Off-Topic Hang out with people and talk about whatever. Feel free to suggest a better description for this forum as everyone seems to have an opinion. :D

TrollandToad.com
Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
  #1    
Old August 14th, 2013 (11:11 AM).
Princess Sandshrew's Avatar
Princess Sandshrew Princess Sandshrew is offline
PokéRespect
     
    Join Date: Jun 2009
    Location: Your Rival's house
    Age: 25
    Gender: Female
    Nature: Docile
    Posts: 66
    Why do you think something is right or wrong?
    Is all morality learned? Or taught? Maybe a bit of both. Can you only find true morality in religion? Do you just follow your society?

    How can you know what you believe to right, how can you trust any one moral stand point when many people differ so much?

    An example of differing morals could be with giving the death sentence to a murderer, one side can say it is right (an eye for an eye, if you will) and the other saying it is wrong (two wrongs don't make a right). How can you say either one is right and why would you believe that?


    I personally find it hard to think of things as being right or wrong, because actions are not inherently right or wrong, it is just what we call them.
    __________________
    “You must not lose faith in humanity. Humanity is like an ocean; if a few drops of the ocean are dirty, the ocean does not become dirty.”
    ― Mahatma Gandhi

    Relevant Advertising!

      #2    
    Old August 14th, 2013 (11:43 AM).
    Pinkie-Dawn's Avatar
    Pinkie-Dawn Pinkie-Dawn is offline
    Vampire Waifu
       
      Join Date: Dec 2012
      Location: California
      Age: 25
      Gender: Male
      Nature: Quirky
      Posts: 9,446
      One of my friends from Skype doesn't believe in morality, because it's man made, so we can do whatever we want (stealing, killing, raping, etc.) and not let anything control us on what is right or wrong, because it's human nature. I'm not sure if that also means we can't have limits to our behavior.
      __________________
        #3    
      Old August 14th, 2013 (2:55 PM).
      BraveNewWorld's Avatar
      BraveNewWorld BraveNewWorld is offline
      The Breaker
         
        Join Date: Apr 2013
        Location: New York
        Age: 23
        Gender: Male
        Nature: Adamant
        Posts: 232
        It's very difficult for me to articulate my thoughts on this. Basically something is right for everyone because it's good for you. Something is wrong for everyone because it's bad for you. When it doesn't pertain to you it becomes very difficult to decipher right from wrong. For instance...

        Murderers = Bad, because you don't want to be murdered.
        Killing murderers = ???, because you don't want to kill.

        Because you don't want to kill or be murdered it becomes difficult to justify either action. This is why some things (murder) are accepted as wrong, while others (death penalty) receive mixed reactions.

        I hope that makes sense.
        __________________
          #4    
        Old August 14th, 2013 (4:12 PM).
        Khawill's Avatar
        Khawill Khawill is offline
        Swaggins
        • Silver Tier
         
        Join Date: Aug 2012
        Location: The Cave of Hymns
        Age: 21
        Gender: Male
        Nature: Brave
        Posts: 1,565
        Each person perceives the universe differently, and the way they perceive the universe is how the universe is. Morality is simply the person's beliefs, and acts as a sort of leash for everyone. This means that what I perceive as good and evil, is what is good or evil, and the same goes for anyone else. This unfortunately gives everyone the basic right to do whatever they want, essentially making them void of any morals. Luckily, humans all have a shared morality belief for the most part, and although one person can not simply state what is right or wrong, we can mutually agree that something is right or wrong, and that those who stray from this belief are malicious.

        I personally strongly stick to the rules given to me, whether or not they are right or not. I will not question any laws, even if I think I should. I also have the belief that no human is allowed to kill another. I also believe that anybody who breaks this rule will be punished whether I do anything about it or not. (I do not trust my perception of morality, so I will cling safely to the clear ones written out as law)
        __________________
        College Bound, Mentally Sound.

