Philosophy Now Forum

Post deleted by author, for copyright reasons.

Kym Farrand wrote:OBJECTIVE MORALITY
Frederick Farrand

The argument below attempts to rationally justify a morality — via investigating what could be evidence for moral objectivity.
Preliminary Comments:-
(a) Rationality inherently seeks and hence values objectivity. Objectivity is possible, e.g., in science. Skeptics/deniers of objectivity contradict themselves, and are hence incoherent, by implicitly asserting it is objective (i.e., correct) that the objective may not or does not exist.

Correctness doesn't have to be about anything objective.

If you asked me how I felt and then made a guess and you were correct then are you saying that my feelings are objective? I would instead say there are a limited amount of categories and that by traces in the real world you would be able to narrow down to which category... but!... you would never know exactly how I felt because only I feel that way.

Correctness doesn't have to be about anything objective.

If you asked me how I felt and then made a guess and you were correct then are you saying that my feelings are objective? I would instead say there are a limited amount of categories and that by traces in the real world you would be able to narrow down to which category... but!... you would never know exactly how I felt because only I feel that way.[/quote]

Reply: I'd not be saying your feelings are objective, as a careful read of the post would show. It is objective that feelings are subjective. If I guessed correctly, say, that you are sad, then I'd be saying it is objective, i.e., true, that you are sad. Which, here, is so. As you say, correctness doesn't have to be about anything objective. It can be about the subjective. Of course.

Kym Farrand wrote:Correctness doesn't have to be about anything objective.

If you asked me how I felt and then made a guess and you were correct then are you saying that my feelings are objective? I would instead say there are a limited amount of categories and that by traces in the real world you would be able to narrow down to which category... but!... you would never know exactly how I felt because only I feel that way.

Reply: I'd not be saying your feelings are objective, as a careful read of the post would show. It is objective that feelings are subjective. If I guessed correctly, say, that you are sad, then I'd be saying it is objective, i.e., true, that you are sad. Which, here, is so. As you say, correctness doesn't have to be about anything objective. It can be about the subjective. Of course.[/quote]

oh key... so what's the point with the original statement then? Btw, it is not objective that feelings are subjective because you don't know if other people have feelings. Sometimes when this knocks you over is when you meet people you expect to feel things but are really just deceiving you or if you face a robot. In other words, at what point does it become objective that feelings are subjective when you can't even know if feelings are subjective other than your own!

The Voice of Time wrote:

Kym Farrand wrote:Correctness doesn't have to be about anything objective.

If you asked me how I felt and then made a guess and you were correct then are you saying that my feelings are objective? I would instead say there are a limited amount of categories and that by traces in the real world you would be able to narrow down to which category... but!... you would never know exactly how I felt because only I feel that way.

Reply: I'd not be saying your feelings are objective, as a careful read of the post would show. It is objective that feelings are subjective. If I guessed correctly, say, that you are sad, then I'd be saying it is objective, i.e., true, that you are sad. Which, here, is so. As you say, correctness doesn't have to be about anything objective. It can be about the subjective. Of course.

oh key... so what's the point with the original statement then? Btw, it is not objective that feelings are subjective because you don't know if other people have feelings. Sometimes when this knocks you over is when you meet people you expect to feel things but are really just deceiving you or if you face a robot. In other words, at what point does it become objective that feelings are subjective when you can't even know if feelings are subjective other than your own![/quote]


Reply: None of this is relevant to the central arguments of the post.

Kym Farrand wrote:Reply: None of this is relevant to the central arguments of the post.

And because of that you can ignore it? Assume something which isn't true because it'll make everything so much easier?

Every piece makes out the structure of a claim. Remove one piece and the structure might fall or appear a bit less pretty.