• Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.

Is there an objective morality?

  • Yes

  • No


Results are only viewable after voting.

o_mlly

“Behold, I make all things new.”
May 20, 2021
3,136
574
Private
✟118,092.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
That said I agree that the language we use for moth is a human invention modeling what we see in the physical world.
Math is pure abstraction. Math does not depend on any observations of the physical world. Math is totally a construct of the human mind.
If it is wholly a construct of humans with no real world reference it is subjective by definition.
If math is wholly a construct of humans with no real world reference then all science is subjective by definition.
You guys keep misusing self evident. No, this is not self evident. It is a derived conclusion.
A claim is self-evident if one cannot rationally hold the opposite. So, I invite you also to stop eating and drinking or jump off a roof high enough to disrupt your bodily integrity and let us know how that goes.
 
Upvote 0

Bradskii

Old age should burn and rave at close of day;
Aug 19, 2018
22,742
15,372
72
Bondi
✟360,954.00
Country
Australia
Gender
Male
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
can you translate that into an example.

Also how would the different degrees (severity) of killing relate to objective morality.

Nah. I've said all I need to say. I'm leaving you to it.
 
  • Winner
Reactions: VirOptimus
Upvote 0

Ken-1122

Newbie
Jan 30, 2011
13,574
1,792
✟233,210.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Private
First, some necessary background to give you an opportunity to understand why He communicated this way... Due to the consequences of sin, and God's perfect moral character (more on this if you want to discuss it), humans are born, when it comes to our relationship to God, basically deaf, and unable to detect him with any of our physical senses. We are born, as the Bible tells us, spiritually dead to God (unable to relate to Him). He didn't originally create us this way, but that is what we have become.

To solve this, God has, over the centuries, repeatedly broke into our world in ways both widely known and individually personal. Sorry, but this background is pretty important for you to know if you are to rightly understand my answer.
So God created mankind in a way he knew would result in them sinning, then chose to create a system for us to get back to him that he knew would have a 95% failure rate? Why didn’t he just create us right (without the desire to sin) in the first place?
I started out by only being able to see that there could be, and possibly should be, a God. But He was quietly present and speaking to me, in His own way, my whole life. But it was not until I was handed a Bible in my mid-twenties that I began to see this in retrospect. The Bible was the first way that He spoke to me in a way that I could recognize, even though it was just words on a page at first. Long story shortened as much as I can, as I read the Bible, and listened to others help me understand it better, I began to have a better understanding of who He is. At some point along the way, I began to really believe that He existed, and started to speak to Him sincerely. Not long after this, I decided to ask Him in, to "come on inside", so to speak. At this point, things really changed drastically for me. Not long after this, I did, yes, begin to hear His voice, definitely not audibly, and not really even in my mind, but out of the depths of my soul (or, subconscious, if you insist). I was given information about circumstances I had no natural way of knowing, and sometimes told to do things that didn't immediately make sense to me, that turned out to be really good decisions. The capstone of it all, though, at least to me, was that when I listened for Him, and spoke to Him, what I can only describe as a pure, clean, liquid light would well up in my heart.
So you began by reading a book written by men as flawed and imperfect as you and I, and you trusted they were telling the truth, but eventually you just began hearing voices and having a feeling of what is right vs wrong? Why couldn’t God just address the world himself, or at least have Jesus write the Bible?

I think it was Mark Twain who said;

A foolish mans account of a wise mans words are never accurate, because he has to translate what he hears into something he can actually understand.

