What could make morality objective?

[Skepdick]

Just because a moral feeling is my own, subjective moral feeling, it doesn't mean it has no influence on my actions.

Exactly. Your moral feelings influence your actions.

If it's causal - it's as objective as gravity.

There is nothing to stop a subjective opinion from imposing limits.

If it's effective at doing so then it has causal influence on your actions.

If it's causal - it's as objective as gravity.

Yes, the cause might have an objective existence within me, but it only applies to me, and no one else

That's not true. It applies to anything and everyone in the causal chain.

and that is the sense in which it is subjective. And whatever my moral views, opinions and tastes, they could have been otherwise.

So what? Gravity could have been otherwise also. If you lived in another universe.

There is no objectively existent repository of objectively right moral values from which one can draw.

So how are you drawing the wrongness of murder from something that doesn't exist?

I don't agree with premis 1, so I consider your conclusion to be modus incorrect.

If you are going to disagree the least you could do is provide a counter-example. Even one example of something limiting/affecting behaviour would do.

Please make sure that your example is non-causal (that is to say - please make sure that your example makes no difference). Because if it's causal and it makes a difference - it's objective.

[Skepdick]

How you tell is how you tell that any ordered system exists apart from the order- systematic that you attribute. There may be hundreds of other ways to attribute an order -systematic other than stars and galaxies and stuff. More ancient generations thought a comet was a god.

We say Earth is a Goldilocks planet. Our scientific thought is Goldilocks too.

I use time for ordering. We can reasonably establish when causal order is violated using various tricks from General Relativity.

Any other notion of "ordering" makes no sense to me.

There's some useful theoretical material with respect to it: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lamport_timestamp

[Harbal]

If you are going to disagree the least you could do is provide a counter-example. Even one example of something limiting/affecting behaviour would do.

Please make sure that your example is non-causal (that is to say - please make sure that your example makes no difference). Because if it's causal and it makes a difference - it's objective.

No, if I am going to disagree with you, which I very much do, the least I could do would be nothing.

[Skepdick]

No, if I am going to disagree with you, which I very much do, the least I could do would be nothing.

It's difficult to disagree if you do nothing.

[Harbal]

When I say that morality is subjective, I mean that moral values are not universally right or wrong, but are a matter of personal opinion. There is no single authoritative source of right moral values.

[Harbal]

No, if I am going to disagree with you, which I very much do, the least I could do would be nothing.

It's difficult to disagree if you do nothing.

I am not put off by difficulty.

[Skepdick]

When I say that morality is subjective, I mean that moral values are not universally right or wrong, but are a matter of personal opinion.

And when I say that gravity is subjective, I mean that gravitational values are not universally right or wrong, but a matter of location.

There's more gravity on Jupiter and less gravity on Earth.

There is no single authoritative source of right moral values.

There's no single authoritative source on the right gravitational values.



You are pre-supposing that "objective" implies invariant. It's almost never the case.

[Harbal]

When I say that morality is subjective, I mean that moral values are not universally right or wrong, but are a matter of personal opinion.

And when I say that gravity is subjective, I mean that gravitational values are not universally right or wrong, but a matter of location.

There's more gravity on Jupiter and less gravity on Earth.

There is no single authoritative source of right moral values.

There's no single authoritative source on the right gravitational values.



You are pre-supposing that "objective" implies invariant. It's almost never the case.

How about, morality is relative, rather than absolute?

[Skepdick]

How about, morality is relative, rather than absolute?

There's some sense of irony in you attempting to compound more and more judgments (relative, absolute, subjective, objective, etc. etc. etc.) to the judgments you call "morality".

Morality is relatively relative!

[Sculptor]

How about, morality is relative, rather than absolute?

There's some sense of irony in you attempting to compound more and more judgments (relative, absolute, subjective, objective, etc. etc. etc.) to the judgments you call "morality".

Morality is relatively relative!

Relative is always relatively relative.
Because it cannot be absolute.

[Skepdick]

Relative is always relatively relative.
Because it cannot be absolute.

Absoluteness is also relative.

Absolute absoluteness is more absolute than mere absoluteness!

Absolutely relative; or relative absoluteness - there's fuckall to be said about things that aren't relative to anything. Because it isn't relative to humans.

[Sculptor]

Relative is always relatively relative.
Because it cannot be absolute.

Absoluteness is also relative.

Nope

[Harbal]

How about, morality is relative, rather than absolute?

There's some sense of irony in you attempting to compound more and more judgments (relative, absolute, subjective, objective, etc. etc. etc.) to the judgments you call "morality".

Yes, you're right, trying to compromise is just making things messy. I'll go back what I really think: Morality is subjective.

[Dontaskme]

Absolute and Relative are diametrically opposed equal and exact opposites of each other, can't have one without the other.

Everything is relative and only that is absolute.

The statement "everything is relative" (Everything Is Relative) is an absolute statement. If "everything is relative" is true then some things (at least that statement) aren't relative. If some things aren't relative, "everything is relative" is false.

It's a divine paradox, caused by the illusory duality of conceptual opposites.

But then, who said reality/existence had to make sense, reality/existence is extremely irrational and absurd, but then that's what makes it all worth talking about, the thrill of thinking reality/existence could ever be understood using the only tool available.. oh my word.

I will continue to have my opinion until I think I have understood.


.

[Veritas Aequitas]

Absolute and Relative are diametrically opposed equal and exact opposites of each other, can't have one without the other.

Everything is relative and only that is absolute.

The statement "everything is relative" (Everything Is Relative) is an absolute statement. If "everything is relative" is true then some things (at least that statement) aren't relative. If some things aren't relative, "everything is relative" is false.

It's a divine paradox, caused by the illusory duality of conceptual opposites.

But then, who said reality/existence had to make sense, reality/existence is extremely irrational and absurd, but then that's what makes it all worth talking about, the thrill of thinking reality/existence could ever be understood using the only tool available.. oh my word.

I will continue to have my opinion until I think I have understood.

The statement;
"The statement "everything is relative" [A] (Everything Is Relative) is an absolute statement." [.B]
is relative.

It [.B] is relative to the human conditions [which precedes and prevails].
If there are no humans, the above statement [.B] is a non-starter.

It is that same for [A] which is ultimately relative to the human conditions.

The 'absolute' is ultimately reserved for a God, but such an illusory things is ultimately conditioned by human impulses, thus relative, i.e. relative to the human conditions.

The main point here is objectivity vs. subjectivity where there is only relative objectivity and relative subjectivity.
There is relative [human based FSK] moral objectivity.