durangodawood
re Member
- Aug 28, 2007
- 27,466
- 19,158
- Country
- United States
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Seeker
- Marital Status
- Single
How do we know when something is truly self-evident rather than merely asserted?
Upvote
0
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.
How do we know when something is truly self-evident rather than merely asserted?? It is self-demonstrated.
If all moral issues are subjective then rape is not objectively immoral. Yes?
Leaving out irrational persons (as we did with "Flat Earthers"), what rational argument can you offer to conclude that rape is ever a moral act?
Could a reasonable person hold the opposite.How do we know when something is truly self-evident rather than merely asserted?
Nope. The confusion seems to be on your end.Once again, you seem confused about what objective and subjective mean. Being subjectively wrong doesn't mean 'sometimes it's moral and sometimes it isn't'.
If all moral issues are subjective then rape is not objectively immoral. Yes?
Leaving out irrational persons (as we did with "Flat Earthers"), what rational argument can you offer to conclude that rape is ever a moral act?
I find such viewpoints abhorrent as well. However, under the rights to the marital embrace implicit in marriage contracts, a man or wife does not commit rape by having reasonable sexual intercourse with their lawful partner even if they act against the other's will. Of course, "reasonable" would limit the right to include only acts that would not injure the partner in some way.So while I don't think rape is ever justified, I do recognize that there are cultures that hold moral viewpoints where rape is acceptable (at least in some cases), no matter how abhorrent I find such viewpoints.
One of the most repulsive things I've ever read. And, if the partner doesn't consent, you've injured that partner.However, under the rights to the marital embrace implicit in marriage contracts, a man or wife does not commit rape by having reasonable sexual intercourse with their lawful partner even if they act against the other's will.
However, under the rights to the marital embrace implicit in marriage contracts, a man or wife does not commit rape by having reasonable sexual intercourse with their lawful partner even if they act against the other's will.
I find such viewpoints abhorrent as well. However, under the rights to the marital embrace implicit in marriage contracts, a man or wife does not commit rape by having reasonable sexual intercourse with their lawful partner even if they act against the other's will. Of course, "reasonable" would limit the right to include only acts that would not injure the partner in some way.
So to avoid this debated narrow area of jurisprudence, let's define rape for purposes of this thread as any non-consensual sexual intercourse between non-spouses. Do you have an a rational argument that rape as defined in some circumstances may be a moral act?
Correct. Nothing is objectively immoral even rape; it is all subjectively immoralIf all moral issues are subjective then rape is not objectively immoral. Yes?
One of the most repulsive things I've ever read. And, if the partner doesn't consent, you've injured that partner.
Then you both must find a husband's insistence objectively immoral, no? But the kidnapping and raping of a child ...? "Oh, now hold on a minute ... that'd be different ... you know, different strokes for different folks."This sounds like something Ripperger might suggest. But surely not. Who on earth would agree to this?
No, I don't. But then it's not my responsibility to do so. I have the position that even though I find rape to be reprehensible, there are people out there with a moral code sufficiently different to mine that they can see rape as being morally acceptable. The fact that I can acknowledge that such people exists does not mean I am responsible for trying to justify their morality, and I'm not going to do it.
Then you both must find a husband's insistence objectively immoral, no? But the kidnapping and raping of a child ...? "Oh, now hold on a minute ... that'd be different ... you know, different strokes for different folks."
"One of the most repulsive things .." Really? Such righteous indignation suggests one might need to get out more often. To wit: 44 Days Of Kidnapping, Rape and Torture
Repulsive suggests taste does it not. Ergo, it's subjectively immoral. "One of" does not mean "there cannot be things more repulsive".
That a person could put forth that forcing a spouse to have sex is not immoral suggests a lack of the single most fundamental quality for a discussion on morality: empathy.
there are some cultures where spousal rape isn't a thing; where if the husband wants sex, he is within his legal rights to force his wife to submit to him. To people in such cultures, would they not think of this as being perfectly moral, even though we would call it rape?
I'm surprised you didn't tell me that repelling was the act of descending a cliff. (Different word, but...)No, "repulsive" does not suggest taste - Do magnets set pole to pole feel like repelling each other?
If so then you are easily surprised. One can rappel until they are at the end of their rope. Let's us know when that happens.I'm surprised you didn't tell me that repelling was the act of descending a cliff.
You appear to be confusing ethical subjectivism with ethical nihilism. If someone says rape is "wrong," but disagrees that it is "objectively wrong" on the grounds of subjectivism, it doesn't follow that they are therefore saying that it's "not wrong.”Deflection, deflection, and more deflection ... can we get back to the argument that "non-spousal" rape is objectively immoral? If you disagree then give us the rationale indicating the circumstances that rape is a moral act.
Hmmm... I asked if you ever do it too, and you haven't answered. I'm guessing that's a "Yes, but I'm not giving you the satisfaction".If you don't think something is objective then you shouldn't be arguing over it. It's that simple. Hence "argument presupposes objectivity."
In the other thread I defined objective as "true and accessible to all." If you don't think the claim you are making is true and accessible to your interlocutor, then you shouldn't be arguing about it with him.
Then you both must find a husband's insistence objectively immoral, no? But the kidnapping and raping of a child ...? "Oh, now hold on a minute ... that'd be different ... you know, different strokes for different folks."
"One of the most repulsive things .." Really? Such righteous indignation suggests one might need to get out more often. To wit: 44 Days Of Kidnapping, Rape and Torture
Sure. It's an objective fact that we have these randomly generated characteristics that increase survivability (assuming that you accept the premise - and it's only a premise). And it's an objective fact that these characteristics have been selected for in the evolutionary process. But that just determines that which works. Which we call 'good'. It doesn't determine the morality of what we do. That's us trying to work out why we do what we do. That's us looking for meaning.
...we have then developed protocols by which we have used to live together and survive. Those protocols we have termed morality. That is, how we should act (in order to survive).
Hmmm... I asked if you ever do it too, and you haven't answered. I'm guessing that's a "Yes, but I'm not giving you the satisfaction".
But let's explore it. Why shouldn't I make such an argument? I want you to agree with me, and my argument (though it will undoubtedly be filled with logical fallacies) may cause you to agree with me anyways. So it seems to be an effective means to get what I would like. Why shouldn't I use effective means towards my goals?
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?