Log in
Register
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
Forums
New posts
Forum list
Search forums
Leaderboards
Games
Our Blog
Blogs
New entries
New comments
Blog list
Search blogs
Credits
Transactions
Shop
Blessings: ✟0.00
Tickets
Open new ticket
Watched
Donate
Log in
Register
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
More options
Toggle width
Share this page
Share this page
Share
Reddit
Pinterest
Tumblr
WhatsApp
Email
Share
Link
Menu
Install the app
Install
Forums
Discussion and Debate
Discussion and Debate
Ethics & Morality
Is there Objective Morality?
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="stevevw" data-source="post: 76316065" data-attributes="member: 342064"><p>They are both morally right things to do. We intuitively know that. But you have to state what the situation is to which the moral applies to determine their rightness or wrongness. Take "Justice". C. S. Lewis explains "how can I know what Justice is if there is no measure about whether there is justice or injustice". He uses the example of "I can only know that a stick is straight by knowing what a crooked stick is.</p><p></p><p>In otherwords in protesting that there is injustice in the world supposes there is a measure of what justice is or is not. Otherwise its just a word. So it follows that if we think "Justice and Injustice" matter morally and the "Truth" for that matter as this is related to "Justice" then they need to have a basis and value beyond peoples personal opinions or views of morality.</p><p></p><p>So we should be able to at least try to establish the best way to act morally in situations where "Justice" and "Forgivness" are issues that matter using rationality and logic to find the objectively right or wrong way to behave. </p><p></p><p> Actually as with Maths morality is discovered not created by humans. I think animals are not moral creatures. They have no conscience. They just live socially and by instinct.</p><p></p><p> If you dont respect "Honesty" as a rule or guide then how do you tell a lie for a truth. Its like saying how do you tell a crooked stick if you don't know what a straight stick looks like. </p><p></p><p> By our intuition that we know moral truths and by reasoning that the moral is the best option in how to act in that situation. </p><p></p><p> You are describing subjective morality and actually making an arguement against it and for there being objective morals. As you said we have to have an independnt standard of what is moral outside people. </p><p></p><p> We can use thought to determine that something is objective outside humans just like we can use thought to determine the objective fact outside human opinion that the earth is roundand not flat. So we can use the same method except the moral facts are not phyical. They are like Math facts (abstract). But we can use rationality and logic to find these moral facts just like Maths.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="stevevw, post: 76316065, member: 342064"] They are both morally right things to do. We intuitively know that. But you have to state what the situation is to which the moral applies to determine their rightness or wrongness. Take "Justice". C. S. Lewis explains "how can I know what Justice is if there is no measure about whether there is justice or injustice". He uses the example of "I can only know that a stick is straight by knowing what a crooked stick is. In otherwords in protesting that there is injustice in the world supposes there is a measure of what justice is or is not. Otherwise its just a word. So it follows that if we think "Justice and Injustice" matter morally and the "Truth" for that matter as this is related to "Justice" then they need to have a basis and value beyond peoples personal opinions or views of morality. So we should be able to at least try to establish the best way to act morally in situations where "Justice" and "Forgivness" are issues that matter using rationality and logic to find the objectively right or wrong way to behave. Actually as with Maths morality is discovered not created by humans. I think animals are not moral creatures. They have no conscience. They just live socially and by instinct. If you dont respect "Honesty" as a rule or guide then how do you tell a lie for a truth. Its like saying how do you tell a crooked stick if you don't know what a straight stick looks like. By our intuition that we know moral truths and by reasoning that the moral is the best option in how to act in that situation. You are describing subjective morality and actually making an arguement against it and for there being objective morals. As you said we have to have an independnt standard of what is moral outside people. We can use thought to determine that something is objective outside humans just like we can use thought to determine the objective fact outside human opinion that the earth is roundand not flat. So we can use the same method except the moral facts are not phyical. They are like Math facts (abstract). But we can use rationality and logic to find these moral facts just like Maths. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Discussion and Debate
Discussion and Debate
Ethics & Morality
Is there Objective Morality?
Top
Bottom