3 ms·

All of the things you mentioned are relative to a culture. Since you were born in the West, you think of all these things as bad. The indoctrination is so stron

All of the things you mentioned are relative to a culture. Since you were born in the West, you think of all these things as bad. The indoctrination is so strong that you feel that your opinion is an objective fact. But, the same seriousness and objectivity you attach to your opinions they attach to their. Morality is kinda religion - everyone thinks their God or prophet is the TRUE one, when in fact they've been indoctrinated from early childhood to belive some magical stories. This hermeneutical matter-of-interpretation crap is no defense Do you think you can invalidate something by labeling it as 'crap'? I guess schools today don't teach people how to respond with arguments, instead of insults.

Retra 10y ago
Unless you're about to say you don't have a culture, maybe you should accept that people will argue according the culture they have and leave it at that. It's like I said "I like pepperoni pizza," and you're trying to say "no one kind of pizza is objectively better than the rest, so you have no right to choose pepperoni pizza over any other pizza." But in fact I do have this right, being that I'm the one choosing which pizza to eat. If I disagree with someone's morals, it's because I'm the one who's choosing which morals to disagree with. The "who I am to judge" is the one who's doing the judging. Just like you are with your inane position here.
- shitlordism 10y ago
  Moral statements are usually stated in way that implies objectivity. For example: "It is wrong to rape babies" or the nemedse reply [1] (writes that things are universally bad). Plus, objectivity gives you credibility. That's why people are citing scientific studies, get 3rd parties or submit evidence, instead of saying "I just made it up" or "I pulled it out of thin air" etc. It's like I said "I like pepperoni pizza," and you're trying to say "no one kind of pizza is objectively better than the rest, so you have no right to choose pepperoni pizza over any other pizza This is misleading. "I like pepperoni pizza" or "Jazz is my kind of music" are positive personal preferences. Those are not binding to anyone. It is stated in a way that expresses your positive preference as opposed to criticism of others' preferences. When you start to criticize others' preferences, that's where questions of objectivity come in. People here are saying something more like "People who eat other types of pizza are idiots. Pepperoni pizza is the the most delicious pizza. period.". Then you could ask: "Who are you to say that and call people idiots? You might like it, but it doesn't mean others do and that pepperoni pizza is in fact the most delicious pizza.". That would be a reasonable reply to an arrogant person. But in fact I do have this right, being that I'm the one choosing which pizza to eat. Again. You're mistaking expressing positive personal preferences with criticism of others' preferences. BTW, rights (to express yourself or write on this forum freely) are also related to morality. You are stating "I do have this right..." as if you saying something that's objectively true. Like "I have arms or legs". The same way you think you have rights is how most people think about morality - it's something objective and is not a matter of what anyone else thinks. Concept of natural rights confirms this (inalienable rights that can't be given or taken away by anyone and you have them, not because you think you do, but because you objectively do). [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11818411

Retra 10y ago

Unless you're about to say you don't have a culture, maybe you should accept that people will argue according the culture they have and leave it at that. It's like I said "I like pepperoni pizza," and you're trying to say "no one kind of pizza is objectively better than the rest, so you have no right to choose pepperoni pizza over any other pizza." But in fact I do have this right, being that I'm the one choosing which pizza to eat. If I disagree with someone's morals, it's because I'm the one who's choosing which morals to disagree with. The "who I am to judge" is the one who's doing the judging. Just like you are with your inane position here.

shitlordism 10y ago
Moral statements are usually stated in way that implies objectivity. For example: "It is wrong to rape babies" or the nemedse reply [1] (writes that things are universally bad). Plus, objectivity gives you credibility. That's why people are citing scientific studies, get 3rd parties or submit evidence, instead of saying "I just made it up" or "I pulled it out of thin air" etc. It's like I said "I like pepperoni pizza," and you're trying to say "no one kind of pizza is objectively better than the rest, so you have no right to choose pepperoni pizza over any other pizza This is misleading. "I like pepperoni pizza" or "Jazz is my kind of music" are positive personal preferences. Those are not binding to anyone. It is stated in a way that expresses your positive preference as opposed to criticism of others' preferences. When you start to criticize others' preferences, that's where questions of objectivity come in. People here are saying something more like "People who eat other types of pizza are idiots. Pepperoni pizza is the the most delicious pizza. period.". Then you could ask: "Who are you to say that and call people idiots? You might like it, but it doesn't mean others do and that pepperoni pizza is in fact the most delicious pizza.". That would be a reasonable reply to an arrogant person. But in fact I do have this right, being that I'm the one choosing which pizza to eat. Again. You're mistaking expressing positive personal preferences with criticism of others' preferences. BTW, rights (to express yourself or write on this forum freely) are also related to morality. You are stating "I do have this right..." as if you saying something that's objectively true. Like "I have arms or legs". The same way you think you have rights is how most people think about morality - it's something objective and is not a matter of what anyone else thinks. Concept of natural rights confirms this (inalienable rights that can't be given or taken away by anyone and you have them, not because you think you do, but because you objectively do). [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11818411