Author Topic: Let's rename objective morality  (Read 2844 times)

Offline SGOS

Re: Let's rename objective morality
« Reply #30 on: March 05, 2017, 06:55:46 AM »
So the wolf that dens the young does it for her own sake?

What of the orca that will defend and raise a pup from a wholy different family?

Ants and bees? There are so many....What would the difference be if a few weren't selfless? They do these things out of instinct (nature) and for the sake of others.

Not for reward for themselves.

Please show otherwise as I have studied altruism for some time.
I'm not sure this has any relationship to the subjectivity/objectivity issue.  Are you defending a definition of morality?  Or has the discussion been diverted to a tangent?

Re: Let's rename objective morality
« Reply #31 on: March 05, 2017, 06:58:56 AM »
I'm not sure this has any relationship to the subjectivity/objectivity issue.  Are you defending a definition of morality?  Or has the discussion been diverted to a tangent?
Both I suppose.

I agree that all things are subjective as the seer is a singular subject with their own perception. That isn't to say that there isn't too objective morality on some level as well.



faith in selfless unity for good
« Last Edit: March 05, 2017, 07:00:32 AM by popsthebuilder »

Offline Baruch

Re: Let's rename objective morality
« Reply #32 on: March 05, 2017, 08:19:19 AM »
I deny the existence of objective morality, on the general rule that nature is predatorial.  There is no morality in predation, and humans are ... predators.
שלום

Re: Let's rename objective morality
« Reply #33 on: March 05, 2017, 08:43:14 AM »
They have the capacity to be predators, parasites, and altruistic.

Not all life is predatory is it? If we are defined by our capacities could it not be argued justifiably that we too are beneficent?

Are wolves, orca, ants, bees and other social animals wholly predatory or do they too have the capacity for altruism seen in nature?

faith in selfless unity for good
« Last Edit: March 05, 2017, 08:44:52 AM by popsthebuilder »

Offline Baruch

Re: Let's rename objective morality
« Reply #34 on: March 05, 2017, 10:43:04 AM »
Individual acts of altruism, prove the rule.  However, you and I both know, that humans can exceed our ape-like natures ... the others here, not so much.
שלום

Offline Solomon Zorn

Re: Let's rename objective morality
« Reply #35 on: March 08, 2017, 05:19:09 PM »
I see the definition[of "moralist"] from Websters assumed to be positive.  I don't think moralists are positive.  I think as Baruch on this; they are blowhard assholes; making the assumption that their set of morals is the the correct and only set.  Morality is the same as beauty--defined differently by each and every viewer.
Morality perhaps. But the word "moralist" can have several definitions. Only the third definition: "one concerned with regulating the morals of others," generally equates to a blowhard asshole.
If God Exists, Why Does He Pretend Not to Exist?
Poetry and Proverbs of the Uneducated Hick

http://www.solomonzorn.com

Re: Let's rename objective morality
« Reply #36 on: March 08, 2017, 06:57:34 PM »
Morality perhaps. But the word "moralist" can have several definitions. Only the third definition: "one concerned with regulating the morals of others," generally equates to a blowhard asshole.
Yeah, I see that, Solomon.  All of these 'charged' words can be and are, defined differently and used differently.  I think morals are different for each person.  What is a moral?  It is what I think it is.  And it may or may not, match yours.  Which is a very good reason to define these words prior to discussing them.
Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able?
Then he is not omnipotent,
Is he able but not willing?
Then whence cometh evil?
Is he neither able or willing?
Then why call him god?

Offline Baruch

Re: Let's rename objective morality
« Reply #37 on: March 08, 2017, 07:17:18 PM »
Yeah, I see that, Solomon.  All of these 'charged' words can be and are, defined differently and used differently.  I think morals are different for each person.  What is a moral?  It is what I think it is.  And it may or may not, match yours.  Which is a very good reason to define these words prior to discussing them.

Except any dictionary writer ... is a blowhard asshole ;-)
שלום

Re: Let's rename objective morality
« Reply #38 on: March 08, 2017, 08:24:21 PM »
So the wolf that dens the young does it for her own sake?