        Frio & Elise || Jayce & Jayce 2
          #5    
        Old August 14th, 2013 (4:32 PM).
        AliasHackyCat AliasHackyCat is offline
           
          Join Date: Aug 2013
          Location: In the deep TOR cloud.
          Gender:
          Nature: Careful
          Posts: 10
          Well... I'll do an IMO post ;

          I think that a murderer shouldn't be killed for having killed, but I also think that prison should be about re-education and rehabilitation, while it isn't. Prison IS an eye for an eye sort of thing, because... They treat prisoners like animals. :I Also, I think that, redistribution, if not of something indie, is pretty morale. One should have the freedom to share any way he want. That's pretty much my thoughts, though... Morale is something that is different for anyone.
            #6    
          Old August 14th, 2013 (4:43 PM).
          twocows's Avatar
          twocows twocows is offline
          Mostly Benign
          • Gold Tier
           
          Join Date: Mar 2009
          Location: Michigan
          Age: 27
          Gender: Male
          Nature: Lax
          Posts: 4,172
          Quote:
          Originally Posted by Princess Sandshrew View Post
          Why do you think something is right or wrong?
          Is all morality learned? Or taught? Maybe a bit of both. Can you only find true morality in religion? Do you just follow your society?

          How can you know what you believe to right, how can you trust any one moral stand point when many people differ so much?

          An example of differing morals could be with giving the death sentence to a murderer, one side can say it is right (an eye for an eye, if you will) and the other saying it is wrong (two wrongs don't make a right). How can you say either one is right and why would you believe that?


          I personally find it hard to think of things as being right or wrong, because actions are not inherently right or wrong, it is just what we call them.
          I dispute the idea that morality is a man-made concept. It's more something we came to understand better as we evolved.

          The fact that different people have different takes on the subject does not make it impossible to come to a definitive answer, nor does it justify all takes on the subject. People debate things all the time, that doesn't mean one answer can't be right and the other can't be wrong. Galileo argued that the Earth revolved around the sun, but nearly everyone of the time disagreed. And yet, he was right and they were wrong. Just because the answer is hard to come upon does not mean it does not exist, and the pursuit of this answer is the foundation of the study of ethics.

          Moral relativism is the easy way out. It's saying "the answer is that there is no answer." Of course, if that was truly the case, you could justify anything. Such an idea devalues those ideas which nearly every branch of ethics seeks to protect in some way (foremost of which is human happiness). In other words, in a morally relativistic world, happiness has no value.

          Except happiness does have value to us. This is self-evident; we desire it, thus it has value to us, as attaining it (in some form or another) is one of the essential ideas upon which we predicate our lives.

          Quote:
          Originally Posted by Pinkie-Dawn View Post
          One of my friends from Skype doesn't believe in morality, because it's man made, so we can do whatever we want (stealing, killing, raping, etc.) and not let anything control us on what is right or wrong, because it's human nature. I'm not sure if that also means we can't have limits to our behavior.
          Yes, I remember you referencing this person's beliefs before. There are several flaws with this idea. First, the idea that something is man-made does not divorce it from value; quite the contrary, plenty of man-made things have value (houses, computers, toilets, etc.).

          Secondly, as I said previously, I am of the mind that morality is not a man-made concept. Any sufficiently evolved species will eventually experience happiness in some form. Happiness is the basis of all moral belief (most obviously utilitarianism, but really any moral philosophy ties into the concept in some way). Some ultimate, unifying ethical code likely exists, whether we have happened upon it or not. And even if that isn't the case, it doesn't mean that an answer that gets it right in some way isn't better than no answer at all.

          Quote:
          Originally Posted by BraveNewWorld View Post
          It's very difficult for me to articulate my thoughts on this. Basically something is right for everyone because it's good for you. Something is wrong for everyone because it's bad for you. When it doesn't pertain to you it becomes very difficult to decipher right from wrong. For instance...

          Murderers = Bad, because you don't want to be murdered.
          Killing murderers = ???, because you don't want to kill.

          Because you don't want to kill or be murdered it becomes difficult to justify either action. This is why some things (murder) are accepted as wrong, while others (death penalty) receive mixed reactions.

          I hope that makes sense.
          You're referring to the Golden Rule, a very old concept with a lot of merit. However, I don't think all ethical responsibility can be simplified to such a rule, especially one that is so dependent on personal thresholds of acceptable or unacceptable.
          __________________
          8values
          Political Simulator
            #7    
          Old August 14th, 2013 (6:24 PM).
          Sandshrew4's Avatar
          Sandshrew4 Sandshrew4 is offline
          Also known as Sandwich
             
