Morality is all in your mind.

[Cypress]

I think we can say they are objectively wrong and it's based on the experience of the person who is enslaved, having their genitals mutilated, etc. Should we believe that those acts are contributing to the well-being of the person having it done to them or is it quite clearly impacting them negatively?

No, that's just your opinion. The dignity and innate value of the individual is something that grew out of religious traditions. Slavery, cannibalism, and ritual human sacrifice make perfect sense to some societies cultural norms.

The DNA molecule doesn't care about morality, neither do quarks and electrons.

Male deer and rabbits will forcibly copulate with females; male lions will kill the cubs of their rivals. We don't call it rape and murder. We just say it's part of the material natural world.

 

[ZenMode]

No, that's just your opinion. The dignity and innate value of the individual is something that grew out of religious traditions. Slavery, cannibalism, and ritual human sacrifice make perfect sense to some societies cultural norms.

The DNA molecule doesn't care about morality, neither do quarks and electrons.

Male deer and rabbits will forcibly copulate with females; male lions will kill the cubs of their rivals. We don't call it rape and murder. We just say it's part of the material natural world.

The impact on the person, at a neurological level, isn't based on my opinion. The way that corporal punishment, for example, negatively impacts the development of children is verifiable through research. Or the fact that neglect, early in life, impacts the chemical response of children when they receive physical affection later in life.

 

[Cypress]

The impact on the person, at a neurological level, isn't based on my opinion. The way that corporal punishment, for example, negatively impacts the development of children is verifiable through research. Or the fact that neglect, early in life, impacts the chemical response of children when they receive physical affection later in life.

"Development of children" is a subjective construct, based on normative values, not on objective morality. Ritual sacrifice of children, abandoning weak toddlers to the wild, or sending six year olds to work in factories made perfect religious, cultural, or economic sense to many civilizations. DNA molecules simply don't care about elaborate objective moral frameworks.

Anytime you invoke the dignity and innate value of the individual human life, you are channeling religious scripture and tradition.

I respect the preeminent atheist Friedrich Nietzsche because he lived out the logical consequences of his atheism without hesitation or recalcitrance - he believed morality was was essentially relative

 

[ZenMode]

"Development of children" is a subjective construct, based on normative values, not on objective morality. Ritual sacrifice of children, abandoning weak toddlers to the wild, or sending six year olds to work in factories made perfect religious, cultural, or economic sense to many civilizations. DNA molecules simply don't care about elaborate objective moral frameworks.

Anytime you invoke the dignity and innate value of the individual human life, you are channeling religious scripture and tradition.

I respect the preeminent atheist Friedrich Nietzsche because he lived out the logical consequences of his atheism without hesitation or recalcitrance - he believed morality was was essentially relative

Children are going to develop physically, mentally and emotionally. So, the fact of development isn't subjective.

I'll say this....on the range of possibilities for development, if you or anyone else doesn't see the difference in value between producing well-adjusted, emotionally stable, thoughtful children vs developing an emotionless, violent, sociopath, then we don't have anything to discuss. Even if I can show an objective, science -based side to determining morality, it assumes that there's a conscious awareness of what is preferred in society vs what is not preferred. You're basically saying that a world of murderous sociopaths isn't any less desirable than a world of reasonable, rational people.

 

[Truck Fump / h1b]

Humans are animals.

with highly evolved social and cooperative behaviors.

morality and cooperation is what made us rise.

you're intent on making us fall with demoralization and the incentivization of human on human predations.

 

[Truck Fump / h1b]

Again it's not relevant if morals are constructs or in someone mind. You cant say morals are in peoples minds then say we don't like the models you have in your mind.

it is relevant.

constucts in the mind is what we call civilization and society itself.

 

[Truck Fump / h1b]

Can morality exist without people? Or are you still pretending to not believe in God?

do animal ever cooperate?

morality is rational.

morality doesn't need religion.

the only people who insist morality comes from religion are immoralists trying to poison the well of rational morality with the negative aspects of religious orthodoxy.

 

[Yakuda]

it is relevant.

constucts in the mind is what we call civilization and society itself.

Nonsensical. If morals are just a construct in people's minds then you have no valid reason to tell someone they can't do X. You would be no different than theist who say you shouldn't kill because God said so. Agreement.doesnt mKe something moral or right.

