Welcome to Atheist Discussion, a new community created by former members of The Thinking Atheist forum.

Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Is Morality Objective?

Is Morality Objective?
(10-30-2022, 10:19 PM)TinyDave Wrote:
(10-23-2022, 09:29 PM)Rhythmcs Wrote: A legal fiction, ofc.  There's nothing an adult can do with an ak, for example, that a child couldn't.  No offense an adult can commit that a minor cannot (and so, sometimes, we try minors as adults).  

There is an actus reus and a mens rea.
Guilty action and a guilty mind.
This is a nonsense, you are a poe.
The point of the question is to offer people an opportunity to make objective assertions, if any can be made.

In this case, ideas about a lack of intent rather than a lack of ability, and it's relationship to our mental development over time.  This is an objective assertion about the nature of a moral agent which is then modifying in an objective calculation of desert.  I could add asserted or alleged before every use of the term until the end of time but it's unweildy.  I also think this is the case. If it -is-, though, or even if we so much as truly believe it is...then it does become a bit odd to see us reject moral objectivity while we assert morally objective terms, and with some insistence, no less. I chalk it up to the term having been poisoned, rather than this rejection being a genuine reflection of our general beliefs on the matter.
Reply

Is Morality Objective?
What about the requirement that a subjective expectation of privacy be manifested regarding 4th Amendment stuff?  Sounds like an  objective measure of the subjective.  That's confusing.
Reply

Is Morality Objective?
I suppose it might be if we're mixing the terms use between legality and morality, but, ofc, not in mere reality, where a subjective appraisal of violation is not necessary for an objective descriptive of violation. Obviously, this clears up everything.

Womp womp.

So, what do you think, can a statement be truth apt? How about moral statements, are they, or can they be, truth apt?
Reply

Is Morality Objective?
(11-06-2022, 02:56 PM)Rhythmcs Wrote:
(10-30-2022, 10:19 PM)TinyDave Wrote: There is an actus reus and a mens rea.
Guilty action and a guilty mind.
This is a nonsense, you are a poe.
The point of the question is to offer people an opportunity to make objective assertions, if any can be made.

In this case, ideas about a lack of intent rather than a lack of ability, and it's relationship to our mental development over time.  This is an objective assertion about the nature of a moral agent which is then modifying in an objective calculation of desert.  I could add asserted or alleged before every use of the term until the end of time but it's unweildy.  I also think this is the case.  If it -is-, though, or even if we so much as truly believe it is...then it does become a bit odd to see us reject moral objectivity while we assert morally objective terms, and with some insistence, no less.  I chalk it up to the term having been poisoned, rather than this rejection being a genuine reflection of our general beliefs on the matter.

Intent and ability are totally separate things.
I don't really understand your argument, this is because to act as an objective agent necessarily means that there is no subjectivity which means that there is no moral element. As described by you.
Reply

Is Morality Objective?
The question, the argument, if you prefer.... is whether or not these assessments are something more, for example, than convenient legal fictions. Is it true that a child cannot commit a crime because of some fact about children, or is it true that children cannot commit crimes because of some fact about the society writing those laws, or a fact about -another- moral agent apprehending (considering) those children?

It's a given, in any case, that each agent possesses subjectivity and that subjectivity exists. As I said, I think it's true that, at some point, children are not capable of doing the thing we call a crime with those added caveats - and, ofc, some adults too. That this is -not- just a fact about our societies or the people making the calls. Thus, that this is objective (though, the categorically objective may yet be false - which I guess we could get to depending on where we go from here).
Reply

Is Morality Objective?
(11-06-2022, 09:22 PM)Rhythmcs Wrote: I suppose it might be if we're mixing the terms use between legality and morality, but, ofc, not in mere reality, where a subjective appraisal of violation is not necessary for an objective descriptive of violation.  Obviously, this clears up everything.

Womp womp.

Clearly moral statements are subjective. To those that believe in them.
For example, I find it appalling that the judgement re Row v Wade is actually being debated. 

Quote:[quote Rhythmc" pid='382526' dateline='1667769750']
So, what do you think, can a statement be truth apt?  How about moral statements, are they, or can they be, truth apt?

No, I don't believe a statement be truth. And as above moral statements are subjective.
Reply

Is Morality Objective?
(11-06-2022, 02:56 PM)Rhythmcs Wrote:
(10-30-2022, 10:19 PM)TinyDave Wrote: There is an actus reus and a mens rea.
Guilty action and a guilty mind.
This is a nonsense, you are a poe.
The point of the question is to offer people an opportunity to make objective assertions, if any can be made.

This is interesting. 
The topic of moral assertations.
Tell more more about this please.
Reply

Is Morality Objective?
(11-06-2022, 10:27 PM)TinyDave Wrote:
(11-06-2022, 09:22 PM)Rhythmcs Wrote: I suppose it might be if we're mixing the terms use between legality and morality, but, ofc, not in mere reality, where a subjective appraisal of violation is not necessary for an objective descriptive of violation.  Obviously, this clears up everything.

Womp womp.

Clearly moral statements are subjective. To those that believe in them.
For example, I find it appalling that the judgement re Row v Wade is actually being debated. 