            Join Date: Oct 2012
            Location: Illinois, USA
            Age: 19
            Gender: Male
            Nature: Careful
            Posts: 305
            My view on morality is too simple.
            If it negatively effects someone, it's immoral.
            If it positively effects someone, it's moral.
            If it neutrally effects someone, it doesn't really matter.
            Probably incorrect, but that's how I see it.
            __________________
            I like Sandshrews. A lot. I am Sandshrews number 1 fan. And don't you deny it.
            My friend code for White 2 is 4857 7379 4725
              #8    
            Old August 14th, 2013 (7:10 PM).
            kosuke's Avatar
            kosuke kosuke is offline
            Extraterrestrial DNA
               
              Join Date: May 2013
              Location: Philippines
              Age: 18
              Gender: Male
              Nature: Relaxed
              Posts: 158
              okay... immorality, huh? I say...
              All of us has a different view, an opinion. Other people think inside the box, others think outside the box, and a few think through the box. It doesn't matter. Everyone must accept and understand each other's point of view. Everyone must search every portion of the box so that we will understand each other. No opinion is right nor wrong. Everyone has his righteousness. We just sometimes see it at the opposite side of the man's view.
              __________________
              ☣ ☣ デオキシス ☣ ☣
              DNA from a space virus mutated and became a Pokémon. It appears where auroras are seen.
              claimsVMPMBattle ServerDeviantArttumblr
                #9    
              Old August 14th, 2013 (8:13 PM).
              J's Avatar
              J J is offline
              good morning
                 
                Join Date: Dec 2006
                Nature: Jolly
                Posts: 420
                Quote:
                Originally Posted by kosuke View Post
                No opinion is right nor wrong.
                I am of the opinion that the sky is magenta, that the Earth is flat, that the blood of unwed virgins are my God-given property, and that an intravenous administration of 10 percent solution of potassium cyanide at 20ml/day is beneficial to your health.

                I am sorry if I sound like a jerk, but what you're thinking there is incredibly dangerous.
                __________________
                  #10    
                Old August 14th, 2013 (9:20 PM).
                kosuke's Avatar
                kosuke kosuke is offline
                Extraterrestrial DNA
                   
                  Join Date: May 2013
                  Location: Philippines
                  Age: 18
                  Gender: Male
                  Nature: Relaxed
                  Posts: 158
                  Quote:
                  Originally Posted by J View Post
                  I am of the opinion that the sky is magenta, that the Earth is flat, that the blood of unwed virgins are my God-given property, and that an intravenous administration of 10 percent solution of potassium cyanide at 20ml/day is beneficial to your health.

                  I am sorry if I sound like a jerk, but what you're thinking there is incredibly dangerous.
                  Chill, man. I was just stating my side of thinking. Well, i think i kinda exaggerated with that statement, though.. so yeah. sorry for that. but what i'm trying to say is that everyone really have an opinion, but these opinions came up because they understand and know that they could defend what their opinion is. so i'll ask you, could you defend that the sky is magenta? how did you say that earth is flat if it is already proven that it is not? why did you say that the blood of unwed virgins are your God-given property? explain why you think that an intravenous administration of 10 percent solution of potassium cyanide at 20mL/day is beneficial to your health? its not that i'm fighting with you or something, its just that i defended my opinion.
                  oh by the way, if its baseless, its a bluff not an opinion.
                    #11    
                  Old August 14th, 2013 (11:17 PM).
                  Princess Sandshrew's Avatar
                  Princess Sandshrew Princess Sandshrew is offline
                  PokéRespect
                     
                    Join Date: Jun 2009
                    Location: Your Rival's house
                    Age: 25
                    Gender: Female
                    Nature: Docile
                    Posts: 66
                    Quote:
                    Originally Posted by twocows View Post
                    I dispute the idea that morality is a man-made concept. It's more something we came to understand better as we evolved.

                    The fact that different people have different takes on the subject does not make it impossible to come to a definitive answer, nor does it justify all takes on the subject. People debate things all the time, that doesn't mean one answer can't be right and the other can't be wrong. Galileo argued that the Earth revolved around the sun, but nearly everyone of the time disagreed. And yet, he was right and they were wrong. Just because the answer is hard to come upon does not mean it does not exist, and the pursuit of this answer is the foundation of the study of ethics.
                    So morality is something we all have by nature? Does that not imply we should all have a very similar moral outlook?

                    Do you mean that there are one set of true morals and we only need to find them?
                    How do we determine what is right and what is wrong? As you gave example of one person can be right while the majority is wrong, so I could go and say that I believe that paedophilia is not only not harmful to children but it is beneficial to them. Now most people will tell me I am wrong, why? No matter what evidence I show I am adamant that most people will still disagree with me.
                    My point is how do you show I am wrong without pitting opinion against opinion? Do you not need some kind of factual basis.


