Is morality objective or subjective?

[henry quirk]

Anyway...

I have a question for all the moral subjectivists (so, moral objectivists, stand down). It's one I've asked before.

Why is slavery wrong?

Don't tell me you think it's wrong. Tell me why you think it's wrong. Give me your reasoning, please.

[Gary Childress]

I am conceding that I am not capable of presenting you with anything you would accept as an argument in favour of my expressed views.

But not realizing that subjectivism is at fault, not me.

Sooner or later, you're probably going to have to subject subjectivism to some sort of scrutiny. And when you do, it will dissolve faster than tissue paper in water. It cannot ground a society, cannot provide information about right and wrong, and can only throw you at the mercy of whatever momentary feeling or sensation strikes you. It's time to relinquish it.

When you see sense about that, consider nihilism. It's at least a rational possibility. Subjectivism is not.

IC, are you suggesting that without the existence of God, humans could never have been able to come up with rules and accords designed to allow us all to better flourish and thrive together? I mean, do ants serve their queen because God told them to, or do they serve their queen because if they didn't, there would be no ant colony?

[Gary Childress]

Anyway...

I have a question for all the moral subjectivists (so, moral objectivists, stand down). It's one I've asked before.

Why is slavery wrong?

Don't tell me you think it's wrong. Tell me why you think it's wrong. Give me your reasoning, please.

It's wrong because it's detrimental to the person being enslaved and ultimately to all of a cooperative society's members.

[The36]

God exist, god doesnt exist both are the same coin of persons who dont have the courage to admit they dont know. Morals, ethics all this things we need them because we dont know how things really works. If you do then you woukd just do it, you wouldnt need any, words, ideas friends to tell you how to act. So we differ just how close we are to the truth which is just word for how things really works. More you really know not with the emotions or thought but in act closer you are to truth. Morals are just rules to communicate to eachother.... and we all lives in stone age societies, where we dont even recognize that everything you know it is just a close up. The same way you dont have capabilities to do the all works that are done in the world, because it isi phsyicaly impposible so we all need eachother to destroy our prejudments, whic are opinions actually are.

[Harbal]

We do. We only differ on details.

The God of the Bible is basic and essential to IC's view of morality, so if you don't believe in that particular God, you're not on the same page at all.

I reckon God is God no matter what particular take any of us have on Him. Mannie's got his take, I got mine: God stays the same no matter what we think or how we differ.

But you don't believe God exists, so it ain't your concern now, is it?

I am just pointing out the ridiculous basis on which you and IC see yourselves as allies, which is as much my concern as anyone else's. He has told many of us that we are going to Hell because we don't believe in his God, but I've never seen him tell you that, and you don't believe in the same God that he does. Have you two got an arrangement where you stick up for each other and just ignore your differences?

[Harbal]

Anyway...



Why is slavery wrong?

It is wrong because henry quirk just kinda knows it is.

[henry quirk]

Anyway...

I have a question for all the moral subjectivists (so, moral objectivists, stand down). It's one I've asked before.

Why is slavery wrong?

Don't tell me you think it's wrong. Tell me why you think it's wrong. Give me your reasoning, please.

It's wrong because it's detrimental to the person being enslaved and ultimately to all of a cooperative society's members.

Detrimental by what standard? Certainly not a moral one that argues for individual dignity and sovereignty (becuz if morality is just personal and aggregated cultural opinion then what constitutes dignity and sovereignty is just opinion).

There are folks here who'll tell you slaves can be treated quite well. Sculptor, for example, can tell you that in certain societies house slaves were well cared for and proud of their status. It's malarky, sure, but there are moral subjectivists who'll back it.

Here's the thing: so what if it's detrimental? In an amoral universe, that's just an opinion, one rejected by some moral subjectivists and by the powers that be since before man fell out of the trees.

Governments, for example, might prefer the citizenry to be happy and voluntarily productive but most won't hesitate to make folks settle down and be productive or abide and to hell if they, the people, like it or not. And, in an amoral universe, it doesn't really matter. You, Gary Childress, may not like being pushed around but, without real morality, with only personal opinion or aggregated cultural opinion as morality, who cares? Gary doesn't wanna do X, not becuz it's wrong (how can it be wrong? morality is just personal opinion and might makes right) but becuz he doesn't like it. Boo friggin' hoo. Get back to the Soylent factory, guy and earn your Green.

-----

Bonus, butt in, post...

are you suggesting that without the existence of God, humans could never have been able to come up with rules and accords designed to allow us all to better flourish and thrive together? I mean, do ants serve their queen because God told them to, or do they serve their queen because if they didn't, there would be no ant colony?

Without God, there would be no universe. There would be no free wills like you and me, and there'd be no bio-automata like ants to follow, mindlessly, their itsy bitsy genetic programs.

Without God there would be a whole whack of nothing.

[henry quirk]

Anyway...



Why is slavery wrong?

It is wrong because henry quirk just kinda knows it is.

Fuck you.

[henry quirk]

The God of the Bible is basic and essential to IC's view of morality, so if you don't believe in that particular God, you're not on the same page at all.

