Can objective ethics be part of modern day survival?

[Hobbes' Choice]

Can objective ethics be part of modern day survival? I'm only saying it, Jon Stewart of the Daily Show! Is there a place for the ethical life anywhere on the planet? Can even the Pope be believed when he says he lives the saintly life?

Life is difficult and one tries hard to come to agreement with all strifes of criminal life that exists. What is one supposed to do? Not murder the neighbour, even an old one?

When the corrupt police turns the corners and ask what you have done lately, one must surely spit out a dirty answer? What say you? Do you find the ethical life promising despite all crime in the World?

Objective ethics hold that rule-following, including duties, permit a Utopian World where all life finds ethical grounding or so. Supply more if you want to.

What do you think "objective ethics" is, exactly?

[Necromancer]

What do you think "objective ethics" is, exactly?

It's the law-abiding life by the (objective) laws and regulations or a more narrow (strict) set of rules (in a democratic country, i.e., developed country).

[Obvious Leo]

What do you think "objective ethics" is, exactly?

It's the law-abiding life by the (objective) laws and regulations or a more narrow (strict) set of rules (in a democratic country, i.e., developed country).

What does this statement mean, please? I can recognise the words but I've never seen them assembled in this order before.

[Hobbes' Choice]

What do you think "objective ethics" is, exactly?

It's the law-abiding life by the (objective) laws and regulations or a more narrow (strict) set of rules (in a democratic country, i.e., developed country).

Gibber, gibber, gibber.

[Necromancer]

What does this statement mean, please? I can recognise the words but I've never seen them assembled in this order before.

You don't know what it means to abide by laws and regulations? You are the greatest!

[Obvious Leo]

You don't know what it means to abide by laws and regulations?

I know perfectly well what it means to abide by laws and regulations, and even mostly do, so but I'm asking what these have to do with ethics, either objective or otherwise. It's a genuine question so please try and answer it.

[Dalek Prime]

You don't know what it means to abide by laws and regulations?

I know perfectly well what it means to abide by laws and regulations, and even mostly do, so but I'm asking what these have to do with ethics, either objective or otherwise. It's a genuine question so please try and answer it.

I think Necromancer is speaking from the ideal; that law should reflect sound ethics. That's my take, anyways.

[Obvious Leo]

I think Necromancer is speaking from the ideal; that law should reflect sound ethics. That's my take, anyways.

Well that's a proposition he's going to have to come and explain, Dalek, because it doesn't makes a scrap of sense to me. Is there some repository of "sound ethics" somewhere in the universe that the law is somehow supposed to be able to gain access to. Who gets to decide which ethics are sound and which are unsound? It strikes me that there hasn't been a lot of thought invested in this idea.

[Necromancer]

I think Necromancer is speaking from the ideal; that law should reflect sound ethics. That's my take, anyways.

Well that's a proposition he's going to have to come and explain, Dalek, because it doesn't makes a scrap of sense to me. Is there some repository of "sound ethics" somewhere in the universe that the law is somehow supposed to be able to gain access to. Who gets to decide which ethics are sound and which are unsound? It strikes me that there hasn't been a lot of thought invested in this idea.

There's the usual saying that a society's morality is reflected (directly) by it's laws and regulations. If murder wouldn't be outlawed then this society's morality would decline quite quickly. Therefore, I'd say that laws and regulations are expressions of ethics directly. The practice of them is the morality, like stealing is outlawed and police strikes down on stealing so the practice of outlawing is sound. Social ethics, anyone? You understand?

Thus, with examples of bribery and prostitution, we have the laws and regulations directly being (social) ethics while the practice of them, the extent the police is actually policing them, the morality. Good?

[Obvious Leo]

Is stealing against the law because it is unethical or because it makes societies difficult to manage?

[Obvious Leo]

You also have yet to explain what you mean by the term "objective" ethics. Thus far all the ethics you speak of are either subjective or inter-subjective.

[Necromancer]

Is stealing against the law because it is unethical or because it makes societies difficult to manage?

Both, but "unethical" goes deep in that it validates the actions that are permissable.

You also have yet to explain what you mean by the term "objective" ethics. Thus far all the ethics you speak of are either subjective or inter-subjective.

"Objective" ethics can be understood as inter-subjective yet in literature "objective" is most used.

[Obvious Leo]

Both, but "unethical" goes deep in that it validates the actions that are permissable.

"Validates" according to what measurable standard?

"Objective" ethics can be understood as inter-subjective yet in literature "objective" is most used.

Precision of language is crucial when discussing any proposition in philosophy and objective and subjective are antonyms which have never been used as synonyms in any literature which I've ever read. Would you care to either rephrase your OP question or explain what you mean by the term "objective ethics", as you've been asked several times.

[Skip]

What would happen to the moral standard of a society that had long sanctified marriage between one man and one woman, if it suddenly allowed two men, or two women, to marry each other?
Would that ethical standard change if same sex couples were allowed to adopt children?

[Obvious Leo]

What would happen to the moral standard of a society

I'm not convinced that the notion of a "moral standard of a society" is a concept with any meaning, skip. Even if there were some utopian ideal society against which such a moral standard could be measured, which there isn't, then we still have the impossible task of determining whether we have met or failed to meet the required standard.

I'm utterly at a loss as to what question is being asked in this OP.