                    I hope I got my point across, it is somewhat early for me and I know I will not remember my argument even 20 minutes later (I have a poor short-term memory).
                      #12    
                    Old August 17th, 2013 (8:04 PM).
                    Livewire's Avatar
                    Livewire Livewire is offline
                    • Platinum Tier
                     
                    Join Date: Jul 2009
                    Location: Sunnyshore City
                    Gender: Male
                    Nature: Adamant
                    Posts: 14,265
                    Morality is very rarely a Black & White thing, it is so very arbitrary and open to interpretation - there are many shades of grey between. There is, however, a correct shade and a proper answer. Having an opinion doesn't make you right.
                    __________________
                      #13    
                    Old August 17th, 2013 (8:15 PM).
                    OmegaRuby and AlphaSapphire's Avatar
                    OmegaRuby and AlphaSapphire OmegaRuby and AlphaSapphire is offline
                    10000 year Emperor of Hoenn
                       
                      Join Date: Apr 2010
                      Location: Oregon
                      Age: 23
                      Gender: Male
                      Nature: Careful
                      Posts: 17,451
                      Quote:
                      Originally Posted by Livewire View Post
                      Morality is very rarely a Black & White thing, it is so very arbitrary and open to interpretation - there are many shades of grey between. There is, however, a correct shade and a proper answer. Having an opinion doesn't make you right.
                      This.
                      In school we saw this clip of a study on young children and morality, according to the study it was found that young children do have some kind of morality upon birth...however they also found some bigotry...
                      So imo we're born with some morals, are taught, and teach morals whether we choose to or not.
                      __________________
                      # TeamRowlet
                      I'm currently working on some novels. If you're interested you can read them here:
                      https://www.wattpad.com/user/ImperialSun
                      https://www.patreon.com/ImperialSun
                        #14    
                      Old August 19th, 2013 (12:05 PM).
                      Cassino's Avatar
                      Cassino Cassino is offline
                         
                        Join Date: Oct 2006
                        Nature: Serious
                        Posts: 7,759
                        Quote:
                        Originally Posted by Livewire View Post
                        Morality is very rarely a Black & White thing, it is so very arbitrary and open to interpretation - there are many shades of grey between. There is, however, a correct shade and a proper answer. Having an opinion doesn't make you right.
                        You seem to imply that you are not of the opinion that such a 'correct shade' exists, instead that you know. So how does one come to know the correct shade? I don't suppose it is merely the 'widsom of society', all human fallibility considered.
                          #15    
                        Old August 19th, 2013 (2:28 PM).
                        Corvus of the Black Night's Avatar
                        Corvus of the Black Night Corvus of the Black Night is offline
                        Wild Duck Pokémon
                        • Gold Tier
                        • Gold Tier
                         
                        Join Date: Feb 2009
                        Location: With the Birds
                        Age: 24
                        Gender: Other
                        Nature: Impish
                        Posts: 3,429
                        Morality is a pretty personal business, with a general overlay involving society. Since society has a lot more power than say you or I, it has a lot more say in what's considered "right" or "wrong". But, as personal morality begins to grow, and individuals start to believe in a different version of morality, society's morality is updated to more represent the morality of all the people. Since the people and society are intertwined, so is morality and the relationship between people and society. I can't really think of many instances where something that is considered immoral is recognized worldwide - what may be considered murder is considered a rightful death in another place, while in western societies suicide and cannibalism are considered wrong, in many eastern countries suicide is often taken as a political statement or a step towards achieving enlightenment, and cannibalism occurs in many cultures' religious acts. I think maybe the only thing I can think of is incest, but I have a strong feeling that there are cultures that don't believe that incest is immoral (although its immorality is beneficial from an evolutionary standpoint).
                          #16    
                        Old August 20th, 2013 (4:00 AM).
                        Plumpyfoof's Avatar
                        Plumpyfoof Plumpyfoof is offline
                           
                          Join Date: Apr 2011
                          Location: Melbourne, Australia
                          Age: 23
                          Gender: Male
                          Nature: Sassy
                          Posts: 916
                          We will never ever see the day where every human in existence agrees that one thing or another is moral.
                          Inb4 "But wait Plumps, surely taking the life of another innocent person is immoral"
                          Well I can think of several scenarios in which it could be seen as perfectly acceptable; when your friend has asked for you specifically to pull the plug on them rather than keep them a vegetable the rest of their life for one.

