Please consider that post with the same effort it took to write it.
Posts by cofty
-
168Moral responsibility.
by nicolaou inno subtlety here, it's going to be obvious where i'm going with this.
please consider the following scenario.. you're seated on a railway platform bench waiting for your train.
a high speed intercity is about to hurtle through without stopping when you see a small child running to the platforms edge!
-
-
-
168
Moral responsibility.
by nicolaou inno subtlety here, it's going to be obvious where i'm going with this.
please consider the following scenario.. you're seated on a railway platform bench waiting for your train.
a high speed intercity is about to hurtle through without stopping when you see a small child running to the platforms edge!
-
-
cofty
Subjective morality is probably synonymous with personal preference. You have already indicated that this is what you confuse with morality without god. You are wrong in this conclusion. It is a common canard of christians to present a false dichotomy between morality based on god or everybody choosing whether or not to eat babies.
Objective morality is the task of making moral judgements on the basis of a standard we can agree on with others. I have summarised this foundation as the 'flourishing of conscious creatures'. We know the basic needs of other humans since we all share the same physiology. It is always harmful to another person to kidnap and rape them. On this basis we can say that it is OBJECTIVELY wrong to do these things. It does not matter if somebody else does not share this view. They are wrong, objectively wrong.
John Rawls suggests a 'veil of ignorance' as a useful thought experiment in thinking about morality. Imagine yourself in an original position behind a veil of ignorance. Behind this veil, you know nothing of yourself and your natural abilities, or your position in society. You know nothing of your sex, race, nationality, or individual tastes. Behind such a veil of ignorance all individuals are simply specified as rational, free, and morally equal beings. From this position we can begin to think objectively about right and wrong. It is a more sophisticated version of 'do unto others' which predates Jesus of Nazareth by many centuries.
Absolute morality is a term favoured by theists and constantly confused with objective morality. It is synonymous with morality with divine fiat. Those things are good which god says are good and vice-versa.
But how do we know what god says? We have an ancient book but it prescribes moral standards of Iron Age goat herders. Sometimes it advocates love and at other times it positively approves of slavery, kidnap, rape and infanticide. It recommends behaviour that we all find repulsive. Should we follow our conscience or the revealed word of god?
God is a hindrance to objective morality.
-
168
Moral responsibility.
by nicolaou inno subtlety here, it's going to be obvious where i'm going with this.
please consider the following scenario.. you're seated on a railway platform bench waiting for your train.
a high speed intercity is about to hurtle through without stopping when you see a small child running to the platforms edge!
-
-
cofty
What is the difference between subjective - objective and absolute morality?
-
168
Moral responsibility.
by nicolaou inno subtlety here, it's going to be obvious where i'm going with this.
please consider the following scenario.. you're seated on a railway platform bench waiting for your train.
a high speed intercity is about to hurtle through without stopping when you see a small child running to the platforms edge!
-
-
cofty
You've already said that the term: "morals" is simply descriptive in nature.
No I didn't what does that even mean?
-
168
Moral responsibility.
by nicolaou inno subtlety here, it's going to be obvious where i'm going with this.
please consider the following scenario.. you're seated on a railway platform bench waiting for your train.
a high speed intercity is about to hurtle through without stopping when you see a small child running to the platforms edge!
-
-
cofty
Stop adding to your posts after I have answered it makes conversation impossible
-
168
Moral responsibility.
by nicolaou inno subtlety here, it's going to be obvious where i'm going with this.
please consider the following scenario.. you're seated on a railway platform bench waiting for your train.
a high speed intercity is about to hurtle through without stopping when you see a small child running to the platforms edge!
-
-
cofty
You asked me - 'is there such a thing as objective morality?'
Now you need to define the terms before I can answer.
-
168
Moral responsibility.
by nicolaou inno subtlety here, it's going to be obvious where i'm going with this.
please consider the following scenario.. you're seated on a railway platform bench waiting for your train.
a high speed intercity is about to hurtle through without stopping when you see a small child running to the platforms edge!
-
-
cofty
I'm not being pedantic but I need you to define your terms.
What do you mean by 'equal' and precisely what do you mean by 'objective morality'?
How does 'objective morality' differ from 'absolute morality' from your perspective?
-
168
Moral responsibility.
by nicolaou inno subtlety here, it's going to be obvious where i'm going with this.
please consider the following scenario.. you're seated on a railway platform bench waiting for your train.
a high speed intercity is about to hurtle through without stopping when you see a small child running to the platforms edge!
-
-
cofty
ignore - see below
-
168
Moral responsibility.
by nicolaou inno subtlety here, it's going to be obvious where i'm going with this.
please consider the following scenario.. you're seated on a railway platform bench waiting for your train.
a high speed intercity is about to hurtle through without stopping when you see a small child running to the platforms edge!
-
-
cofty
SB - We haven't even began to discuss the foundation for godless morality. You refuse to talk about it despite your constant requests to talk about it.
Morals are simply the name we give to the way we choose to act towards other conscious creatures.
Morals can be judged on the basis of the effect our words and actions have on others. Do they promote the flourishing of others or not?
Often the answer is obvious such as in the OP; other times it is complex and involves conflicting interests.
Pretending there is some divine law-giver who decides adds nothing useful. Especially when it turns out that this ultimate source of morality prescribes actions that we all find repulsive.
You have so far made no effort to respond to these simple introductory points. Do you want a conversation or not?
-
168
Moral responsibility.
by nicolaou inno subtlety here, it's going to be obvious where i'm going with this.
please consider the following scenario.. you're seated on a railway platform bench waiting for your train.
a high speed intercity is about to hurtle through without stopping when you see a small child running to the platforms edge!
-
-
cofty
Sea Breeze - Is it always wrong to murder children en masse?
Is kidnap and rape always wrong?
Is it always wrong to own another human being as chattel?
We can say yes because there are no circumstances where doing such things promotes the flourishing of conscious creatures and morality is ultimately nothing more than the choices we make in our interactions with others.
You have a problem if you say yes don't you?