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.
Morality is if you choose to ignore your father or not.
Or shoot him or not.
You're missing the point and you're way off the mark in what you think my conception of morality is. Point is, the stuff people generally call moral, they also generally like. The stuff people generally call immoral, they also generally dislike. You say you're different, as though you wouldn't say a lot of the same things I just said. But to be honest, some stuff you've said makes it sound like you never gave it much thought.You've narrowed down on and iterating over subsets of the same thing in the first half, and making really vague statements in the second. Rape and murder are forms of assault.
"You prefer people not have stuff they dislike happen to them."
What about an alcoholic forced into rehab?
Someone going to jail for a crime they committed?
What if "what makes me happy" is throwing rocks at old ladies?
I think you have described a naive form of hedonism (which is great I'm a hedonist), how do you resolve the tension between individual and collective good (which I think you are terming "moral").
A hypothetical system of objective morality.
Either you recognized what is moral, or you chose what is moral. In the first scenario all you've done is described how society affected your choice. So you're actually an option 2."Some things which I prefer, I prefer them because those things are moral"
Yes. Surely I am conditioned by all the rewards society offers for moral behavior.
"All things which are moral, are moral because I prefer those things"
No. No one made me king of whats moral and what isnt. This is probably better for everybody.
Do you mean that you think there's a third option? Or do you just mean that you see no problem with one or both of the options?I must be dense, I see no dilemma.
No, i mean what i said. Thats not a dilemma.Do you mean that you think there's a third option? Or do you just mean that you see no problem with one or both of the options?
Either you recognized what is moral, or you chose what is moral. In the first scenario all you've done is described how society affected your choice. So you're actually an option 2.
"Some things which I prefer, I prefer them because those things are moral"Either you recognized what is moral, or you chose what is moral. In the first scenario all you've done is described how society affected your choice. So you're actually an option 2.
If you want to start with option one you have to start with "There are moral things". You are starting with "Society shaped me" and then the next step comes from you not the thing."Some things which I prefer, I prefer them because those things are moral"
I prefer moral things because I'm conditioned to do that by culture and somewhat by biology.
Things arent made moral in the human world by my personal preferences. Thats backwards.
Imagine two scenarios.For example. Who does not recognize, and then choose?
I don’t think either are true for me.Euthypro's Dilemma, now for ATHEISTS!
(agnostics too)
Just pick the poll answer that is true. Simple as that. Leave comments explaining your choice if you like.
This is not an apologetic topic. For the sake of this discussion, it will be assumed that God(s) do not exist and never have. Any discussion of how God would answer this poll will be considered off topic.
I acknowledge the existence of moral things in the first 4 words of my sentence:If you want to start with option one you have to start with "There are moral things". You are starting with "Society shaped me" and then the next step comes from you not the thing.
Imagine two scenarios.
I sit down at the dinner table and see steak. I recognize that steak is for dinner.
I sit down at the dinner table and there is nothing there. I ask the wife for steak, because I choose that steak be for dinner.
Either you recognize what is moral, or you choose what is moral.
I acknowledge the existence of moral things in the first 4 words of my sentence:
"I prefer moral things because I'm conditioned to do that by culture and somewhat by biology."
If thats not enough, we could add a preamble sentence to my statement that says: "There are moral things". But it seems redundant to me.
Questioning the nature of morality (as in the OP) presumes the existence of objective morality.I don't see how the Universe could have moral laws. (It has what we might euphemistically call "physical laws", but nothing about the strong nuclear force (for example) implies anything about morality.
Depends what you mean by objective morality.Questioning the nature of morality (as in the OP) presumes the existence of objective morality.
Questioning the nature of morality (as in the OP) presumes the existence of objective morality.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?