Why do liberals insist on subjective morality being laws?

"No, but it does mean that they know what they are doing is wrong, otherwise they would not fear getting caught."

You're flat out incorrect. There is a difference between knowing that society CONSIDERS something wrong and actually BELIEVING an action to be WRONG.

"By what subjective standard is that "not wrong"?"

It's not wrong or right.. because there is NO real framework.

I am not refusing to play damo, there is nothing TO play. You keep talking about society, but society doesn't mean ANYTHING.

There is no objective morality. It's not real.
 
Either way there is very little difference. They realize that there is a consequence to their action and work to alleviate that consequence, there is no real difference between why they realize it is "wrong"...

Like I already stated, that same terrorist gets a pat for killing "them" but would be beheaded for killing one of "us" among their society. They know that murder is "wrong" too. We have stripped that particular exception and are getting closer to the meat of this particular subjective moral. Where is the center kernal?
 
Damo.

I am a person.

I honestly don't think murdering anyone, including stabbing a child's eyes out, is wrong or right.

There, you lost.
 
Grind said:
"No, but it does mean that they know what they are doing is wrong, otherwise they would not fear getting caught."

You're flat out incorrect. There is a difference between knowing that society CONSIDERS something wrong and actually BELIEVING an action to be WRONG.

"By what subjective standard is that "not wrong"?"

It's not wrong or right.. because there is NO real framework.

I am not refusing to play damo, there is nothing TO play. You keep talking about society, but society doesn't mean ANYTHING.

There is no objective morality. It's not real.
Click to expand...
Once again, you pretend that I am talking about an objective ideal and I have repeatedly informed you that I am not.

I am, however, talking about reality and subjective morality is reality whether you want it to be or not. As well there are rules that prevade every form and manner of society, we are now exploring one of those rules...
 
Grind said:
Damo.

I am a person.

I honestly don't think murdering anyone, including stabbing a child's eyes out, is wrong or right.

There, you lost.
Click to expand...
So when did you last do this and if you were going to would you carefully plan it to avoid consequences? Understanding reality doesn't take Faith...
 
Sio If I wear a net and gloves and such to keep from getting stung while working a hive I know that working in the hive is wrong ?
 
Of course subjective morality is part of reality. That's why my entire thread was started asking why liberals USE subjective morality.

In fact my whole argument has essentially been that there is NO OTHER KIND of morality.

So what the hell is your point?

Do you even have one?
 
uscitizen said:
Sio If I wear a net and gloves and such to keep from getting stung while working a hive I know that working in the hive is wrong ?
Click to expand...
LOL. No, but one is punishment, the other nature. You do understand the difference and are only pretending to be simple, right?
 
Grind said:
Of course subjective morality is part of reality. That's why my entire thread was started asking why liberals USE subjective morality.

In fact my whole argument has essentially been that there is NO OTHER KIND of morality.

So what the hell is your point?

Do you even have one?
Click to expand...
I am working on finding out if there is any such "universal" rules, I believe we are getting close to one of them...

By asking these questions and eliminating the exceptions I believe that we can arrive at something that is so close to being universal among human subjective reality as to be no different from universal...
 
"So when did you last do this and if you were going to would you carefully plan it to avoid consequences? Understanding reality doesn't take Faith..."

A) I don't have a motive to do this.
B) I dont' want to go to prison. That's self interest, it has nothing to do with morally condemning myself in any way.
 
uscitizen said:
And I suppose soldiers wear body armor because they know they are doing wrong ?
Click to expand...
Yes, they know that the "others" they are attempting to kill will consider their action wrong and take pains to alleviate the consequences of that action.
 
"I am working on finding out if there is any such "universal" rules, I believe we are getting close to one of them..."

No there are no universal rules. Your problem is you are looking at society rather than individuals. You will always have dissenting individuals and therefore NO value can be universal.
 
what about the soldier wearing body armor Damo, that is a good example. Same as the terrorist, but on the other side.
 
Grind said:
"So when did you last do this and if you were going to would you carefully plan it to avoid consequences? Understanding reality doesn't take Faith..."

A) I don't have a motive to do this.
B) I dont' want to go to prison. That's self interest, it has nothing to do with morally condemning myself in any way.
Click to expand...
No, but it is understanding. One doesn't need to feel guilt to understand "wrong", they just need to understand consequences...

The whole idea that it must be emotive rather than reactive is patently wrong.
 
Again damo, there is a difference between knowing that people CONSIDER an action to be wrong and actually BELIEVING the action to be wrong.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top