment of the act. Of course once we agree that sex with people under a certain age is evil, then every sexual act with children is automatically evil. But if we are part of the aforementioned cultures, then sex with children is NOT considered "molesting" them, and in fact a husband may get quite annoyed at your insinuation that he's molesting his own wife.

Edit: nowhere in my statement do I intend to condone sex with children or any other criminal and disgusting activity.

English is not my first language. If you think I am being mean, ask me. It could be just a wording problem.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like sy2502's post
09-02-2012, 09:18 PM
RE: absolute morality
It's a 12 century theological misdirection.

1. If there are objective moral values then God exists.
2. There are objective moral values.
3. Therefore, God exists.

No basis for the relationship claimed in position 1
No proof for position 2
Position 3 then is baseless.

Use this as a reply to the moral argument from a Christian.
1. If there are presents are under the tree then Santa exists.
2. There are presents under the tree.
3. Therefore, Santa exists.
It makes about as much sense logically

If you seek the truth the first thing you need to do is abandon logic.

The old gods are dead, let's invent some new ones before something really bad happens.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Thomas's post
13-02-2012, 03:14 PM
RE: absolute morality
Hi, I am a mainstream Roman Catholic and I think the two words 'absolute ethics' need a clarification.

Absolute morals does not mean simplistic morals, even though common linguistic shortcuts may give that impression. For example historically the Judeo-Christian tradition has found it useful to condense its teaching on theft in the compact phrase "Thou shall not steal". Now obviously this particular formulation does not have universal applicability, as for example being compelled to theft in order to feed one's starving family is not generally considered unethical. But then it was never meant to: it is merely place-holder, only understandable in context, for the actual absolute principle whose explicit verbal formulation would be too cumbersome. The rules may be complex but they are either absolute or don't exist, because that's the only way we may build a formal system on which to base decisions.

And if you're going to ask what criteria should a certain 'prescription' meet in order to qualify as an absolute moral and who has the authority to define the criteria, then just keep in mind that the validity of moral prescriptions is guaranteed by a metaphysical gold standard, be it Plato's ariston (the Supreme Good) or God's will, which is correct by definition.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
18-02-2012, 07:00 PM
RE: absolute morality
I believe morality is relative, but its basics only change very slowly over long periods of time, so to many observers it may seem as absolute. But it isn't.

Theoretically, things like wars might at some point in our history or prehistory serve as a cultural influence that pushed the civilization forward. After all, it required men to unite and fight for a common cause and obey one leader, which is a step better than whacking each other on head for personal interest.

It seems like there is a strained love-hate relationship of morality and technology. Morality without technology is stagnant, technology without morality is deadly. When technology develops, morality must develop too, because suddenly so many new crimes are possible and easy. So in our times of speedy technologic innovations we can suddenly see, how relative the morality is.

The absolute good itself does not lie in a particular version of morality. It is essentially a progressive direction of moral development or anything that helps humanity in the current situation.

And similarly, the absolute evil is not in a particular action, but also rather a contra-progressive direction of development, such as in imposing obsolete, reactionary actions and sets of rules on contemporary people or slowing down the progress of humanity.

Of course, various cultures are variously civilized and have different mentalities and are used to various degrees of social pressure and mindfuck. Some parts of "morality" are artificial cultural figments, nonetheless very real.


Btw, homopedophilia traditions in ancient Greece was popular as preparation of boys for maturity, because women were mostly held as house servants and weren't educated. If men wanted a relationship as intellectual equals, they needed another man. Male friendships were seen as noble and superior to relationship with a mere woman. There were genuine gays also, but they had fixed roles as mommy or daddy. And the daddy had a greater social esteem among men than his mommy partner. You see, that had nothing to do with morality whatsoever, it's a typical cultural invention of necessity.
Later, in different culture (altar boys of Catholic Church) a similar activity becomes a great crime.

If you claim there are nuances to principles, there are no nuances to getting arrested or shot for disobeying the power.
The Venus Project
FreeDomain Radio - The greatest philosophy show on the web!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: