The judgement that the defendant is guilty is subjective. Maybe he/she did the action but the judgement that it rises to guilt is subjective.That's a bad analogy. There is a fact of the matter. Either the defendant is guilty, or the defendant is innocent. Maybe your "opinion" is correct, and maybe your "opinion" is incorrect.
The judgement that the defendant is guilty is subjective. Maybe he/she did the action but the judgement that it rises to guilt is subjective.
I think Tinker Grey was referring to a guilty determination is subjective and not the feeling of guilt. The defendent can feel guilt as to whether they did the crime of not but the jury normally wouldn't unless they had something to hide.And that feeling of guilt is something that actually happens in objective reality, not just subjectively.
Okay, so maybe it's an objective fact that the defendant is guilty, but your judgement is subjective. It's your subjective opinion that their guilt is an objective fact.The judgement that the defendant is guilty is subjective. Maybe he/she did the action but the judgement that it rises to guilt is subjective.
That is why subjective preferences, opinions and feelings don't equate to how morality work.Okay, so maybe it's an objective fact that the defendant is guilty, but your judgement is subjective. It's your subjective opinion that their guilt is an objective fact.
Is that analogous to morality? Is it your subjective judgement that murder is objectively wrong? That isn't comparable to your other analogy of movie preferences. There is a fact that you are making a judgement about in a criminal trial. There is no fact as to whether Star Trek is better than Star Wars.
So which is morality like?
No, preferences and feelings are the basis for morality. His analogy isn't about preferences or feelings.That is why subjective preferences, opinions and feelings don't equate to how morality work.
I agree.No, preferences and feelings are the basis for morality. His analogy isn't about preferences or feelings.
Okay, so maybe it's an objective fact that the defendant is guilty, but your judgement is subjective. It's your subjective opinion that their guilt is an objective fact.
Is that analogous to morality? Is it your subjective judgement that murder is objectively wrong? That isn't comparable to your other analogy of movie preferences. There is a fact that you are making a judgement about in a criminal trial. There is no fact as to whether Star Trek is better than Star Wars.
So which is morality like?
I think we've been through this before. A preference for a TV show like Star Wars for example is not morally wrong. You cannot be sacked for liking Star Wars but you can be sack for breaching morals codes such as for descrimination or sexual harrassment. Subjective preferences, feelings or opinions are not normative.No, preferences and feelings are the basis for morality. His analogy isn't about preferences or feelings.
I don't get your point. Whether Star Trek is better than Star Wars is much more important compared to someone stealing a penny, and yet morality is about the latter.Whether Star Trek is better than Star Wars is pretty trivial compared to whether someone is guilty of murder or not, so I think its pretty obvious morality is more concerned with the latter.
Of course not. You prefer that people don't murder other people, so you write a normative statement to promote your preferences.Subjective preferences, feelings or opinions are not normative.
Huh?I agree.
The point of my post to @Chriliman is that he was confusing different uses of the word objective. No, my analogy wasn't about feelings and preferences. It was about the use of the word objective.Huh?
Feelings and preferences are the basis for morality.
Your analogy isn't about feelings and preferences.
Something that has nothing to do with feelings and preferences is a good analogy for something that is based on feelings and preferences?
So if we see how norms are applied in society they still dont equate to preferences. You cannot be sacked for preferring a TV show. It does not translate so its not the same to begin with.Of course not. You prefer that people don't murder other people, so you write a normative statement to promote your preferences.
Thats not true. There are many examples of petty theft that matters. Steal a 1 cent lolly from a shop and you still get done for shop lifting, Little jonny who takes his friends cheap toy will still be in trouble when his mum finds out. Stealing is stealing.I don't get your point. Whether Star Trek is better than Star Wars is much more important compared to someone stealing a penny, and yet morality is about the latter.
Norms don't equate to preferences. I just said that. You prefer that people don't do some thing, so you write a normalizing statement to prevent it. You prefer that people do some thing, so you write a normalizing statement to promote it.So if we see how norms are applied in society they still dont equate to preferences.
I think you're mixing in "opinion" as if all opinions are purely subjective. Evaluating evidence for a fact that isn't directly observable doesn't make it subjective.The point of my post to @Chriliman is that he was confusing different uses of the word objective. No, my analogy wasn't about feelings and preferences. It was about the use of the word objective.
This still doesn't make sense. Norms are like rules that forbid certain behaviours even to the point of forcing others to conform or else fact consequences.Norms don't equate to preferences. I just said that. You prefer that people don't do some thing, so you write a normalizing statement to prevent it. You prefer that people do some thing, so you write a normalizing statement to promote it.
Some things we only prefer for ourselves. Some things we prefer other folk to do / not do. Those latter things we call "morality".
No it doesn't depend on the person. We all know that stealing is wrong. The fact that people will pretend that this is not the case and rationalize that its OK ie "oh well it was only a small thing and thats not really stealing" doesn't equate to stealing being OK to do. Its either right or its wrong. That is what societal norms are based on.Depends on the person. That's why it's all subjective.
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?