Philosophy Now Forum

Harbal wrote: ↑Sat Sep 30, 2023 2:49 pm It has always been my understanding that morality is the subjective human sense of right and wrong.

I understand. But that's not at all how the human race, historically, has seen things.

I have denied the existence of objective morality, which was perhaps wrong of me, because all I am really entitled to say about it is that I don't understand how such a thing could exist, or what it could be like if it does exist.

That's perfectly fair. Well said.

Such a thing could only exist if there were an objective basis for morality. Once one has decided no such objective basis exists, then one is inevitably thrown on the conviction that morality's a put-up job. It's just the prejudices of one's own society...and there isn't even a meta-ethic that could tell you that you are morally indebted to care what your own society thinks, so the whole thing's a fix.

Animals get along with no morality. Human beings are animals. Therefore, why shouldn't human beings get along without morality? The logic is easy.

Skepdick wrote: ↑Sat Sep 30, 2023 3:02 pm

Harbal wrote: ↑Sat Sep 30, 2023 3:00 pm

Skepdick wrote: ↑Sat Sep 30, 2023 2:22 pm
But you believe your opinion about the subjectivity of moral values is true; and not false.

If you believed your opinion was false - surely you wouldn’t hold it?

So I am asking you a simple question in the exact same language we are both speaking: why do you believe your opinion is true?

I am only able to experience my own moral feelings that come about because of my own moral values; I am not able to experience yours, or anyone else's. This is why I believe moral values and the experience of morality to be subjective.

Why are you trying to drag other people into your opinions?

If you read what I said more carefully, you will see I am excluding other people from my opinions, not dragging them in.

Why do you believe your opinions to be true; and not false?

Which opinions are you specifically referring to?

Harbal wrote: ↑Sat Sep 30, 2023 3:19 pm

Why do you believe your opinions to be true; and not false?

Which opinions are you specifically referring to?

This one.

Harbal wrote: ↑Sat Sep 30, 2023 1:51 pm It is my opinion that moral values are subjective.

Skepdick wrote: ↑Sat Sep 30, 2023 3:20 pm

Harbal wrote: ↑Sat Sep 30, 2023 3:19 pm

Why do you believe your opinions to be true; and not false?

Which opinions are you specifically referring to?

This one.

Harbal wrote: ↑Sat Sep 30, 2023 1:51 pm It is my opinion that moral values are subjective.

It is my opinion that my moral values are subjective, to be more precise.

Harbal wrote: ↑Sat Sep 30, 2023 4:01 pm

Skepdick wrote: ↑Sat Sep 30, 2023 3:20 pm

Harbal wrote: ↑Sat Sep 30, 2023 3:19 pm
Which opinions are you specifically referring to?

This one.

Harbal wrote: ↑Sat Sep 30, 2023 1:51 pm It is my opinion that moral values are subjective.

It is my opinion that my moral values are subjective, to be more precise.

That much is self-evident.

You still can’t tell us whether that’s an a priori presupposition or an a posteriori conclusion.

Is your opinion the product of dogma; or reason?

Skepdick wrote: ↑Sat Sep 30, 2023 4:06 pm

Harbal wrote: ↑Sat Sep 30, 2023 4:01 pm

Skepdick wrote: ↑Sat Sep 30, 2023 3:20 pm
This one.

It is my opinion that my moral values are subjective, to be more precise.

That much is self-evident.

You still can’t tell us whether that’s an a priori presupposition or an a posteriori conclusion.

Is your opinion the product of dogma; or reason?

I'm getting bored now.

Harbal wrote: ↑Sat Sep 30, 2023 4:53 pm

Skepdick wrote: ↑Sat Sep 30, 2023 4:06 pm

Harbal wrote: ↑Sat Sep 30, 2023 4:01 pm

It is my opinion that my moral values are subjective, to be more precise.

That much is self-evident.

You still can’t tell us whether that’s an a priori presupposition or an a posteriori conclusion.

Is your opinion the product of dogma; or reason?

I'm getting bored now.

Is that true?

Evidence please.

