5 ms·
What, exactly, is the persuasive counterargument for basic morality? Why isn't morality axiomatic? Let's put it this way - the argument above would also apply
by geofft 5y ago
What, exactly, is the persuasive counterargument for basic morality? Why isn't morality axiomatic?
Let's put it this way - the argument above would also apply to saying that a private citizen who catches a thief stealing their catalytic convertor can torture them slowly and painfully for weeks without actually killing them. You owe them no moral consideration, it's a deterrent, etc. Do you need someone to make a persuasive argument against the merits of that to realize that it's abhorrent?
- Eelongate 5y ago> What, exactly, is the persuasive counterargument for basic morality? Morality is subjective. Here you are asserting that your personal morality is the "basic morality", without much in the way of supporting argument. > Let's put it this way - the argument above would also apply to saying [something that wasn't said] Strawmanning is not a persuasive line of argument either. I'll demonstrate this by doing it back to you (this will be unpersuasive, demonstrating my point): "If 'basic morality' dictates that you owe every person a moral consideration even if they are in the process of victimizing you, then by your logic it shouldn't be permitted to shoot somebody who's raping you" I sincerely doubt I've persuaded you with that strawman, and nor have you persuaded me with yours.
- tonyarkles 5y agoIf morality were axiomatic, then worldwide we would have a collective shared understanding of what is right or wrong, immutable over time. That’s clearly not the case.
- pasquinelli 5y agomaybe not in every detail, but are the broad strokes really so varried?
- naniwaduni 5y agoYes.
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- chillacy 5y agoCertainly morality is a shared part of us all, it was evolved to create ingroup cohesion and resist outgroups in humans, so there are a lot of commonalities like reciprocity, justice, etc. It’s the divvying up of ingroup and out group that tend to create disagreements in morality. I.e. we understand forgiveness, but we disagree who is worthy. We understand justice but we disagree who deserves punishment or why. That tends to make a pretty big difference in results and conclusions.