                          A simple Google search has led me to a few morality conundrums for us to discuss:
                          Spoiler:
                          Quote:
                          You are an inmate in a concentration camp. A sadistic guard is about to hang your son who tried to escape and wants you to pull the chair from underneath him. He says that if you don’t he will not only kill your son but some other innocent inmate as well. You don’t have any doubt that he means what he says. What should you do?

                          Spoiler:
                          Quote:
                          You are an emergency worker that has just been called to the scene of an accident. When you arrive you see that the car belongs to your wife. Fearing the worst you rush over to see she is trapped in her car with another man.She sees you and although barely conscious, she manages to mouth the words “I’m sorry”…You don’t understand, but her look answers you question. The man next to her is her lover with whom she’s been having an affair.You reel back in shock, devastated by what her eyes have just told you. As you step back, the wreck in front of you comes into focus. You see your wife is seriously hurt and she needs attention straight away. Even if she gets attention there’s a very high chance she’ll die.You look at the seat next to her and see her lover. He’s bleeding heavily from a wound to the neck and you need to stem the flow of blood immediately. It will only take about 5 minutes to stop, but it will mean your wife will definitely die.If you tend to your wife however, the man will bleed to death despite the fact it could have been avoided.Who would you choose to work on?

                          Spoiler:
                          Quote:
                          You and your family are going away for the weekend. Your daughter is 7 and is best friends with your niece, who is also 7. Your families are very close and your daughter asks if your niece can come with you on your holiday. You have been on holidays together before and don’t see any problem, so you agree.You arrive at your holiday destination and the house you are staying at backs onto a beach. The girls ask if they can go for a swim. You tell them that they have to wait until you have unpacked the car, but they can play on the sand directly in front of the beach. They run down to the sand, and you begin to unpack the car. After about 5 minutes, you hear screaming coming from the direction of the beach and it sounds like the girls.You run down to see what the matter is, and you discover that they hadn’t listened to you and have gone for a swim. There is no one else on the beach and the girls are caught in a rip.The girls are really struggling, particularly your niece who isn’t as strong a swimmer as your daughter.You swim out quickly, but when you get there, you realize that there is no way you will be able to get both the girls back into shore on your own. You realize that an agonizing decision will need to be made.You need to decide which of the girls you will rescue first, you have enough strength and energy to rescue them both, but you can only do it one at a time. You look at the two girls, and your niece is really struggling to hold her head above water and you know if you take your daughter back first, there will be little or no chance that she will survive.Your daughter is struggling also, but is much stronger in the water and you estimate that if you take your niece back to shore first, there’s probably a 50% chance that your daughter will be able to stay afloat long enough for you return, but you simply don’t know how long she will hold on for.

                          Spoiler:
                          Quote:
                          One morning you are driving to work, and as per usual you are running a bit late, so you are driving a touch faster than the speed limit. You reach down to your stereo to change the CD, when all of a sudden your car hits something solid. You spin to a stop, but not before several more cars have run into you and each other in an attempt to avoid the accident.As you look up and out of your car, you can see that you hit a person, and that the person is not looking very good. In fact, you are sure that they are dead. You shakily get out of your car, and look around at the damage that has been caused. Several cars have been badly smashed up, but more importantly you have killed someone with your careless driving.As you are standing there in shock, a woman comes up to you, tears running down her face, and obviously very shook up. As a natural reaction, you ask her what is wrong. She gives you a funny look, and then she explains that she just ran over someone. You ask her where this person is, and she points towards the person that you ran over!You don’t understand why, but for some reason this woman thinks that she caused this accident and killed the person, when in fact you are well aware that you were the cause. Whoever accepts the blame is likely to be placed in jail for a very long time. If you let the woman take the blame, there is a very good chance you will get away with it all. However, there is also the chance that you could be placed in jail for even longer for trying to cover it up.


                          That'll do I guess, my responses to the spoilers can be found in:
                          Spoiler:
                          The other spoiler! OMG SHOCKER!


