Are values purely subjective?

C

Cypress

Well-known member
G.E. Moore's Principia Ethica gives three thought experiments that suggest there is an objective side to value beyond the purely subjective.

A first argument is that beauty can have an intrinsic value, even if no one is around to see it. A universe that lacks any conciousness, but has the grand canyon, sunsets, waterfalls is still better than an opaque and colorless universe. Moore claims this shows beauty has an intrinsic objective value, even if no one is around to see it. .

The second argument is the magic button thought experiment. You have a choice to push a button which will convert us all into brains in a vat where Matrix type technology creates the neural experience for all of us of a living a pleasant best-possible digital pseudo-life. Moore says very few people would push the button because there is an intrinsic and object value to having contact with reality.

The third argument is the principle of organic unities. The case in which a person takes pleasure in a child's pain. The fact that someone takes pleasure in anothers pain does not mean the value of the whole is simply the value of the pleasure minus the pain. This kind of pleasure is morally tainted, what matters is the objective nature of the relationship between the two sensations. Here again, there is an objective side to values.
 
Cypress said:
G.E. Moore's Principia Ethica gives three thought experiments that suggest there is an objective side to value beyond the purely subjective.

A first argument is that beauty can have an intrinsic value, even if no one is around to see it. A universe that lacks any conciousness, but has the grand canyon, sunsets, waterfalls is still better than an opaque and colorless universe. Moore claims this shows beauty has an intrinsic objective value, even if no one is around to see it. .

The second argument is the magic button thought experiment. You have a choice to push a button which will convert us all into brains in a vat where Matrix type technology creates the neural experience for all of us of a living a pleasant best-possible digital pseudo-life. Moore says very few people would push the button because there is an intrinsic and object value to having contact with reality.

The third argument is the principle of organic unities. The case in which a person takes pleasure in a child's pain.The fact that someone takes pleasure in anothers pain does not mean the value of the whole is simply the value of the pleasure minus the pain. This kind of pleasure is morally tainted, what matters is the objective nature of the relationship between the two sensations. Here again, there is an objective side to values.
Click to expand...

What the fuck is wrong with you?
 
Margot said:
Well,Socrates,Plato ,Kant were into "values" but I like Cypress have no opinion
Click to expand...
Speak for yourself.

I have at least 80 posts on this board stating that the moral relativists are wrong, and not everything is culturally relative.

There are unequivocally universal values widely common to all human cultures.
 
Cypress said:
G.E. Moore's Principia Ethica gives three thought experiments that suggest there is an objective side to value beyond the purely subjective.

A first argument is that beauty can have an intrinsic value, even if no one is around to see it. A universe that lacks any conciousness, but has the grand canyon, sunsets, waterfalls is still better than an opaque and colorless universe. Moore claims this shows beauty has an intrinsic objective value, even if no one is around to see it. .

The second argument is the magic button thought experiment. You have a choice to push a button which will convert us all into brains in a vat where Matrix type technology creates the neural experience for all of us of a living a pleasant best-possible digital pseudo-life. Moore says very few people would push the button because there is an intrinsic and object value to having contact with reality.

The third argument is the principle of organic unities. The case in which a person takes pleasure in a child's pain. The fact that someone takes pleasure in anothers pain does not mean the value of the whole is simply the value of the pleasure minus the pain. This kind of pleasure is morally tainted, what matters is the objective nature of the relationship between the two sensations. Here again, there is an objective side to values.
Click to expand...

Yes values are purely subjective. We decide what matters.
 
Yakuda said:
Yes values are purely subjective. We decide what matters.
Click to expand...

You can decide to abuse a child, or choose to break promises to businesses partners and spouses, but society will typically hold you accountable because you would be violating widely held universal values pretty much all human cultures hold as a standard.
 
Cypress said:
You can decide to abuse a child, or choose to break promises to busnesses partners and spouses, but society will typically hold you accountable because you would be violating a widely held universal value pretty much all human cultures hold as a standard.
Click to expand...

So let me inquire what do you see as the difference between values and morals?
 
Yakuda said:
So let me inquire what do you see as the difference between values and morals.
Click to expand...
Standards of behavior or expectations that some social norms are of great importance. Probably some significant overlap with ethics.

The expectation to keep your promises is a universal value.
 
Cypress said:
Standards of behavior or expectations that some social norms are of great importance. Probably some significant overlap with ethics.

The expectation to keep your promises is a universal value.
Click to expand...

So you don't see a distinction.

So you're a assuming a "promise" is binding and that people intrinsically recognize it and comply? Ive been on both sides of broken promises.
 
