What could make morality objective?

[henry quirk]

Is, "Honor your father and mother," a moral fact or principle? Is it objective? Is it absolute?

Your question highlights what seems to a feature of man's psychology, that bein' the impulse to needlessly complexify shit.

Seems to me: we need to get to the root.

Quite apart from whether I'm right or wrong (as I say, I'm not lookin' to re-litigate) let's say a man belongs to himself (ownness) is fact, is the root. Moral fact (to be fact) would have to align with the fact, the root. So how does honor your father & mother align with ownness?

Which of these...

Don't put other gods before Me
Honor your father and mother
Remember the sabbath
Don't worship idols
Don't abuse God's name
Don't murder
Don't commit adultery
Don't steal
Don't lie
Don't envy

...align with the fact?

Me: I say only these...

Don't murder (murder is wrong)
Don't steal (stealing is wrong)
Don't lie (lying is wrong)

...align with the root, a man belongs to himself.

The others, not so much.

Of course: your results will vary dependin' on what you believe the root is (and, if you believe there is no root, or that the root, the fact, doesn't lead to moral fact, then my post is just hooey to you).

[RCSaunders]

As for producing a moral fact, I'll happily go forward with that, ...

Is, "Honor your father and mother," a moral fact or principle? Is it objective? Is it absolute?

Just for clarification.

Well, what do you mean by "moral fact"? Do you mean "objectively moral"? Or are you crossing the fact-value divide?

How do you mean to differentiate "principle" from what you take its opposite to be? By "absolute," do you mean "always right, when rightly circumstantially applied," or do you mean something like, "a purely formal principle that admits of no qualifications from circumstance?"

Do you take "honour" to mean "obey," or something more like, "to seek the best interests of"?

I can't really respond to your question until I know what you're actually asking there, RC. Can you clarify?

I'm not assigning a meaning to any of those words. I'm only using them because you do. I'm asking if any of those words, as you use them, apply to the commandment, "Honor your father and mother." It's not a trick question. It's actually four separate questions. Just answer the one's you can or like:

Is the commandment--
1. --a moral fact?
2. --a principle?
3. --objective?
4. --absolute?

Or none of those in terms of whatever you mean by fact, principle, objective, or absolute? If it's none of those, is it just a suggestion?

I don't see why you expect me to explain what it means to, "honor." I didn't write it. Exodus 20:12 (I believe) doesn't offer any explanation. I suggest, if you need an explanation, you consult the author. How do I know what he meant?

[Immanuel Can]

Provide an example of what you think is a moral fact without first asking me what my definition of one is as you keep doing here.

Well, I was talking to RC, at the moment. So I haven't actually questioned your definition. But maybe you want to offer it?

[Immanuel Can]

duplicate

[RCSaunders]

Is, "Honor your father and mother," a moral fact or principle? Is it objective? Is it absolute?

Your question highlights what seems to a feature of man's psychology, that bein' the impulse to needlessly complexify shit.

Seems to me: we need to get to the root.

Quite apart from whether I'm right or wrong (as I say, I'm not lookin' to re-litigate) let's say a man belongs to himself (ownness) is fact, is the root. Moral fact (to be fact) would have to align with the fact, the root. So how does honor your father & mother align with ownness?

Which of these...

Don't put other gods before Me
Honor your father and mother
Remember the sabbath
Don't worship idols
Don't abuse God's name
Don't murder
Don't commit adultery
Don't steal
Don't lie
Don't envy

...align with the fact?

Me: I say only these...

Don't murder (murder is wrong)
Don't steal (stealing is wrong)
Don't lie (lying is wrong)

...align with the root, a man belongs to himself.

The others, not so much.

Of course: your results will vary dependin' on what you believe the root is (and, if you believe there is no root, or that the root, the fact, doesn't lead to moral fact, then my post is just hooey to you).

If by moral you mean what is right regarding human relationships, murder and stealing are certainly wrong. Unless by lying you only mean fraud or slander, I cannot agree that lying is always wrong. Lying to someone intent on doing you harm to prevent that harm is actually a virtue. I always lie on all government question forms because I regard the government a dangerous enemy.

Most of the commandments are silly. My objection to the, "commandments," and most of what goes by the name, "morality," is that they are all negative. Except for two thou shalts, (keep the Sabbath, honor parents) all the rest are negative, "thou shalt nots." What good is a moral system that only tells you what not to do. If one's morality consists of never doing anything their moral code says they should not do, they would be worthless and would die. Living consists of what you do, not what you don't do.

I have no interest in any principles that only tells me what not to do. The only principles I'm interested in are those that enable me to make right choices in how I live my life for my own success and happiness. I could never murder, steal, rape, enslave another individual, or interfere in another individual's life because it would be bad for me and make it impossible for me to be all I can as a human being. What someone else thinks or believes has no bearing on the rightness or wrongness of my choices.

A question to think about. Doesn't every animal belong to itself?

[Immanuel Can]

I can't really respond to your question until I know what you're actually asking there, RC. Can you clarify?

I'm not assigning a meaning to any of those words.

Well, the term "moral fact" was actually Peter's...and my assumption that I can make sense of his request is, perhaps, too hasty. At the very least I should have asked him what he meant by "moral fact."

