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.
I think you are a chat bot. You might not be aware that you are though.wrong. It's my judgement, based on facts. I exist and I am what I am regardless of anyone's descision.
That happens to be your chosen standard. But I still put out mouse traps where I think appropriate.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.
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.
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.
You are free to choose to go out of existence.
Anyone who is a human. I mean all living things require values. All living things require values. It's just that man requires more than other animals given his nature as a rational being.
You missed where I said the life of a rational being.That happens to be your chosen standard. But I still put out mouse traps where I think appropriate.
I've even drowned chipmunks on occasion.
I guess you don't know the right people. This thread is about the facts that are the basis of an objective moral code and not about moral principles. I'd rather not get into moral scenarios for that reason. But if you want to make that question about nursing homes in a separate thread I'll try to join in. If I have time. I really didn't expect this much response and I appreciate it.You are the only person I know who uses that standard. Which I don't feel you can apply to all men, except in your imagination.
For example, in hospice, patients are given sedatives to stay in bed which causes poor health until they die. Would that be "right" or "wrong"? Either way, that's what happens.
Who chooses these values?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.
Nothing needs values to exist. One has nothing to do with the otherhere are the facts which underpin any objective code of values:
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.
Yes he does. Man decides which values to pursue.Man does not automatically know what values to pursue.
Yeah he does; man decides which actions to take to preserve his lifeMan does not automatically know what actions to take to preserve his life. (his life as a rational being)
I’ve pointed out a few I believe to be wrong.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.
Is this one of your made up facts?"Facts" are an imaginary concept defined by each individual.
This guy uses objective facts that are different from mine:
And everything society does is automatically right?Society does not support that option.
By this I mean that animals do not reach the conceptual level of consciousness. By definition their actions are not rational. They have instincts which we do not and their values are pretty simple so that their mothers and fathers can teach them, by instinct. But baby rabbits don't need to know the proper soil PH to grow blueberries. They eat what is there and if the berries fail and the grass dries up in a drought, they die.I can't think of any irrational animal behavior.
Though men can choose to die for the benefit of others.
Who chooses these values?
Nothing needs values to exist. One has nothing to do with the other
Yes he does. Man decides which values to pursue.
I said that man had no automatic knowledge of the right actions to take, not that does not decide what actions to take and we see all around us that those who choose irrationally, don't usually last long in this world.Yeah he does; man decides which actions to take to preserve his life
I’ve pointed out a few I believe to be wrong.
So when you speak of values, you mean things like the ability to eat, or drink? Perhaps I misunderstood you; I thought you were referring to guiding principles when you spoke of valuesOkay, stop eating and drinking and let us know what happens.
The way you phrased your points weren’t very clear. When you said “man” I thought you were referring to all of mankind; I didn’t know you were talking about infants.I said he had no automatic knowledge. Were you born with the knowledge of what was good for you or did you have to learn it?
I said that man had no automatic knowledge of the right actions to take, not that does not decide what actions to take and we see all around us that those who choose irrationally, don't usually last long in this world.
Since you obviously aren’t referring to guiding principles, how are you defining “values”?Yes, well, as we've seen you need to read more carefully. Remember, don't drink or eat anything for a week and come back and tell us all that living organisms don't need values to exist.
Sorry, my programming is unable to field a response to this.I think you are a chat bot. You might not be aware that you are though.
So when you speak of values, you mean things like the ability to eat, or drink? Perhaps I misunderstood you; I thought you were referring to guiding principles when you spoke of values
The way you phrased your points weren’t very clear. When you said “man” I thought you were referring to all of mankind; I didn’t know you were talking about infants.
Since you obviously aren’t referring to guiding principles, how are you defining “values”?
Sadly, you are correct, which is why the world is such a mess.It's hard to imagine that objective morals can even be a thing when morals are a human concept and humans interpret the world they live in subjectively according to the cultures and environments they exist in...
Not trying to being awkward, but that sounds absolutely self contradictory.
Morality is a sort of handshake between natural human values and the conditions in which we live. Both are real facts of the world.
I actually think that both are subject to change too. Nothing is frozen in place.
(Great thread btw).
However, since thoughts are an extension of the humans that express them, don't they take on a living quality?No. Morality is an object. By an object I mean anything we perceive or consider. Morality and its basis is the object that we are considering right now. If I perceive a tree, it is the object of my consciousness. If I consider a tree in my mind it is also the object of my consciousness. But I don't mean by this that morality is concrete like a rock or a tree. Anything we perceive and or consider is an object.
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?