 

[Truck Fump / h1b]

Nonsensical. If morals are just a construct in people's minds then you have no valid reason to tell someone they can't do X. You would be no different than theist who say you shouldn't kill because God said so. Agreement.doesnt mKe something moral or right.

you're nonsensical.

morals are a construct in a person's mind.

we could behave as animals and some do.

they're called neocon "might makes right" war criminals, and muggers and murderers.

 

[Yakuda]

you're nonsensical.

morals are a construct in a person's mind.

we could behave as animals and some do.

they're called neocon "might makes right" war criminals, and muggers and murderers.

Now you're just ignoring the topic. If morals are only in a person's mind you can't then, by definition, tell other people that what their mind tells them is moral isnt moral.

 

[Cypress]

do animal ever cooperate?

morality is rational.

Cooperation isn't morality.
Cooperation is ultimately about self-preservation and self-interest.
Do you believe Owner Schindler was just 'cooperating' with Jews?

morality doesn't need religion.

the only people who insist morality comes from religion are immoralists trying to poison the well of rational morality with the negative aspects of religious orthodoxy.

It doesn't have to come from religious traditions, but the fact is that is largely where it originates. Why be reticent to admit it? And that is generally true whether you look at ancient Greece, the ancient Near East, ancient India, or ancient China.

 

[Truck Fump / h1b]

Cooperation isn't morality.

it is.

Cooperation is ultimately about self-preservation and self-interest.

as is morality.

Do you believe Owner Schindler was just 'cooperating' with Jews?

he defintely was cooperating with some of them.

It doesn't have to come from religious traditions, but the fact is that is largely where it originates. And that is generally true whether you look at ancient Greece, the ancient Near East, ancient India, or ancient China.

it largely doesn't come from any one religion, because...

morality is innately rational.

you're just a corrupt and evil war machine sell out who hates peace.

 

[Cypress]

it is.

as is morality.


he defintely was cooperating with some of them.

it largely doesn't come from any one religion, because...

morality is innately rational.

you're just a corrupt and evil war machine sell out who hates peace.

Without some kind of religious/metaphysical framework, you cannot claim there is a concept such absolute right and wrong; you cannot claim there is an objective morality. You have to admit morality is based on cultural tradition (which varies widely), opinion, or popular consensus.

Most people, including atheists, are keen to stake their reputation on a concept of absolute right and wrong because it is psychologically appealing.

 

[Cypress]

he defintely was cooperating with some of them.

Now you're just redefining and expanding the definition of 'cooperation' so it's an umbrella term large enough that you can cram selfless and utterly self-denying acts of moral conscience on behalf of strangers underneath it.

 

[Diogenes]

you're intent on making us fall with demoralization and the incentivization of human on human predations.

I recognize reality.

 

[Truth Detector]

Now you know.

That is a remarkably ignorant statement. Morality is taught. It is not inherent. Without it, man's tendency is to do great evil.

What would you supplant it with? You are aware that ALL of our laws and jurisprudence is based on morality, right?

 

[Truth Detector]

Can you think of any actual reasons why murder might be wrong without someone having to tell you it is?

Can you actually claim that one is not taught that murder is wrong? Do you actually and foolishly believe that morality is inherent and we are born with it?

Apparently you do not know that one can be raised to believe that murder is perfectly okay.

 

[Truth Detector]

Your mind would probably NOT, under normal operating circumstances, tell you that murder is moral. We are evolved to be a SOCIAL animal whose survival REQUIRES that we have a safe, stable society. This is why murder within social groups of animals isn't always that common. It is an evolutionary adaptation for social animals.

I can tell you why murder is "immoral" even without relying on God to tell me it is immoral. Murder is immoral because it is the killing of an innocent person. That makes society less safe and stable if murder is common. That would eliminate the survival advantage that a safe and stable society provide us. Hence murder is wrong.

BUT if I see a male polar bear kill the offspring of another male polar bear, by the same token, I do NOT say that is "immoral". The polar bear is not a social animal. As such it doesn't have the same instincts or thought patterns we have in regards to "the other".

Dumb.

 

[Truth Detector]

Humans are animals.

 

[Truck Fump / h1b]

I recognize reality.

No.

You're a brainwashed and evil idiot.