It's actually four separate questions. Just answer the one's you can or like:

Is the commandment--
1. --a moral fact? (we'll have to ask Peter what he meant, so I can know if I was right to respond to him as I did)
2. --a principle? (well, it seems to be at least that, depending on what you mean)
3. --objective? (do you mean, "Objectively a moral commandment?" Or do you mean something like, "Objectively wrong for all people in the relevant circumstances?" I'm still not clear on that.)
4. --absolute? (in this context, I didn't choose this word, so I'm still going to have to ask you what you mean.)

I don't see why you expect me to explain what it means to, "honor." I didn't write it. Exodus 20:12

So you mean it in the same sense the Bible uses it? Okay. I can live with that.

[RCSaunders]

I can't really respond to your question until I know what you're actually asking there, RC. Can you clarify?

I'm not assigning a meaning to any of those words.

Well, the term "moral fact" was actually Peter's...and my assumption that I can make sense of his request is, perhaps, too hasty. At the very least I should have asked him what he meant by "moral fact."

It's actually four separate questions. Just answer the one's you can or like:

Is the commandment--
1. --a moral fact? (we'll have to ask Peter what he meant, so I can know if I was right to respond to him as I did)
2. --a principle? (well, it seems to be at least that, depending on what you mean)
3. --objective? (do you mean, "Objectively a moral commandment?" Or do you mean something like, "Objectively wrong for all people in the relevant circumstances?" I'm still not clear on that.)
4. --absolute? (in this context, I didn't choose this word, so I'm still going to have to ask you what you mean.)

I don't see why you expect me to explain what it means to, "honor." I didn't write it. Exodus 20:12

So you mean it in the same sense the Bible uses it? Okay. I can live with that.

I think you are being evasive. I have no interest in what Peter thinks. I'm interested only in what you mean by moral. So, in your own terms, in what way is the commandment, "honor your mother and father," moral. Is it moral to obey that commandment? Is it immoral to disobey that commandment?

If you like, you can explain how and why. Define the terms in any way you like. (It would help if your definition is not a common one, to explain that too.) You don't have to argue for or defend your view. (I'm not challenging it. I don't know what it is.)

I'm trying to understand what a theist means by, "moral," in relation to the commandments.

[Immanuel Can]

I think you are being evasive.

I can't cure that. You can suppose, of course...but I'm really only trying to clear up terms. I actually want to answer your question...but the question you're really asking, not one you're not.

I'm interested only in what you mean by moral. So, in your own terms, in what way is the commandment, "honor your mother and father," moral. Is it moral to obey that commandment? Is it immoral to disobey that commandment?

Well, obviously, both. Morality always has both "praise" and "blame" sides, and is not purely negative. But that's a conventional answer, so what do we make of that?

I'm trying to understand what a theist means by, "moral," in relation to the commandments.

Fair enough. I just didn't want to be misleading with my answer, because depending on what you take me to be saying, my answer could be taken to say one thing or another. I was just trying to be clear in the answer I gave.

[Belinda]

A hen blackbird belongs to herself and her fledglings. If only blackbirds could gang up against cats all fledglings would be safer.

We can gang up for mutual aid. We call it society.
There are codes of rules for moral guidance some codes made by priests and some made by political rulers and kings.

[henry quirk]

Lying to someone intent on doing you harm to prevent that harm is actually a virtue. I always lie on all government question forms because I regard the government a dangerous enemy.

Bein' untruthful with an enemy is self-defense. Lyin' to an ally or non-adversarial stranger is wrong.


Doesn't every animal belong to itself?

Not all; mebbe some.


I have no interest in any principles that only tells me what not to do.

Me neither. I do have an interest in certain codifications of principle (fact/moral fact). For me, those codifications are the equivalent of a fence (makin' for good neighbors).

-----

B

A hen blackbird belongs to herself and her fledglings. If only blackbirds could gang up against cats all fledglings would be safer.

A blackbird is a bio-robot; a crow, well, it might be a horse of another color.

[RCSaunders]

I'm interested only in what you mean by moral. So, in your own terms, in what way is the commandment, "honor your mother and father," moral. Is it moral to obey that commandment? Is it immoral to disobey that commandment?

Well, obviously, both. ...

That wasn't so hard was it?

At the risk of being misunderstood and having to explain forever what I mean... If I ask the same question of each of the other commandments would you have the same answer, that it is moral to obey the commandment and immoral to disobey it?

[Belinda]

A blackbird is a bio-robot;

No. A blackbird is sentient.

[henry quirk]

A blackbird is a bio-robot;

No. A blackbird is sentient.

meaning it's conscious: sure

a roomba is conscious too, but it has no self-awareness, it ain't a person (and neither is that blackbird)

[Belinda]

A blackbird is a bio-robot;

No. A blackbird is sentient.

meaning it's conscious: sure

a roomba is conscious too, but it has no self-awareness, it ain't a person (and neither is that blackbird)

No. I mean it's sentient it feels pain and terror.

[henry quirk]

No. A blackbird is sentient.

meaning it's conscious: sure

a roomba is conscious too, but it has no self-awareness, it ain't a person (and neither is that blackbird)

No. I mean it's sentient it feels pain and terror.

pain, yeah; terror, no

pain is biological; terror is the bailiwick of the self-aware, of the person