3 ms·
You state this as if it's a fact but I think most people would disagree. If morality is subjective, then that means there is nothing objectively wrong with mur
by pc86 1y ago
You state this as if it's a fact but I think most people would disagree.
If morality is subjective, then that means there is nothing objectively wrong with murder, rape, pedophilia, chattel slavery, or any number of things that most civilized people would find abhorrent.
I'm not even trying to make a religious argument about the source of some objective morality, I don't think it's necessary to solve that to answer the "objective v. subjective" question.
- Retr0id 1y ago> If morality is subjective, then that means there is nothing objectively wrong with ... Yes, this is a true statement. Subjectivity and objectivity are two different things. But I will grant you, there are plenty who believe in an objective framework for morality. My earlier statement is not universally agreed upon.
- dokyun 1y agoThe ancient Romans had far less of a problem with all of those things than many people do now; would you consider them uncivilized?
- pc86 1y agoI said nothing about how "civilized" anyone is. You can be a civilized person and be completely immoral. They're unrelated.
- djoldman 1y agoThis quickly devolves into semantics as you pointed out. Do you mean that reasonably all people agree that murder, rape, pedophilia, etc. are bad? Aka if close to everyone thinks something, then that's an "objective" opinion? If so, that makes sense. However, the parent comment may mean to say that wrong and right are qualities that humans place on things/events/communications... and I think that makes sense. Physics/chemistry/math has nothing to say about vice and virtue.
- gopher_space 1y ago> Physics/chemistry/math has nothing to say about vice and virtue. Leaded gasoline.
- pc86 1y agoWhat does physics, chemistry, or math have to say about the vice or virtue of leaded gasoline? What's the equation where the right side says "good" or "bad?"
- x-complexity 1y ago> > Physics/chemistry/math has nothing to say about vice and virtue. > Leaded gasoline. Again, as GP mentioned, there's a failure in linking how (Physics/chemistry/math) imposes morality on (leaded gasoline): Any moral opinions on this subject are within the broader context of how it affects humans (negatively). Physics/chemistry/math, in isolation, do not impose morality.
- gopher_space 1y agoThe other way around. What does leaded gasoline have to say about the connection of physics/chemistry/math to the concepts of vice and virtue. What do we know, today, that might connect these in people's minds?
- x-complexity 1y ago> The other way around. What does leaded gasoline have to say about the connection of physics/chemistry/math to the concepts of vice and virtue. Again, there are no connections between (physics/chemistry/maths) and (vice and virtue), even with the inclusion of (leaded gasoline). Graph-wise, it looks like: (physics/chemistry/maths) --(chemically describes)--> (leaded gasoline) while (vice and virtue) sits in an isolated corner. ----- I'm not going to provide the whole solution that connects the two together, since you have yet to do so yourself. Even so, the two cannot be connected without adding the human-centric context node to the graph. This is nothing but a roundabout way to define morality as a human-imposed construct onto concepts, which further reinforces the point that the injection of human-centric morality is the linchpin to connecting (physics/chemistry/maths) with (vice and virtue). Morality is not something that exists in isolation: It's heavily personal-POV-centric & color-imposing. This stands in contrast to (physics/chemistry/maths), which can be derived outside of the human experience.
- gaganyaan 1y agoThere isn't anything objectively wrong with those. You can still derive a functioning society from selfish principles. I don't want to live in a society where I can just get murdered, so I am fine with outlawing murder. This is philosophically valid, but also has the advantage of being how moral systems are actually constructed in practice.