What of the orca that will defend and raise a pup from a wholy different family?

Ants and bees? There are so many....What would the difference be if a few weren't selfless? They do these things out of instinct (nature) and for the sake of others.

Not for reward for themselves.

Please show otherwise as I have studied altruism for some time.
1) Various species exhibit *seemingly* selfless altruism.
2) ?
3) Reciprocal altruism is immoral

I think you missed a couple steps there.

Re: Let's rename objective morality
« Reply #39 on: March 14, 2017, 10:13:28 PM »
All very interesting discussions, morality is a interesting topic. Depending on which definition of objective that you use objective morality can mean different things, particularly to a theist vs a non-theist.
Again, my question still stands about using the term qualitative morality rather than objective morality for those people who are discussing morality.
Not sure why attacking moralists is in vogue around here. I'm not trying to define a moral yard stick, only a term to represent how each of us weighs and defines morality.
Again thoughts ? Preferably in this arena but I'm learning not to hold my breath

Re: Let's rename objective morality
« Reply #40 on: March 14, 2017, 10:44:36 PM »
All very interesting discussions, morality is a interesting topic. Depending on which definition of objective that you use objective morality can mean different things, particularly to a theist vs a non-theist.
Again, my question still stands about using the term qualitative morality rather than objective morality for those people who are discussing morality.
Not sure why attacking moralists is in vogue around here. I'm not trying to define a moral yard stick, only a term to represent how each of us weighs and defines morality.
Again thoughts ? Preferably in this arena but I'm learning not to hold my breath
Maybe you could frame your question better--I don't really understand what you are looking for.

I don't think many on this forum subscribes to the term 'objective morality'; personally, I don't think there is such a thing.  All morality is subjective.  it is subject to the dictates of the society you are referring to.  And the individual then uses those 'morals' as they think they should apply to his/her life.  So, trying to find any objective way to define morals is an impossible task. 
Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able?
Then he is not omnipotent,
Is he able but not willing?
Then whence cometh evil?
Is he neither able or willing?
Then why call him god?

Re: Let's rename objective morality
« Reply #41 on: March 15, 2017, 08:25:29 AM »
I personally do not see much point in changing a word without changing its meaning.

When I think of objective morality I don't exactly think of GOD or religion but what can be deemed as universally good or right.

peace,

Sorry for not actually attempting to answer your question sooner.



faith in selfless unity for good


Re: Let's rename objective morality
« Reply #42 on: March 15, 2017, 08:54:07 AM »
I personally do not see much point in changing a word without changing its meaning.

When I think of objective morality I don't exactly think of GOD or religion but what can be deemed as universally good or right.

peace,

Sorry for not actually attempting to answer your question sooner.



faith in selfless unity for good
Can you name one 'universal' good?
Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able?
Then he is not omnipotent,
Is he able but not willing?
Then whence cometh evil?
Is he neither able or willing?
Then why call him god?

Re: Let's rename objective morality
« Reply #43 on: March 15, 2017, 09:08:35 AM »
Can you name one 'universal' good?
Peace

Harmony

Compassion

Ever-giving

Long suffering for the sake of another

Self sacrifice for the sake of others.

Actually I could most likely make a list of words that indeed are universally good, but I'm trying to not bring words associated with faith into it, even though they can be wholly understood without religion.


I can most likely name off some universally negative or bad things too if you would like.

peace




faith in selfless unity for good


Offline Solomon Zorn

Re: Let's rename objective morality
« Reply #44 on: March 15, 2017, 03:32:03 PM »
Peace

Harmony

Compassion

Ever-giving

Long suffering for the sake of another

Self sacrifice for the sake of others.
Pops, I really need you to withdraw all of your savings, liquidate your assets, come up to Northwest Indiana, pay my rent in advance, for as far into the future as you can, and massage my back. It shouldn't be a problem for you, since ever-giving, long suffering, self sacrifice is a universal good.
If God Exists, Why Does He Pretend Not to Exist?
Poetry and Proverbs of the Uneducated Hick

http://www.solomonzorn.com