                          Spoiler:
                          1. Let the guard kill both my son and another inmate.
                          2. Work on my wife's lover, he may not have known he was doing wrong. And if he did there's always time for revenge.
                          3. Niece first, think about how her parents would be if you saved your stronger swimming daughter first.
                          4. Let them believe, how do you know that you hit the person. Your car hit something hard and a person would not spin the car out. You didn't actually kill them.
                            #17    
                          Old August 20th, 2013 (5:39 AM).
                          Khawill's Avatar
                          Khawill Khawill is offline
                          Swaggins
                          • Silver Tier
                           
                          Join Date: Aug 2012
                          Location: The Cave of Hymns
                          Age: 21
                          Gender: Male
                          Nature: Brave
                          Posts: 1,565
                          Spoiler:

                          1. Ask my Son what he wants, it's his life, not mine.
                          2. I'd save the guy, I won't let two lives be lost in order to probably save one.
                          3. Save the niece, save the daughter. If the daughter dies, then it would entirely be my fault and the consequences would be relatively more personal. I believe I'd be able to save both though.
                          4. Carelessness is something you have to take responsibility for. I would not even dare to say that the woman was the one who killed the person, regardless of whether or not there is a possibility that she did, (All I know for a fact is that I hit the guy, I know nothing else.)

                          The first three are rather unfair, it's less a question of morality and more a question of who's life you value more.
                            #18    
                          Old August 20th, 2013 (3:38 PM).
                          Shamol's Avatar
                          Shamol Shamol is offline
                          Colorless green ideas sleep furiously.
                             
                            Join Date: Aug 2013
                            Location: Dhaka
                            Age: 26
                            Gender: Male
                            Nature: Relaxed
                            Posts: 195
                            Whoa, this is an interesting discussion.

                            In my view, Morality isn't something dependent on people's views, it's objective. I quite like philosopher Michael Ruse's quote in this regard: "The man who says that it is morally acceptable to rape little children is just as mistaken as the man who says, 2+2=5." Thinking of morality being analogous to rationality is useful and (I think) accurate, our core moral perceptions are just as strong, if not stronger, than our belief in arithmetic or logical truths.

                            I have two things to say about ethical relativism.

                            First, just because people agree on a topic doesn't mean the difference of opinion is valid. There are people who believe the earth is flat or the universe is 6000 years old, or that the existence of other minds is illusory. We don't say relativism/withholding judgment about these things is warranted, rather we simply say those people are wrong. Similarly, Nazis and children-sacrificing communities are wrong when they commit morally reprehensible acts. I don't understand why some posters have cited the diversity of human opinion on morality as a defeater to objective morality, it's no more than a description of reality. People may not agree on the age of the universe, but so what? Does it commit us to say that there opinion is of value?

                            Second, in many cases, ethical diversity is only superficial. In OP's example about death penalty for example, the two parties don't disagree that justice needs to be served, they just have different perceptions about what might be the right way of going about it. In other words, they agree on moral values, but differ on moral duties. I believe much of the ethical diversity in the world are likewise superficial.

                            Plumpyfoof:

                            Quote:
                            We will never ever see the day where every human in existence agrees that one thing or another is moral.
                            Inb4 "But wait Plumps, surely taking the life of another innocent person is immoral"
                            Well I can think of several scenarios in which it could be seen as perfectly acceptable; when your friend has asked for you specifically to pull the plug on them rather than keep them a vegetable the rest of their life for one.
                            This hardly commits us to moral relativism. The conundrums you mention can easily be averted by specifying a context to a moral statement, e.g. instead of saying "taking innocent lives is wrong in general" we could say "taking innocent lives is wrong except in contexts X, Y and Z".

                            Additionally, there are some moral statements that are absolutely indubitable. Consider (sorry for the example) "cutting up babies into little pieces just for fun".

                            Princess Sandshrew:

                            Quote:
                            Do you mean that there are one set of true morals and we only need to find them?
                            There are two distinct questions here:

                            1. Does objective morality exist?
                            2. How do we know which moral values are objective?

                            Let's not get them mixed up. Someone can answer in the affirmative for 1 but withhold judgment on 2: she could say "I know objective moral values exist, and I can think of some examples of objective moral values (e.g. recreationally raping children is wrong), but I don't know all instances of objective moral values there is." This is crucial, because just because we may not know all the "true moral values", doesn't at all mean no true moral values exists. This consideration also defeats the repeated appeals to "ethical diversity" against objective morality in this thread.

