The Basis of Objective Morality

[The happy Objectivist]

Objectivity is both a metaphysical and an epistemological concept. In its metaphysical sense, it means that things exist and are what they are independent of anyone's conscious activity such as believing, knowing, wishing, imagining, demanding, asserting, etc. This is known as the primacy of existence or the primacy of the object metaphysics. This is the metaphysical sense of the concept. The epistemological sense of the concept is that knowledge is gained by looking at reality and identifying what is perceived by an objective method. An objective method is one that adheres to the primacy of existence exclusively. Therefore, objectivity in the epistemological sense means that one's thinking is based on facts which obtain regardless of anyone's thoughts or wishes or objections to the contrary.

The factual basis of an objective moral code.

I want to define morality here. Morality is a code of chosen values to guide one's thinking and actions, which actions determine the course of one's life.

here are the facts which underpin any objective code of values:

Man exists.

Man is what he is independent of anyone's conscious activity. (the primacy of existence)

Man is a biological organism that faces the fundamental alternative of life vs. death.

Man needs values in order to exist.

A value is something that man requires according to his nature, in order to live and that he must act to gain or keep if his goal is to continue existing.

Man does not automatically know what values to pursue.

Man does not automatically know what actions to take to preserve his life. (his life as a rational being)

Man needs a means of discovering what values he needs and how to produce or acquire them.

Man has the ability to conceptualize what he perceives.

It is the ability to conceptualize what he perceives that enables man to know anything.

Now all of these facts are true and none of them is a matter of opinion. These facts are the basis of an objective moral code.

 

[SkyWriting]

Man exists. Man is what he is independent of anyone's conscious activity.

You don't exist as a person unless I decide you are a person.
Artificial chat robots are getting better all the time.
Even spam phone calls are responding to my voice now.

 

[The happy Objectivist]

You don't exist as a person unless I decide you are a person.
Artificial chat robots are getting better all the time.
Even spam phone calls are responding to my voice now.

A textbook example of the primacy of consciousness. Thanks.

 

[SkyWriting]

Man needs values in order to exist.

All animals learn what it takes to exist after birth.
We learn from our environment.
Some learn some don't.

 

[Moral Orel]

Man exists.

Man is what he is independent of anyone's conscious activity. (the primacy of existence)

Man is a biological organism that faces the fundamental alternative of life vs. death.

Man needs values in order to exist.

A value is something that man requires according to his nature, in order to live and that he must act to gain or keep if his goal is to continue existing.

Man does not automatically know what values to pursue.

Man does not automatically know what actions to take to preserve his life. (his life as a rational being)

Man needs a means of discovering what values he needs and how to produce or acquire them.

Man has the ability to conceptualize what he perceives.

It is the ability to conceptualize what he perceives that enables man to know anything.

Now you just need to establish as a fact that "Man should exist". Without that, you don't have objective morality.

 

[SkyWriting]

These facts are the basis of an objective moral code.

James 4:17
So whoever knows the right thing to do and fails to do it, for him it is sin.

But not for others.

 

[The happy Objectivist]

Now you just need to establish as a fact that "Man should exist". Without that, you don't have objective morality.

I don't need to establish this fact any more than I have to establish that existence should exist. Existence does exist and man is part of it.

 

[The happy Objectivist]

All animals learn what it takes to exist after birth.
We learn from our environment.
Some learn some don't.

They do but not in conceptual form. Animals have instincts. Man requires conceptual knowledge.

 

[The happy Objectivist]

James 4:17
So whoever knows the right thing to do and fails to do it, for him it is sin.

But not for others.

Only if he wishes to continue existing.

 

[SkyWriting]

These facts are the basis of an objective moral code.

An objective code would allow for judging others.

Matthew 7:1-5
“Judge not, that you be not judged. For with the judgment you pronounce you will be judged, and with the measure you use it will be measured to you. Why do you see the speck that is in your brother's eye, but do not notice the log that is in your own eye? Or how can you say to your brother, ‘Let me take the speck out of your eye,’ when there is the log in your own eye? You hypocrite, first take the log out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to take the speck out of your brother's eye.

