4 ms·

Which makes all this mainly about personal values and not "objective truths".

by calibas 6y ago

aidenn0 6y ago
That's only true if you accept moral relativism.
- calibas 6y ago
  If morals aren't relative, which ones are correct? To me, moral relativism means that I understand other people have different morals than mine and I have to respect that. It's not some excuse to toss morals out the window.
  - aidenn0 6y ago
    If Special Relativity and Quantum Mechanics are incompatible with respect to gravity, which one is correct? The fact that we don't know something does not then imply that that the actual truth is subjective. The less you know the more humble you need to be, but different views do not always justify respect. To use my previous analogy: If a random person shows up to a physicist claiming to have invented anti-gravity, then they aren't going to get much respect. Similarly if someone claims that it's a moral positive to walk into random people's houses and murder their babies, I don't have to respect that.
    - calibas 6y ago
      Are we talking about moral relativism, or whether actual truth is subjective? Morals are personal/cultural values, I can't imagine equating them to "actual truth". I'm really not following how this relates to my original comment either, I meant your idea of "fairness" depends on personal values. The fact that people have different ideas of what's fair is conclusive proof.
      - aidenn0 6y ago
        > Morals are personal/cultural values This phrase is something I completely disagree with. Morals are how one ought to behave, and how one ought to behave can intersect with cultural and personal values, but is not determined by cultural and personal values. > I'm really not following how this relates to my original comment either, I meant your idea of "fairness" depends on personal values. The fact that people have different ideas of what's fair is conclusive proof. I missed that subtlety , I thought you meant the general discussion of whether meritocracies are good depends on personal values. That stronger statement (that I now see you didn't make) is what I was disagreeing with.
        calibas 6y ago
        >Morals are how one ought to behave, and how one ought to behave can intersect with cultural and personal values, but is not determined by cultural and personal values. There are plenty of people who believe this, that their morals are absolute, and you can refer to the Spanish Inquisition to see exactly how "evil" that kind of thinking can get. Moral relativists are saints compared to what the Catholics have done in the name of "morality". All religious fanatics agree that morals are absolute, they just don't agree on what those morals are. Also, and I'm sure you'll disagree, but how you quantify and qualify "merits" is based upon personal/cultural values. If you don't realize this you'll just argue endlessly with people over whose perspective is correct, not realizing you're both just viewing things through your own biases. To me, "good morals" are trying to understand and empathize with other people, while allowing them their own unique perspective.
        aidenn0 6y ago
        > Also, and I'm sure you'll disagree, but how you quantify and qualify "merits" is based upon personal/cultural values. If you don't realize this you'll just argue endlessly with people over whose perspective is correct, not realizing you're both just viewing things through your own biases. Actually I completely agree with this. The fact that I have biases and you have biases will cause us to both be wrong. It doesn't mean that we are equally wrong though. > To me, "good morals" are trying to understand and empathize with other people, while allowing them their own unique perspective. That's a moral absolutist position.

Which makes all this mainly about personal values and not "objective truths".

aidenn0 6y ago

That's only true if you accept moral relativism.

calibas 6y ago
If morals aren't relative, which ones are correct? To me, moral relativism means that I understand other people have different morals than mine and I have to respect that. It's not some excuse to toss morals out the window.
- aidenn0 6y ago
  If Special Relativity and Quantum Mechanics are incompatible with respect to gravity, which one is correct? The fact that we don't know something does not then imply that that the actual truth is subjective. The less you know the more humble you need to be, but different views do not always justify respect. To use my previous analogy: If a random person shows up to a physicist claiming to have invented anti-gravity, then they aren't going to get much respect. Similarly if someone claims that it's a moral positive to walk into random people's houses and murder their babies, I don't have to respect that.
  - calibas 6y ago
    Are we talking about moral relativism, or whether actual truth is subjective? Morals are personal/cultural values, I can't imagine equating them to "actual truth". I'm really not following how this relates to my original comment either, I meant your idea of "fairness" depends on personal values. The fact that people have different ideas of what's fair is conclusive proof.
    - aidenn0 6y ago
      > Morals are personal/cultural values This phrase is something I completely disagree with. Morals are how one ought to behave, and how one ought to behave can intersect with cultural and personal values, but is not determined by cultural and personal values. > I'm really not following how this relates to my original comment either, I meant your idea of "fairness" depends on personal values. The fact that people have different ideas of what's fair is conclusive proof. I missed that subtlety , I thought you meant the general discussion of whether meritocracies are good depends on personal values. That stronger statement (that I now see you didn't make) is what I was disagreeing with.
      - calibas 6y ago
        >Morals are how one ought to behave, and how one ought to behave can intersect with cultural and personal values, but is not determined by cultural and personal values. There are plenty of people who believe this, that their morals are absolute, and you can refer to the Spanish Inquisition to see exactly how "evil" that kind of thinking can get. Moral relativists are saints compared to what the Catholics have done in the name of "morality". All religious fanatics agree that morals are absolute, they just don't agree on what those morals are. Also, and I'm sure you'll disagree, but how you quantify and qualify "merits" is based upon personal/cultural values. If you don't realize this you'll just argue endlessly with people over whose perspective is correct, not realizing you're both just viewing things through your own biases. To me, "good morals" are trying to understand and empathize with other people, while allowing them their own unique perspective.
        aidenn0 6y ago
        > Also, and I'm sure you'll disagree, but how you quantify and qualify "merits" is based upon personal/cultural values. If you don't realize this you'll just argue endlessly with people over whose perspective is correct, not realizing you're both just viewing things through your own biases. Actually I completely agree with this. The fact that I have biases and you have biases will cause us to both be wrong. It doesn't mean that we are equally wrong though. > To me, "good morals" are trying to understand and empathize with other people, while allowing them their own unique perspective. That's a moral absolutist position.