Quote:[quote Rhythmc" pid='382526' dateline='1667769750']
So, what do you think, can a statement be truth apt?  How about moral statements, are they, or can they be, truth apt?

No, I don't believe a statement be truth. And as above moral statements are subjective.
If moral statements cannot be truth apt, then they cannot be subjective.  Subjectivist moral statements, at least in their fullest expression, are those statements which are truth apt, and true, of a given subject.


(11-06-2022, 10:32 PM)TinyDave Wrote:
(11-06-2022, 02:56 PM)Rhythmcs Wrote: The point of the question is to offer people an opportunity to make objective assertions, if any can be made.

This is interesting. 
The topic of moral assertations.
Tell more more about this please.
There wouldn't be much to tell if these statements can't be truth apt, other than we're wrong about all of them when we think so, including relativist and subjectivist statements, as fellow cognitive assertions to objectivist statements.

If so, why? Are no statements truth apt, or is this a special class of statement in their inability to describe any truth?
Reply

Is Morality Objective?
(11-06-2022, 10:36 PM)Rhythmcs Wrote: If moral statements cannot be truth apt, then they cannot be subjective.  Subjectivist moral statements, at least in their fullest expression, are those statements which are truth apt, and true, of a given subject.

You've made that argument that truths are subjective....

I would argue that observations are subjective and are subject to interpretation.

(11-06-2022, 10:36 PM)Rhythmcs Wrote:
(11-06-2022, 10:32 PM)TinyDave Wrote: This is interesting. 
The topic of moral assertations.
Tell more more about this please.
There wouldn't be much to tell if these statements can't be truth apt, other than we're wrong about all of them when we think so, including relativist and subjectivist statements, as fellow cognitive assertions to objectivist statements.

If so, why?  Are no statements truth apt, or is this a special class of statement in their inability to describe any truth?

Your reply is a bit it of a word salad. 

However I will respond;

Why? I don't know. 
There is something in evolutionary biology/psychology that invites us to perceive and interpret truth in our own perceived terms.
All statements of truth are just that, statements, without fact, unless there is evidence that follows.
Everyone's standard of evidence varies.
Reply

Is Morality Objective?
(11-06-2022, 11:27 PM)TinyDave Wrote: You've made that argument that truths are subjective....

I would argue that observations are subjective and are subject to interpretation.
Moral realist, not a subjectivist.  At any rate, observation being subjective does not rule out moral objectivity, but statements being incapable of being truth apt rules out moral objectivity -and- moral subjectivity, as both sets are considered truth apt or cognitive statements.  One, accurately communicated, about the reporting subject..the other, accurately communicated, about the reported object.


Quote:Your reply is a bit it of a word salad. 

However I will respond;

Why? I don't know. 
There is something in evolutionary biology/psychology that invites us to perceive and interpret truth in our own perceived terms.
All statements of truth are just that, statements, without fact, unless there is evidence that follows.
Everyone's standard of evidence varies.
Unless something about biology or psychology makes us completely incapable of reporting facts about which opinions we hold or facts about our environment, then biology/psychology could not be the explanation for why these (or any other statements) cannot be truth apt.

It's 7pm est, 6th of november, 2022. This is a (purportedly) truth apt statement. A (purportedly) objective statement. Does that help clear anything up?
Reply

Is Morality Objective?
(11-06-2022, 11:47 PM)Rhythmcs Wrote:
(11-06-2022, 11:27 PM)TinyDave Wrote: You've made that argument that truths are subjective....

I would argue that observations are subjective and are subject to interpretation.
....  At any rate, observation being subjective does not rule out moral objectivity, 

Yes it does though. 
How can something be both objective and open to interpretation?
Reply

Is Morality Objective?
Because, or so it's contended, though human beings have many flaws and though situations can be complex and difficult to cleanly parse, and though there may be plenty of space in the world for interpretation, it's not impossible for a moral statement to report a fact about a thing itself. As opposed to that purported fact of the object being a misreported fact of the reporting subject, or the reporting subjects society. Subjectivism and relativism, respectively, and the explaination (as subjectivists and relativists would have it) for why the objectivist statements are both truth apt -and- incorrect as stated.

I suppose the simple answer is that the terms, like many terms in any area of study, aren't employed exactly like they are in casual conversation. That you're taking them to mean something else, and perhaps arguing against or addressing that other thing, when using them in this context. Moral objectivity is not moral absolutism, for example. Where there is and can only ever be one answer and no room to interpret or disagree. In objective moral systems, there's as much room for disagreement and interpretation as the collection of facts about the thing allows. In an absolutist context, for example, we might say "stealing bad" and this is simply the end of it and off to the gulag or the hand chopper or the private prison plantation you go. In an objective system, we might want or need to know more about the theft...or, in my earlier example, the fire, before we go doling out judgement. There are other things we may also consider, but that would be the baseline.

Even deeper still, especially when given an exclusively suboptimal decision field, there may not be one objective answer, there must be interpretation and consideration of those relevant facts and circumstances , or else the conclusion..if there is one to be had, cannot be objective. Moral dilemmas like trolley problems being the standard example.
Reply

Is Morality Objective?
Of course, it's not.
Reply




Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)