I reckon God is God no matter what particular take any of us have on Him. Mannie's got his take, I got mine: God stays the same no matter what we think or how we differ.

But you don't believe God exists, so it ain't your concern now, is it?

I am just pointing out the ridiculous basis on which you and IC see yourselves as allies, which is as much my concern as anyone else's. He has told many of us that we are going to Hell because we don't believe in his God, but I've never seen him tell you that, and you don't believe in the same God that he does. Have you two got an arrangement where you stick up for each other and just ignore your differences?

Fuck you.

[Gary Childress]

Anyway...

I have a question for all the moral subjectivists (so, moral objectivists, stand down). It's one I've asked before.

Why is slavery wrong?

Don't tell me you think it's wrong. Tell me why you think it's wrong. Give me your reasoning, please.

It's wrong because it's detrimental to the person being enslaved and ultimately to all of a cooperative society's members.

Detrimental by what standard? Certainly not a moral one that argues for individual dignity and sovereignty (becuz if morality is just personal and aggregated cultural opinion then what constitutes dignity and sovereignty is just opinion).

It's detrimental by the standard of everyone who wishes not to be someone else's slave. If someone out there wants very badly to be a slave because s/he (preferably she) thinks its better than being free, then s/he is welcome to come do my laundry without compensation. And therefore, me allowing them to do my laundry would be perfectly fine if it is of no harm to them.

As far as "house slaves", it is true that they were the "elite" among slaves. Those who were in worse forms of slavery balked at house slaves because the masters could always count on their house slaves to stand by them (or else they would be demoted to field slaves). Is there something about facts that you don't like, Henry?

[Harbal]

Why is slavery wrong?

It is wrong because henry quirk just kinda knows it is.

Fuck you.

..........

Fuck you.

Henry quirk! just you go and wash your mouth out at once!

[Iwannaplato]

And then what it is. They have some tendencies to the same side of the spectrum, but what do they do on issues they disagree on?

Mannie is Christian, I'm a deist. That sums up the differences.

Otherwise the morals are the same?


Like IC is down with:

Morality isn't real. It's meaningless.

The rape isn't wrong.

The best you can say is: I don't like it!.

-----

sex outside marriage
men...hav(ing) sex with each other

Speakin' as a deist and natural rights libertarian: what free wills choose for themselves is on them...some of what they choose may be whacky but it ain't a moral issue; some of they choose can lead to issues of morality (the one-night stand isn't, in itself, a moral issue...that which happens to the baby that might result from the one-night stand, is).

If you two guys could only agree on where objective morality comes from, you would make a very formidable team.

Just thought I'd bring you in, Harbal.

[henry quirk]

It's detrimental by the standard of everyone who wishes not to be someone else's slave.

And the slaver should give a damn? Gary doesn't wanna be a slave...why?...no reason beyond it sux...boo hoo, put him back to work.

If someone out there wants very badly to be a slave because s/he (preferably she) thinks its better than being free, then s/he is welcome to come do my laundry without compensation. And therefore, me allowing them to do my laundry would be perfectly fine if it is of no harm to them.

No one wants to be a slave. Some can tell you why it's wrong, others can only say I don't like it or it sux.

As far as "house slaves", it is true that they were the "elite" among slaves. Those who were in worse forms of slavery balked at house slaves because the masters could always count on their house slaves to stand by them (or else they would be demoted to field slaves). Is there something about facts that you don't like, Henry?

The fact is: no slave relishes his slavery. He may be resigned to it, may be grateful his lot is not harsh, but he never accepts it or accepts that it's right he should be a slave

I wonder if any slave -- past or present -- was or remained a moral subjectivist. There may be atheists in fox holes but I'm thinkin' there aren't and never were any subjectivists in leashes.

Anyway: thanks for your answer.

[FlashDangerpants]

It's detrimental by the standard of everyone who wishes not to be someone else's slave.

And the slaver should give a damn? Gary doesn't wanna be a slave...why?...no reason beyond it sux...boo hoo, put him back to work.

If the slaver lacks moral motivation under Gary's description of morality, he can lack it under yours too. The slaver doesn't give two hoots if you think it's impossible for you not to know that you own yourself when he has you in chains and he owns the key.

[FlashDangerpants]

The God of the Bible is basic and essential to IC's view of morality, so if you don't believe in that particular God, you're not on the same page at all.

I reckon God is God no matter what particular take any of us have on Him. Mannie's got his take, I got mine: God stays the same no matter what we think or how we differ.

But you don't believe God exists, so it ain't your concern now, is it?

I am just pointing out the ridiculous basis on which you and IC see yourselves as allies, which is as much my concern as anyone else's. He has told many of us that we are going to Hell because we don't believe in his God, but I've never seen him tell you that, and you don't believe in the same God that he does. Have you two got an arrangement where you stick up for each other and just ignore your differences?

Have you ever actually seen IC or VA say that Henry's argument about something is correct? I haven't. They give him belly rubs by saying that his moral intuation is along the right lines. They might as well appreciate his haircut.