Yakuda said:
So you don't see a distinction.

So you're a assuming a "promise" is binding and that people intrinsically recognize it and comply? Ive been on both sides of broken promises.
Click to expand...

Universal values aren't supposed to come with a guarantee that everyone, everywhere, and all times will meet the expectations.

What they do is set a universal standard society agrees we should shoot for.

People who break promises or take pleasure in abusing children are almost universally regarded as assholes because they are violating a universal ethical standard.
 
Cypress said:
Universal values aren't supposed to come with a guarantee that everyone, everywhere, and all times will meet the expectations.

What they do is set a universal standard society agrees we should shoot for.

People who break promises or take pleasure in abusing children are almost universally regarded as assholes because they are violating a universal ethical standard.
Click to expand...

Right, whether they do or not is based on their morals.

There are a ton of definitional problems in that last sentence.
 
Yakuda said:
Right, whether they do or not is based on their morals.

There are a ton of definitional problems in that last sentence.
Click to expand...

There's a reason people don't brag about breaking promises
Don't boast about cheating on their wives
Don't talk about the pleasure they feel about hitting small children.

Because they intuitively know they are social deviants, that they are just violating universal ethical standards and would be considered assholes by peers and community.
 
Cypress said:
There's a reason people don't brag about breaking promises
Boast about cheating on their wives
Talk about the pleasure feel about hitting small children.

Because they intuitively just know they are violating universal ethical standards and would be considered assholes by peers and community.
Click to expand...

Again it's their morals that decide which "value" they will adhere to. What they brag about has nothing to do with anything.
 
Yakuda said:
Again it's their morals that decide which "value" they will adhere to. What they brag about has nothing to do with anything.
Click to expand...

The fact that you don't openly brag about breaking promises to relatives, business partners, spouses is not evidence you just have different, but equally justifiable ethical standards.

It means you know you are practicing social deviancy in direct conflict with society's universal ethical values.
 
Cypress said:
The fact that you don't brag about breaking promises to relatives, business partners, spouses is not evidence you just have different but equally justifiable ethical standards.

It means you know you are practicing social deviancy in direct conflict with society's universal ethical values.
Click to expand...

So is it your contention that these values are not subjective? You keep referring to them.as "universal". I've had conversations with people regarding morals and their "universality" and that concept was rejected.
 
Last edited:
Cypress said:
G.E. Moore's Principia Ethica gives three thought experiments that suggest there is an objective side to value beyond the purely subjective.

A first argument is that beauty can have an intrinsic value, even if no one is around to see it. A universe that lacks any conciousness, but has the grand canyon, sunsets, waterfalls is still better than an opaque and colorless universe. Moore claims this shows beauty has an intrinsic objective value, even if no one is around to see it. .

The second argument is the magic button thought experiment. You have a choice to push a button which will convert us all into brains in a vat where Matrix type technology creates the neural experience for all of us of a living a pleasant best-possible digital pseudo-life. Moore says very few people would push the button because there is an intrinsic and object value to having contact with reality.

The third argument is the principle of organic unities. The case in which a person takes pleasure in a child's pain. The fact that someone takes pleasure in anothers pain does not mean the value of the whole is simply the value of the pleasure minus the pain. This kind of pleasure is morally tainted, what matters is the objective nature of the relationship between the two sensations. Here again, there is an objective side to values.
Click to expand...

This bothers many people, but "subjective" and "objective" are fairly meaningless terms.
 
Cypress said:
A universe that lacks any consciousness, but has the grand canyon, sunsets, waterfalls is still better than an opaque and colorless universe.
Click to expand...


If we're in a universe that has consciousness, however,
we should know enough not to waste time at the Grand Canyon
when the beautiful lights of Las Vegas are only 130 miles up the road.
 
Yakuda said:
So is it your contention that these values are not subjective? You keep referring to them.as "universal". I've had conversations with people regarding morals and their "universality" and that concept was rejected.
Click to expand...
Some values are not subjective.

Keeping your promises is a universal value accepted in all major cultures I know of on the planet. That's what makes them universal.

It's a standard everyone is expected to aspire to.


The reason no one proudly admits they don't keep their promises is because they are fully aware they are practicing social deviancy -- not simply just another perfectly justifiable alternative ethical system.
 
NiftyNiblick said:
If we're in a universe that has consciousness, however,
we should know enough not to waste time at the Grand Canyon
when the beautiful lights of Las Vegas are only 130 miles up the road.
Click to expand...

Vegas has it's charms, and the universe ideally needs a Vegas!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top