                            Kosuke:

                            Quote:
                            Chill, man. I was just stating my side of thinking. Well, i think i kinda exaggerated with that statement, though.. so yeah. sorry for that. but what i'm trying to say is that everyone really have an opinion, but these opinions came up because they understand and know that they could defend what their opinion is. so i'll ask you, could you defend that the sky is magenta? how did you say that earth is flat if it is already proven that it is not? why did you say that the blood of unwed virgins are your God-given property? explain why you think that an intravenous administration of 10 percent solution of potassium cyanide at 20mL/day is beneficial to your health? its not that i'm fighting with you or something, its just that i defended my opinion.
                            There are quite some truths we accept without "evidence" (a priori truths). Examples are: laws of logic, truths of mathematics, introspective beliefs, human perception of the external reality in general, memory beliefs, and so on.

                            David Hume in his Inquiries Concerning Human Understanding argued that science is a non-rational enterprise, because the premise of science- induction- cannot be substantiated with evidence. His problem was, he didn't acknowledge the existence of a prior beliefs, things we simply know to be true without having evidence to believe them. These are integral parts of human noetic structure.
                            __________________
                            "Perseverence in science needs to be tempered by flexibility."

                            -Haig Kazazian, in Mobile DNA: Finding Treasures in Junk
                              #19    
                            Old August 20th, 2013 (3:48 PM).
                            Fernando Torres's Avatar
                            Fernando Torres Fernando Torres is offline
                            Class on grass
                            • Crystal Tier
                             
                            Join Date: Feb 2013
                            Gender: Male
                            Nature: Jolly
                            Posts: 162
                            I believe that you don't need to learn any morals. It's just something you have inside you that was there since conception, and will be there until what Catholics say the ascension.
                            __________________
                              #20    
                            Old August 22nd, 2013 (6:10 PM).
                            au bon's Avatar
                            au bon au bon is offline
                            • Developer
                            • Platinum Tier
                             
                            Join Date: Oct 2004
                            Location: New Jersey
                            Gender: Male
                            Nature: Quirky
                            Posts: 17,313
                            Quote:
                            Originally Posted by twocows View Post
                            Moral relativism is the easy way out. It's saying "the answer is that there is no answer." Of course, if that was truly the case, you could justify anything. Such an idea devalues those ideas which nearly every branch of ethics seeks to protect in some way (foremost of which is human happiness). In other words, in a morally relativistic world, happiness has no value.

                            Except happiness does have value to us. This is self-evident; we desire it, thus it has value to us, as attaining it (in some form or another) is one of the essential ideas upon which we predicate our lives.


                            Yes, I remember you referencing this person's beliefs before. There are several flaws with this idea. First, the idea that something is man-made does not divorce it from value; quite the contrary, plenty of man-made things have value (houses, computers, toilets, etc.).

                            Secondly, as I said previously, I am of the mind that morality is not a man-made concept. Any sufficiently evolved species will eventually experience happiness in some form. Happiness is the basis of all moral belief (most obviously utilitarianism, but really any moral philosophy ties into the concept in some way). Some ultimate, unifying ethical code likely exists, whether we have happened upon it or not. And even if that isn't the case, it doesn't mean that an answer that gets it right in some way isn't better than no answer at all.
                            What about people who gain some twisted forme of happiness from doing horrible things, like murdering someone in cold blood?

                            I'm not arguing your point. I'm just interested in your take on the matter.
                              #21    
                            Old August 23rd, 2013 (12:12 AM).
                            Shamol's Avatar
                            Shamol Shamol is offline
                            Colorless green ideas sleep furiously.
                               
                              Join Date: Aug 2013
                              Location: Dhaka
                              Age: 26
                              Gender: Male
                              Nature: Relaxed
                              Posts: 195
                              Quote:
                              What about people who gain some twisted forme of happiness from doing horrible things, like murdering someone in cold blood?

                              I'm not arguing your point. I'm just interested in your take on the matter.
                              Twocows can probably elaborate more on this, but "happiness" shouldn't be equivocated with "immediate happiness". For instance, your hypothetical murderer may get happiness from murder. But if she practices restraint in this matter, then the joy of saving human life would be more profound.

