Why do liberals insist on subjective morality being laws?

Cypress said:
You're moving the goal posts backwards. "Us" is a subjective term. Not quantifiable.

You've moved the goal posts, and left us with an ever less objective proposition. What is "us".

Iraqis of the same nationality are killing each other. Russians in Stalin's NKVD certainly took great pleasure murdering other russians.

And USC is right: the whole wearing of masks by iraqi militia thing, is because they don't want to be caught. Not because they feel some inner guilt about murdering.
Click to expand...
This is the actual central question to my proposition, what is "us". In the case of the Abortion Doctor he had redefined his "us".
 
"This is exactly NOT what I was arguing. I was arguing that the emotion of regret is unnecessary in understanding a "wrong"... I specifically stated so several times along the way.

Hence why I also said I know something isn't wrong. Even without feeling bad, I still don't think it's wrong. I think society is wrong. I'm right.
 
Damocles said:
No, not understanding society is a type of insanity. Pretending otherwise is simply pretense for a cause.
Click to expand...

What if your society believes murdering a particularly individual is right? Is it therefore right, or do you believe that your particular society has the best and only answers?
 
Damocles said:
However, it is well outside the question at hand regardless. However, the regular citizen was not "executed" for that, it was the most heinous who were even tried. They did still know they were doing wrong though.
Click to expand...

There have been studies done on this...

Subjects were told by men in white suits to keep on sending shocks to someone. After a while they started screaming. Then the screaming stopped and they were told to up the voltage more. Of course, no one was dying. But they clearly knew what they were doing, and they simply followed order. I believe about 90% of the respondents or so went along with this... in America.

Of course, we're libertarians. We hate authority, and we have our own moral compass. It's a different way than the average citizen thinks, so I doubt many libertarian would go along. But to the average citizen, social pressure can be far more persuasive than torture, or being involuntarilly drugged, or anything else we usually consider in court cases that usually causes the case to be thrown out.
 
Grind said:
"This is exactly NOT what I was arguing. I was arguing that the emotion of regret is unnecessary in understanding a "wrong"... I specifically stated so several times along the way.

Hence why I also said I know something isn't wrong. Even without feeling bad, I still don't think it's wrong. I think society is wrong. I'm right.
Click to expand...
Which depends entirely on which group you place yourself in, "us" is vital to such, even with understanding...

It's all good Grind, there is no objective morality, the Universe doesn't care what strictures society places on an individual.
 
Watermark said:
What if your society believes murdering a particularly individual is right? Is it therefore right, or do you believe that your particular society has the best and only answers?
Click to expand...
That particular individual would be "outside" or "other"...
 
uscitizen said:
But of course they are "insane" because they don't agree with the same concepts of right and wrong in their society. The existance of insanity negates your argument by itself Damo. And society determines who fits their definition of insane,,,
Click to expand...

Insanity is a tool society uses to give a reason for the people who do things that aren't within the society's bounds. Morality doesn't exist. A "universal" society doesn't exist. People come together, do things, and refer to themselves as society, but they are all seperate individuals with their own moral compasses. Some people, sometimes a majority, sometimes all, most of the time a minority, decide a set moral compass and enforce it on everyone else.

It all sounds so messy whenever you describe it like that though, eh?
 
Society is an entity of itself, thus we have a nice science to study it called sociology. Anyway, when those groups of humans get together and make their rules there are rules that are universal to all human societies. One, and only one of them, has been what I have been discussing in this thread. The idea that one would feel "guilt" or "remorse" is idealism. Understanding is the only line that must be drawn. Do you understand the rules, not would you feel bad if you broke them, is the question...
 
Criminal activity in itself may be considered insanity. However, we don't like to think about this. We like to think of the noble police officer and the evil swine criminals. But what made them commit the crime? How is the crime wrong? Were they being greedy? Why were they being selfish? What lead them to this path? How can we fix this?

Punishment is a blunt solution to this, shoving individuals out of the way that society finds undesirable. It's a stopgap measure. I mean, what else do we have? Brainwashing and designing people to act exactly as society wants from childbirth?

Still, some people take some kind of irrational pride in the act of punishment, and believe themselves great for it, for destroying a life in order to avenge the hurt of another. I don't. I put up with it.
 
They made a decision to face the consequences of their decision. Their action to hide what they have done makes it clear they understood that their action was "wrong". Whether they feel remorse or not makes not one iota of difference.
 
Killing is wrong ? well EXCEPT in self defense, or protecting your country, or for revenge, or if accidental, if they are a bad man, caught with your wife, told to by a superior officer, It killing one will save more lives, etc....
 
Damocles said:
They made a decision to face the consequences of their decision. Their action to hide what they have done makes it clear they understood that their action was "wrong". Whether they feel remorse or not makes not one iota of difference.
Click to expand...
Not quite damo, I don't smoke pot, but only because I like to keep my property, job and not go to jail, but I don't think anything is wrong with smoking pot.
 
Damocles said:
Society is an entity of itself, thus we have a nice science to study it called sociology. Anyway, when those groups of humans get together and make their rules there are rules that are universal to all human societies. One, and only one of them, has been what I have been discussing in this thread. The idea that one would feel "guilt" or "remorse" is idealism. Understanding is the only line that must be drawn. Do you understand the rules, not would you feel bad if you broke them, is the question...
Click to expand...

And therefore you fall to the answer...

Everyone is selfish, and everyone wants what's best for them, no matter what. Those who act in a way that society likes, like giving away charity, are doing this so that they will feel good, so that society will like them, not because they're some kind of followers of this inperceivable universal morality.

And how is society an entity? It is not. Society is vague, and it exists, but it is not in itself an entity. I consider myself associated with society sometimes, but I do not consider myself the society. I am acquiesced into it, I do it only because to not do so would be bad for me.
 
Damocles said:
Society is an entity of itself, thus we have a nice science to study it called sociology. Anyway, when those groups of humans get together and make their rules there are rules that are universal to all human societies. One, and only one of them, has been what I have been discussing in this thread. The idea that one would feel "guilt" or "remorse" is idealism. Understanding is the only line that must be drawn. Do you understand the rules, not would you feel bad if you broke them, is the question...
Click to expand...
Me thinks you have diverged a bit here Damo.
 
Damocles said:
Ahhh, but they both understood that there would be consequences here...

The man went willingly to the death penalty, he was willing to pay the consequence. The woman was judged to be insane and we have already eliminated the insane.

The man also attempted to cover his action, knowing it to be wrong but was caught later.
Click to expand...

He "went willingly into the death penalty"? He willingly killed the woman, but he would have avoided his own death if he could have. You never punish yourself willingly, to say that you do is a justification that is logically fallacious, and often used fallaciously by people in authority.
 
Last edited:
Those who don't follow society act selfishly. We consider them evil, and we consider our selfishness better than theirs. All societies do. And so we try to punish them, and they believe WE are insane, sometimes. Some societies very close together can consider another society somewhat insane... and many insane people believe society to be insane, as technically if a person is completely alone and broken with society they can become their own society. The only thing the big "societies" have going for them is a large number of people follow them.
 
uscitizen said:
Not quite damo, I don't smoke pot, but only because I like to keep my property, job and not go to jail, but I don't think anything is wrong with smoking pot.
Click to expand...
Once again the "feeling" is of no actual consequence... "Feeling" it is wrong is not what I am talking about and is the reason that I put "wrong" in quotations throughout. The emotive response is unnecessary to the equation.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top