I’m not saying those who wrote the Bible were fools, but if God is as wise as you claim, comparatively speaking, they would be. Don’t cha think it would have been better had God at least had Jesus write the Bible? He spent 30+ years on Earth yet he never wrote anything down; resulting in contradictions of what he actually said and did resulting in different. Seems to me he could have done it all a better way.
So God must jump through your hoops, and give you some candy, before you'll listen to Him? Even though He does love you as His child, that doesn't mean it would be good for you, or for His other kids, for Him to acquiesce to your demands by jumping through a hoop or two and giving you a few pieces of candy in order to get you to acknowledge Him, let alone listen to Him, now does it?
I’m not saying he should jump through hoops or give me candy, I’m saying he should speak to me in a language I can understand. If my father knew I only spoke English, it would be unfair for him to give me an important message in French then insist I figure it all out; don’t cha think? The least he should do is speak to me in a way I can understand IMO

I will respond to the rest later
 
Upvote 0

stevevw

inquisitive
Nov 4, 2013
15,627
1,654
Brisbane Qld Australia
✟312,719.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
Nah. I've said all I need to say. I'm leaving you to it.
Thats fair enough. I would expect we have different beliefs about morality being that we are having this thread
Is there Objective Morality?
So the answer can either be yes or no. I say yes and you say no. We have disagreement. What else can we do.
 
Upvote 0

Belk

Senior Member
Site Supporter
Dec 21, 2005
30,438
14,907
Seattle
✟1,120,349.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Agnostic
Marital Status
Married
Math is pure abstraction. Math does not depend on any observations of the physical world. Math is totally a construct of the human mind.

<blink>
I see. So your claim is that the tool we use to model the physical world is not based on the physical world? That we can use math for Architecture and physics are just a happy coincidence?

I guess all those in the mathematics field who debate if it is discovered or invented are just clueless?

If math is wholly a construct of humans with no real world reference then all science is subjective by definition.

Uh-huh.

A claim is self-evident if one cannot rationally hold the opposite. So, I invite you also to stop eating and drinking or jump off a roof high enough to disrupt your bodily integrity and let us know how that goes.

No, that is not the definition of self-evident.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

essentialsaltes

Fact-Based Lifeform
Oct 17, 2011
40,993
44,051
Los Angeles Area
✟984,817.00
Country
United States
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Legal Union (Other)
I think I have said it a dozen times now. Our intuition is a good starting point.

But people's intuitions differ. So this is certainly not getting us closer to objective facts, where the personal is supposed to be taken out of the equation.

What do you mean alive. Are you saying they are not human?

You said 'a life'. They are alive. They are human.

is that an objective claim or just your opinion.

There are no objective claims in morality. There are only opinions. You said no one holds this combination of opinions. I assert I do hold that combination of opinions.

Not sure what you have been reading

Look, you own cut&paste source shows that there are disagreements in morality. It's just some face-saving tap-dancing to suggest that these disagreements 'are overblown'.
 
Upvote 0

essentialsaltes

Fact-Based Lifeform
Oct 17, 2011
40,993
44,051
Los Angeles Area
✟984,817.00
Country
United States
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Legal Union (Other)
can you translate that into an example.

The point is it's because we disagree about how Brussels sprouts taste that logically implies theres a right and wrong answer.
 
Upvote 0

o_mlly

“Behold, I make all things new.”
May 20, 2021
3,136
574
Private
✟118,092.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
I see. So your claim is that the tool we use to model the physical world is not based on the physical world? That we can use math for Architecture and physics are just a happy coincidence?

I guess all those in the mathematics field who debate if it is discovered or invented are just clueless?
Your logic is backwards. The sciences are dependent on mathematics; mathematics is only dependent on the existence of the human mind, nothing else. Think of the telescope as man's invention to an enhanced view of the cosmos. The invention of the telescope did not depend on the existence of the cosmos but radically improved man's understanding of it. Absent man, there is no telescope.
No, that is not the definition of self-evident.
So, you then believe you can make a rational argument that it is good to have never existed? Of course, if you never existed then there would be no argument from you to read about how good it is that you never existed.
 
Upvote 0

Belk

Senior Member
Site Supporter
Dec 21, 2005
30,438
14,907
Seattle
✟1,120,349.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Agnostic
Marital Status
Married
Your logic is backwards. The sciences are dependent on mathematics; mathematics is only dependent on the existence of the human mind, nothing else.

I'll ask again, is it just a coincidence that mathematics is used to model aspects of our world such as architecture and physics?