                              I remember reading this in Will Durant's book: "Epicurus, then, was no Epicurean." The Greek philosopher is often associated with a radical form of utilitarianism. But in reality what Epicurus sought was intellectual or altruistic pleasure, which is deeper. So maybe a "good" utilitarianist would argue as such: one should adopt the course of action which warrants the highest amount of profound happiness, as opposed to immediate happiness.
                                #22    
                              Old November 11th, 2013 (7:45 AM). Edited November 11th, 2013 by KittenKoder.
                              KittenKoder's Avatar
                              KittenKoder KittenKoder is offline
                              I Am No One Else
                                 
                                Join Date: Oct 2013
                                Location: Seattle
                                Age: 42
                                Gender: Female
                                Nature: Calm
                                Posts: 313
                                All of it is subjective. It was considered moral to kill anyone who was not part of a tribe, and eat them, for many tribal cultures of the past. But today many, not all, societies now consider that unethical. History is riddled with such clear and solid evidence demonstrating how subjective things are.

                                We know our laws are subjective, yet like ethics, we define them based on what helps society as a whole function better, that's instinctual in itself as well. Empathy, a genetic trait by all accounts, plays a role in most mammalian species, and many others, in forming societies, it's one of our primary social traits. Some people lack this trait, and thus we tell them to just live by our rules or remove yourself from our society. Empathy varies too, it's not even a solid "yes" or "no," nothing about living organisms can ever be defined as dichotomies.

                                The reason this whole "objective morality" nonsense started was as a method of controlling the masses without government, fear tends to be a very effective method in getting people to do what you want them to do. What stops psychotic people from killing? The threat of losing their freedom, there are many psychotic personalities living in even the most civilized societies, freely contributing like all other members, and finding other ways that will not risk the loss of freedom to sate this urge to hurt something, video games are one really good method.

                                Quote:
                                Originally Posted by Shamol View Post
                                .... (cropped for length)

                                There are quite some truths we accept without "evidence" (a priori truths). Examples are: laws of logic, truths of mathematics, introspective beliefs, human perception of the external reality in general, memory beliefs, and so on.

                                David Hume in his Inquiries Concerning Human Understanding argued that science is a non-rational enterprise, because the premise of science- induction- cannot be substantiated with evidence. His problem was, he didn't acknowledge the existence of a prior beliefs, things we simply know to be true without having evidence to believe them. These are integral parts of human noetic structure.
                                Yeah ... nope. Everything that we accept as fact is supported by evidence, anything that is not supported by evidence is delegated to guess.

                                Oh wait, you were talking about "truths" ... as far as I can see no one has lied. You should be careful of your wording, really. Using the word "truth" in that manner is highly inaccurate, science doesn't dictate reality, unlike what religion attempts to do, and thus we deal with facts, evidence, and results, everything else is generally useless after exploration into a matter has begun. We do understand how memory works, that's just too easy, neurologists are pretty certain how it works and we even design AIs that simulate this pretty well, just not the "laws of logic," that you brought up.

                                Laws of logic can be demonstrated, and the demonstration is supporting evidence. Belief is just superstition, actually a genetic instinct to fear the places we cannot immediately comprehend, thus we create stories about what's in the shadows ... but it's all made up. It's why kids often insist there is a monster under the bed, it's that same instinctual trait that kept our ancestors safe when they first climbed from the trees.

                                Perception is another easy one, it's demonstrated all the time to every living person. Hate to burst your bubble, but there is no "sixth sense" of any sort, there is no "knowing something is true without evidence." Every fact can be demonstrated to work the same in all cases, at all times, if such a demonstration cannot be made, then it's not a fact.
                                __________________
                                If you add me, please message me so I can reciprocate. No, garbage does not make a cute Pokemon, and it smells funny.

                                Join me on IRC, synirc.net #PokemonTactics, for friendly discussions on tactics and strategies.
                                  #23    
                                Old November 11th, 2013 (9:47 AM).
                                Esper's Avatar
                                Esper Esper is offline
                                • Silver Tier
                                 
                                Join Date: Jun 2009
                                Location: California
                                Posts: 10,621
                                We generally don't want threads over a month old posted in. That's because if a month has passed without any posts it's generally thought that the topic is dead and that anyone who has already posted in it won't think to come back and check.

                                But if you want to start a new thread on this topic or a similar one then that's A-OK!
                                __________________
                                Closed Thread

                                Quick Reply

                                Join the conversation!

                                Create an account to post a reply in this thread, participate in other discussions, and more!

                                Create a PokéCommunity Account

                                Sponsored Links
                                Thread Tools

                                Posting Rules
                                You may not post new threads
                                You may not post replies
                                You may not post attachments
                                You may not edit your posts

                                BB code is On
                                Smilies are On
                                [IMG] code is On
                                HTML code is Off

                                Forum Jump


                                All times are GMT -8. The time now is 8:49 PM.