Luke 6:37
“Judge not, and you will not be judged; condemn not, and you will not be condemned; forgive, and you will be forgiven;

John 7:24
Do not judge by appearances, but judge with right judgment.”

James 4:11-12
Do not speak evil against one another, brothers. The one who speaks against a brother or judges his brother, speaks evil against the law and judges the law. But if you judge the law, you are not a doer of the law but a judge. There is only one lawgiver and judge, he who is able to save and to destroy. But who are you to judge your neighbor?

James 4:12
There is only one lawgiver and judge, he who is able to save and to destroy. But who are you to judge your neighbor?

Romans 2:1-3
Therefore you have no excuse, O man, every one of you who judges. For in passing judgment on another you condemn yourself, because you, the judge, practice the very same things. We know that the judgment of God rightly falls on those who practice such things. Do you suppose, O man—you who judge those who practice such things and yet do them yourself—that you will escape the judgment of God?

 

[Moral Orel]

I don't need to establish this fact...

You do. Why should I perpetuate my own existence when I could choose to end it? Why is one potential choice correct and the other incorrect?

any more than I have to establish that existence should exist. Existence does exist and man is part of it.

"Existence exists"? Now we're in woo territory. Round rounds and square squares. No, none of these things do those things.

 

[SkyWriting]

Only if he wishes to continue existing.

We are not qualified to judge sin for others.

 

[SkyWriting]

A textbook example of the primacy of consciousness. Thanks.

That's your opinion.

 

[The happy Objectivist]

We are not qualified to judge sin for others.

I don't recognize the concept of sin. If you mean judge what is right vs. wrong then no I can't. Judgment is something individuals must do for themselves, but the standard is the same for all men. That which is objectively life-affirming vs. that which is life-destroying.

 

[The happy Objectivist]

That's your opinion.

wrong. It's my judgement, based on facts. I exist and I am what I am regardless of anyone's descision.

 

[Lawrence87]

So let me get this straight. You are saying that values are the means of achieving the goal of continued existence? And that whatever these values happen to be are the moral code which you argue is objective?

(edited for typos)

 

[Lawrence87]

Judgment is something individuals must do for themselves, but the standard is the same for all men. That which is objectively life-affirming vs. that which is life-destroying.

Do you mean life affirming for all beings? Life affirming for the individual? for the majority?

 

[public hermit]

Man exists.

Man is what he is independent of anyone's conscious activity. (the primacy of existence

Great post!

What is the difference between these two? Is it to mark out the difference between existence and essence, and that both are objective?

I think you use "independent of anyone's conscious activity" to designate the objectivity of the human essence, i.e. the "what" of a human. But isn't the "what" intimately related to consciousness? Humans are inherently social, simply by virtue of human generation and inherent ignorance (the need for training to survive).

What I am cannot be separated from being conscious and being known by other like-minded conscious entities. Human essence entails subjectivity. There is no possible objective human that is purely independent of anyone's conscious activity to meet the condition needed for objectivity ( as you've described it).

Perhaps we could say this fact concerning the objectivity of human essence is simply a concept to mark objectivity. But if it's simply a concept then it's not objective.

I'm just thinking "out loud" so to speak. How could one respond to this concern?

These facts are the basis of an objective moral code

Assuming these facts track reality, and are a sufficient basis for an objective moral code, is the code going to the same for everyone?

Also, what is the code? If everything you've laid out obtains, then someone (many someone's probably) knows the code. Do we have it as it follows from this factual basis?

 

[The happy Objectivist]

You do. Why should I perpetuate my own existence when I could choose to end it? Why is one potential choice correct and the other incorrect?

You are free to choose to go out of existence.

"Existence exists"? Now we're in woo territory. Round rounds and square squares. No, none of these things do those things.

Saying that existence exists is not in any way analogous to saying round rounds or square squares.

 

[The happy Objectivist]

Do you mean life affirming for all beings? Life affirming for the individual? for the majority?

Anyone who is a human. I mean all living things require values. All living things require values. It's just that man require more than other animals given his nature as a rational being.