Think of the telescope as man's invention to an enhanced view of the cosmos. The invention of the telescope did not depend on the existence of the cosmos but radically improved man's understanding of it. Absent man, there is no telescope.



So, you then believe you can make a rational argument that it is good to have never existed? Of course, if you never existed then there would be no argument from you to read about how good it is that you never existed.

I made no such claim. I pointed out that you are using the term "self evident" incorrectly.
 
Upvote 0

o_mlly

“Behold, I make all things new.”
May 20, 2021
3,136
574
Private
✟118,092.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
I'll ask again, is it just a coincidence that mathematics is used to model aspects of our world such as architecture and physics?
Is it a coincidence that the Roman math had no symbol for the number zero but Indian math did?

I made no such claim. I pointed out that you are using the term "self evident" incorrectly.
Give us your alternate definition.
 
Upvote 0

o_mlly

“Behold, I make all things new.”
May 20, 2021
3,136
574
Private
✟118,092.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Are you incapable of answering my question?
I already have but apparently you do not understand. "Co" (together) + "incident" (event). If no man then no math. If no math then no science. Do you see now?
 
Upvote 0

Belk

Senior Member
Site Supporter
Dec 21, 2005
30,438
14,907
Seattle
✟1,120,349.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Agnostic
Marital Status
Married
I already have but apparently you do not understand. "Co" (together) + "incident" (event). If no man then no math. If no math then no science. Do you see now?

Perhaps you could state it in a more clear fashion as it appears nonsensical to me. It appears that you are claiming:

Math is solely the product of the human mind
The fact that it is useful for modeling real world events is coincidence.
Math is therefore subjective


Is this correct?
 
Upvote 0

o_mlly

“Behold, I make all things new.”
May 20, 2021
3,136
574
Private
✟118,092.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Math is solely the product of the human mind
The fact that it is useful for modeling real world events is coincidence.
Math is therefore subjective

Math is solely the product of the human mind - YES.
The fact that it is useful for modeling real world events is coincidence - NO.
Math is therefore subjective - NO.

Morality is solely the product of the human mind - YES.
The fact that morality is useful for categorizing the morality of human acts is coincidence - NO.
Morality is therefore subjective - NO.

The concepts of mathematics and morality necessarily precede their application to the real world. That which precedes is not coincident by definition.

How do you define "subjective"?
 
Upvote 0

Belk

Senior Member
Site Supporter
Dec 21, 2005
30,438
14,907
Seattle
✟1,120,349.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Agnostic
Marital Status
Married
Math is solely the product of the human mind - YES.
The fact that it is useful for modeling real world events is coincidence - NO.
Math is therefore subjective - NO.

Morality is solely the product of the human mind - YES.
The fact that morality is useful for categorizing the morality of human acts is coincidence - NO.
Morality is therefore subjective - NO.

The concepts of mathematics and morality necessarily precede their application to the real world. That which precedes is not coincident by definition.

How do you define "subjective"?

subjective

1 philosophy : relating to the way a person experiences things in his or her own mind subjective reality Dreaming is a subjective experience. a person's subjective perception of the world
2 : based on feelings or opinions rather than facts
 
Upvote 0

o_mlly

“Behold, I make all things new.”
May 20, 2021
3,136
574
Private
✟118,092.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
subjective

1 philosophy : relating to the way a person experiences things in his or her own mind subjective reality Dreaming is a subjective experience. a person's subjective perception of the world
2 : based on feelings or opinions rather than facts
Definitions which use the word being defined in the definition are not very useful.

Is chess subjective ?
 
Upvote 0

Belk

Senior Member
Site Supporter
Dec 21, 2005
30,438
14,907
Seattle
✟1,120,349.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Agnostic
Marital Status
Married
Upvote 0

o_mlly

“Behold, I make all things new.”
May 20, 2021
3,136
574
Private
✟118,092.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Upvote 0

Belk

Senior Member
Site Supporter
Dec 21, 2005
30,438
14,907
Seattle
✟1,120,349.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Agnostic
Marital Status
Married
Upvote 0