Why there is no such thing as objective morality.

Yakuda said:
Of course self interest is objective morality. If you don't want to be a slave it's immoral for you to make others a slave. AGAIN that has nothing to do with my feelings.
Click to expand...
So if you could receive an ironclad 100% guarantee you would never be enslaved, then slavery would cease to be objectively wrong from your viewpoint.
Yakuda said:
Slavery is objectively wrong because no normal person wants to be a slave.
Click to expand...
That's stupid, because that is self-interest, not objective morality.

Under the framework of objective morality, slavery is wrong at all times and all places, regardless of your personal opinions or personal circumstances.
 
Cypress said:
So if you could receive an ironclad 100% guarantee you would never be enslaved, then slavery would cease to be objectively wrong from your viewpoint.

That's stupid, because that is self-interest, not objective morality.

Under the framework of objective morality, slavery is wrong at all times and all places, regardless of your personal opinions or personal circumstances.
Click to expand...
Yes slavery is wrong at all times and all places, regardless of your personal opinions or personal circumstances. You finally figure it the fuck out.
 
Yakuda said:
Yes slavery is wrong at all times and all places, regardless of your personal opinions or personal circumstances. You finally figure it the fuck out.
Click to expand...
No, you said slavery was wrong based on the fact you wouldn't like to be enslaved.

You don't need God if you are going to base morality on self-interest, avoidance of pain, and self-preservation.

That can easily be explained by the scientific framework of Darwinian evolution.
 
Cypress said:
No, you said slavery was wrong based on the fact you wouldn't like to be enslaved.

You don't need God if you are going to base morality on self-interest, avoidance of pain, and self-preservation.

That can easily be explained by the scientific framework of Darwinian evolution.
Click to expand...
You sure do need God. Its because of idiots like you that slavery ever existed. You morons find what you believe are acceptable reasons and circumstances to enslave people.
 
Cypress said:
I'm using the definition of universal that means widespread or ubiquitous among humans.

Obviously, ant colonies do not have an objective moral framework. They are simply responding to the laws of survival and Darwinian tenets of evolution.
Click to expand...
I know you do, that's why I clarified my definition. Still, while humans are limited by our genetics and physics which creates limited choices towards survival of their tribes, I'm still not convinced there's an objective morality. History is filled with a lot of subjective morality and situational ethics.
 
Cypress said:
No, you said slavery was wrong based on the fact you wouldn't like to be enslaved.

You don't need God if you are going to base morality on self-interest, avoidance of pain, and self-preservation.

That can easily be explained by the scientific framework of Darwinian evolution.
Click to expand...
Most MAGAts are the opposite of Christian ethics and morality since they do, indeed, base their beliefs upon "self-interest, avoidance of pain, and self-preservation". Anyone who truly believes that there is an existence beyond the material universe would not be so selfish much less seek to harm others for personal gain as every MAGAt on JPP proves with their posts.
 
Dutch Uncle said:
Most MAGAts are the opposite of Christian ethics and morality since they do, indeed, base their beliefs upon "self-interest, avoidance of pain, and self-preservation". Anyone who truly believes that there is an existence beyond the material universe would not be so selfish much less seek to harm others for personal gain as every MAGAt on JPP proves with their posts.
Click to expand...

Agreed for sure
 
Matt Dillon said:
You lack the intellectual capacity to participate in a thread like this, yet somehow you started it.
I find that fascinating.
spock-fascinating.gif
Click to expand...
duhhhhhhhhh picture duhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh
 
ZenMode said:
It's actually a very important distinction. The belief that morality is subjective allows people to do terrible things, particularly in the name of their god.
Click to expand...
Please give an actual example of someone saying this. Something concrete, not hypothetical.
 
Hume said:
Let ants conduct their own discussion of morality.
Click to expand...

Ants likely have their own version of "morality". They are a social animal and they abide by specific "rules of behavior".

The only difference is for the ant there's only instinct. For humans there's instinct as well as secondary reasoning, but morality is morality.

If group A practices a "morality" and group B practices a different "morality" there's no rational world in which "morality" would be considered objectively true.
 
Daylight63 said:
Ants likely have their own version of "morality". They are a social animal and they abide by specific "rules of behavior".

The only difference is for the ant there's only instinct. For humans there's instinct as well as secondary reasoning, but morality is morality.

If group A practices a "morality" and group B practices a different "morality" there's no rational world in which "morality" would be considered objectively true.
Click to expand...
Good. So this thread is for humans.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top