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.
This is the essence of our dispute....Nope, I've quite explicitly said different. How we feel is merely the starting point, and therefore the basis, for morality.....
Sweets is an interest example. We like them because we're biologically conditioned to go for the energy density of sugary things. Objective basis. Is it "good" to eat them in todays world? Lets see what the nutritionists have to say.......Yes we've established that humans (generally) like living. So what? It's a fact that humans (generally) like sweets too. So what?...
For any given value we can point to some thing as the objective cause of that value. Does that mean all values have an objective basis?I think how we feel is secondary. These feelings are the result of deep biological and social conditioning about what keeps humans invested in their societies so those societies can persist.
Morality only requires one person to exist, so I think the point you're going for here fails.Sweets is an interest example. We like them because we're biologically conditioned to go for the energy density of sugary things. Objective basis. Is it "good" to eat them in todays world? Lets see what the nutritionists have to say....
If eating sweets hurt others in a clear way, it would have become a moral issue and nature or culture would have hammered the feeling of "bad" into us as a result.
Yes, that's exactly how morality works. People value whatever they want.
Yes, we do. Tell me something you want, and I'll tell you something you value, whatever it is.No, they don't.
Yes, we do. Tell me something you want, and I'll tell you something you value, whatever it is.
This is the essence of our dispute.
I think how we feel is secondary. These feelings are the result of deep biological and social conditioning about what keeps humans invested in their societies so those societies can persist.
You don't care what you value?Who cares what I value? No one, until what I value affects you. Enter the concept of morality.
You don't care what you value?
So you do care what you value, and you do value what you want, whatever that is.You're smarter than that. You know what I meant, do I really need to explain that?
I describe a value as a like or dislike or preference.
I didn't ask what the cause of values is, I asked what they are. Are they something more than a thing you like or dislike or feel a preference for?Values arise as a result of our desires or as you put it, preference.
Whats this "actually special"? I have this feeling youre trying to make me answer for the idea of absolute or universal or God-revealed moral rules. But I wont do that because I dont believe in them. I think this is what youre looking for when you keep asking if I can say a moral rule is "correct". (If not, then what exactly are you asking for?)For any given value we can point to some thing as the objective cause of that value. Does that mean all values have an objective basis?
I'll do you one better. Every single value you have is the result of biological processes. No one can pick a value on a whim and start valuing it. Our brains are wired to remember the associations we make between things and feelings so that we can learn from experience. So absolutely every thing you like is the result of biology, brain chemistry, and evolution and therefore has an objective basis. right?
How about the fact that we are hardwired to trust our own biases first and foremost? We have to devise techniques like double-blind studies in science to defy our deep biological programming. Isn't following our biases good because it has an objective basis? And circumventing our biases is bad because it goes against our programming?
No, the reason you have for feeling some values are more important than others is that you value your continued existence, the persistence of society, and that society functioning in such a way as to promote other values you have like feeling safe and secure. That's all fine, I share those values too, as do most humans. But intersubjective agreement doesn't make us correct to value the things we do. It doesn't make our values actually special in some way.
I guess so.Same question to you, @durangodawood : I describe a value as a like or dislike or preference. Does that sum it up, or do you think our values are something more or better than that? Let's see if we can all find something we agree on.
I'm a hard agnostic and an atheist. If there was a god, moral objectivity is, at best, an arbitrary set of instructions. Can you stop worrying that I'm trying to lead you into a god-trap now? I'd prefer that your responses don't require you to phrase everything in such a way as to avoid a conclusion that couldn't ever be coming.Whats this "actually special"? I have this feeling youre trying to make me answer for the idea of absolute or universal or God-revealed moral rules. But I wont do that because I dont believe in them. I think this is what youre looking for when you keep asking if I can say a moral rule is "correct". (If not, then what exactly are you asking for?)
OK, so when you ask me if or how I can consider X "correct", what exactly do you mean by correct?I'm a hard agnostic and an atheist. If there was a god, moral objectivity is, at best, an arbitrary set of instructions. Can you stop worrying that I'm trying to lead you into a god-trap now? I'd prefer that your responses don't require you to phrase everything in such a way as to avoid a conclusion that couldn't ever be coming.
How about via example with something we agree on? It is correct that having a well staffed and well funded fire department decreases the number of lives lost and the property damage associated with fires. This is factually true, so it is correct.OK, so when you ask me if or how I can consider X "correct", what exactly do you mean by correct?
Sorry, I wasnt precise enough. I meant to ask this: do you feel actions can be morally correct, or morally wrong? If so, what precisely do you mean by correct in this context?How about via example with something we agree on? It is correct that having a well staffed and well funded fire department decreases the number of lives lost and the property damage associated with fires. This is factually true, so it is correct.
I think you're trying to skip ahead to your conclusion, and I think all that jumping around is what is making us seem like we disagree on more than we do.Sorry, I wasnt precise enough. I meant to ask this: do you feel actions can be morally correct, or morally wrong? If so, what precisely do you mean by correct in this context?
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?