Skepdick wrote: ↑Sat Sep 30, 2023 5:00 pm

Harbal wrote: ↑Sat Sep 30, 2023 4:53 pm

Skepdick wrote: ↑Sat Sep 30, 2023 4:06 pm
That much is self-evident.

You still can’t tell us whether that’s an a priori presupposition or an a posteriori conclusion.

Is your opinion the product of dogma; or reason?

I'm getting bored now.

Is that true?

Evidence please.

I suspect you are the only one here not prepared to take my word for it.

Harbal wrote: ↑Sat Sep 30, 2023 5:12 pm

Skepdick wrote: ↑Sat Sep 30, 2023 5:00 pm

Harbal wrote: ↑Sat Sep 30, 2023 4:53 pm

I'm getting bored now.

Is that true?

Evidence please.

I suspect you are the only one here not prepared to take my word for it.

I took your word at face value.

I am still trying to determine if your word is objectively true.

You keep insisting that all this mind-stuff has no objective truth-value, so I don't know what to do now.

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Sat Sep 30, 2023 3:14 pm
Animals get along with no morality. Human beings are animals. Therefore, why shouldn't human beings get along without morality? The logic is easy.

Because human beings have evolved the ability to interact and cooperate socially to a level of sophistication far beyond that of any other species. If one accepts natural selection as the driving force behind biological evolution, as I do, the incorporation of morality into human behaviour seems perfectly logical.

Skepdick wrote: ↑Sat Sep 30, 2023 5:30 pm

Harbal wrote: ↑Sat Sep 30, 2023 5:12 pm

Skepdick wrote: ↑Sat Sep 30, 2023 5:00 pm
Is that true?

Evidence please.

I suspect you are the only one here not prepared to take my word for it.

I took your word at face value.

I am still trying to determine if your word is objectively true.

You keep insisting that all this mind-stuff has no objective truth-value, so I don't know what to do now.

Why not give doing nothing a try.

Harbal wrote: ↑Sat Sep 30, 2023 6:08 pm

Skepdick wrote: ↑Sat Sep 30, 2023 5:30 pm

Harbal wrote: ↑Sat Sep 30, 2023 5:12 pm

I suspect you are the only one here not prepared to take my word for it.

I took your word at face value.

I am still trying to determine if your word is objectively true.

You keep insisting that all this mind-stuff has no objective truth-value, so I don't know what to do now.

Why not give doing nothing a try.

That ship has sailed.

If you wanted me to do nothing - you shouldn't have lied in the first place.

Now I have this contradiction on my desk and I am told those won't fly on a philosophy forum...

Skepdick wrote: ↑Sat Sep 30, 2023 6:13 pm

Harbal wrote: ↑Sat Sep 30, 2023 6:08 pm

Skepdick wrote: ↑Sat Sep 30, 2023 5:30 pm
I took your word at face value.

I am still trying to determine if your word is objectively true.

You keep insisting that all this mind-stuff has no objective truth-value, so I don't know what to do now.

Why not give doing nothing a try.

That ship has sailed.

If you wanted me to do nothing - you shouldn't have lied in the first place.

Now I have this contradiction on my desk and I am told those won't fly on a philosophy forum...

You are mistaken; I do not lie.

Harbal wrote: ↑Sat Sep 30, 2023 6:38 pm

Skepdick wrote: ↑Sat Sep 30, 2023 6:13 pm

Harbal wrote: ↑Sat Sep 30, 2023 6:08 pm

Why not give doing nothing a try.

That ship has sailed.

If you wanted me to do nothing - you shouldn't have lied in the first place.

Now I have this contradiction on my desk and I am told those won't fly on a philosophy forum...

You are mistaken; I do not lie.

It this just your opinion; or is it objectively true?

Skepdick wrote: ↑Sat Sep 30, 2023 8:41 pm

Harbal wrote: ↑Sat Sep 30, 2023 6:38 pm

Skepdick wrote: ↑Sat Sep 30, 2023 6:13 pm
That ship has sailed.

If you wanted me to do nothing - you shouldn't have lied in the first place.

Now I have this contradiction on my desk and I am told those won't fly on a philosophy forum...

You are mistaken; I do not lie.

It this just your opinion; or is it objectively true?

Yes, that is correct.