What Is Morality? - Page 5

Feslin · 05-17-2008, 12:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Stinger

We as a society saying it is so.

Wrong..................

Feslin · 05-17-2008, 12:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Burning Giraffe

I'm not sure what you're confused about. This is what I said, "Something is morally wrong when it is in contradiction to either a principle of an ethical code or if it subverts an intended consequence promoted by an ethical philosophy".

I'm not confused.

Tell me, what makes an action wrong.

Feslin · 05-17-2008, 12:27 PM

This thread is horrible.

Nearly everyone here seems to believe in subjectivist bullshit where morality is whatever people want it to be.

Djinn · 05-17-2008, 02:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Feslin

This thread is horrible.

Nearly everyone here seems to believe in subjectivist bullshit where morality is whatever people want it to be.

As long as "people" remains in the plural, then I agree. In order to subscribe to an objectivist version of the bullshit, one must be willing to accept someone else's morality.

And the act of such an acceptance is usually a voluntary act, so even accepting some sort of "divine" morality remains subjective, after a fashion.

Feslin · 05-17-2008, 02:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Djinn

As long as "people" remains in the plural, then I agree. In order to subscribe to an objectivist version of the bullshit, one must be willing to accept someone else's morality.

And the act of such an acceptance is usually a voluntary act, so even accepting some sort of "divine" morality remains subjective, after a fashion.

In order to subscribe to an objectivist version one must simply define what makes an action wrong and say, "Anyone who disagrees is wrong."

Pretty easy. The trick is actually being right.

Burning Giraffe · 05-17-2008, 03:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Feslin

I'm not confused.

Tell me, what makes an action wrong.

I'm not sure what you're confused about. This is what I said, "Something is morally wrong when it is in contradiction to either a principle of an ethical code or if it subverts an intended consequence promoted by an ethical philosophy".

Christopher · 05-17-2008, 04:16 PM

I think there are a few questions we should ask that would help in understanding what morality is and what immorality is, which are: what are the acts that cause feelings of guilt, and why? Are these actions immoral? What are the actions that do not give us guilt, and why? Are these actions moral?

I think there is something within all of us that gives us an innate knowledge of how we should act, and that is what morality is all about.

Also, here are a few quotes about morality:

Quote:

"Human beings, all over the earth, have this curious idea that they ought to behave in a certain way, and cannot really get rid of it." - C. S. Lewis

Quote:

"The most important human endeavor is the striving for morality in our actions. Our inner balance, and even our very existence depends on it. Only morality in our actions can give beauty and dignity to our lives." - Albert Einstein

Fresh Insight · 05-17-2008, 05:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Burning Giraffe

I'm not sure what you're confused about. This is what I said, "Something is morally wrong when it is in contradiction to either a principle of an ethical code or if it subverts an intended consequence promoted by an ethical philosophy".

I think that this was the second or third time that you repeated yourself. You are, in fact, correct. In my opinion, that is a very good definition of "wrong". However, your explanation involves essentially a violation of "ethical code or philosophy" and in that lies the issue.

What constitutes a code or philosophy of ethics? Is an ethical code not simple subjectivity? In reality, what we consider objectivity is merely the significant overlap of subjectivity. After all, the ancient Greeks would have sex in public. That sort of thing was commonplace. Today, in America, you'd be taken to jail. Pagans would sacrifice babies to their gods. Today, you'd be brought up on infanticide.

justoneman · 05-17-2008, 11:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Feslin

This thread is horrible.

Nearly everyone here seems to believe in subjectivist bullshit where morality is whatever people want it to be.

If morality is collective and ever changing, then having slaves in southern USA in 1863 was perfectly fine and not immoral and then having them in 1866 was a horrible act merritous of long term imprisonment. the fact is that it was immoral both dates.

If society decided 15 years from now it was good to kill your mother and eat her for dinner, do you think that then is moral?

Feslin · 05-18-2008, 12:50 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by justoneman

If society decided 15 years from now it was good to kill your mother and eat her for dinner, do you think that then is moral?

No.

That's why I'm calling subjectivism bullshit.