Where is the Objective Morality?

[VirOptimus]

What exactly is a right/wrong independent of humanity when we're the ones experiencing what's right and wrong collectively?

….

Seriously, read an introduction to moral philosophy, you are in way over your head.

 

[childeye 2]

That's avoiding the point I made. You say that moral objectivity is related to love and compassion. So is ending someone's life out of love for that person the objectively moral thing to do?

I didn't see any point made that I disagreed with. Respectfully, I'm saying that, in the specific case you described, that should be your decision to make whether it's the moral thing to do, and not someone else. I can fully understand how hard it is to watch someone needlessly suffer, and I can understand it would be a difficult circumstance to be in. Love has sympathy.

 

[childeye 2]

So if you love someone enough to put them out of their misery if tbey are dying and they so desire, then that is an objectively moral thing to do.

I think that you may have a great deal of other forum members disagreeing with you on that.

I'm not claiming that it's objectively a moral thing to do or an immoral thing to do. I'm saying it's objectively wrong for others to make personal decisions for you and your family about personal matters that don't affect them.

The scenario you are describing has love on two sides of an issue that must adapt to the circumstances of a difficult situation. On one hand you don't want her to die because you love your wife, but on the other, you don't want her to suffer, because you love your wife. But the "not wanting her to die" type of love will precede in existence the "not wanting her to suffer" type of love, according to the events as they unfold. It's the circumstances that dictates this reality, the love is the same love on both sides of the issue. If it were me, it would seem selfish of me to even be deliberating about if I were being wicked in this scenario of decision. But that doesn't mean I wouldn't be praying for God to help me do the right thing.

 

[essentialsaltes]

Does that sound reasonable to you?

Yes, it certainly does.

This example is not even in a moral/immoral context. It's useless for making any point in the matter.

It is very useful for understanding the different between objective facts and subjective opinions.

 

[childeye 2]

….

Seriously, read an introduction to moral philosophy, you are in way over your head.

Respectfully, I'm trying to understand your understanding of what objective morality means, not someone else's. And I want you on the record so I can respond in kind. For all I know you're just quoting someone else's philosophical version of what moral objectivity is which is why you can't answer the question about what they think. So can you answer the question or not?

What exactly is a right/wrong independent of humanity when we're the ones experiencing what's right and wrong collectively?

 

[childeye 2]

Yes, it certainly does.

I don't believe you see nothing wrong with someone breaking into their neighbors' house and torturing the children and Mother leaving them all quadriplegics for life. So there's some misunderstanding happening here.

It is very useful for understanding the different between objective facts and subjective opinions.

If that's the case, I don't see how your desire for a team to lose a sports contest even qualifies as an opinion. If it was your preference for them to lose and you're glad they lost, then that's a fact because that's the reality. Now had you said, "I think they're going to lose", that would be an opinion.

 

[VirOptimus]

Respectfully, I'm trying to understand your understanding of what objective morality means, not someone else's. And I want you on the record so I can respond in kind. For all I know you're just quoting someone else's philosophical version of what moral objectivity is which is why you can't even answer my question about what they think. So can you answer the question or not?

What exactly is a right/wrong independent of humanity when we're the ones experiencing what's right and wrong collectively?

I dont believe in objective morality.

For me, objective morality is nonsense.

As a sidenote, objective morality is well defined in moral philosophy. Its not ”mine” version. Thats why you should read up on the subject if you want to debate it.

 

[Bradskii]

I didn't see any point made that I disagreed with. Respectfully, I'm saying that, in the specific case you described, that should be your decision to make whether it's the moral thing to do, and not someone else. I can fully understand how hard it is to watch someone needlessly suffer, and I can understand it would be a difficult circumstance to be in. Love has sympathy.

It sounds like you don't believe that objective morality exists. That, for example, euthanasia is not objectively right or wrong but is a subjective matter. Perhaps you could simply confirm that to save some of us some time arguing for a position that you already hold.

 

[childeye 2]

I dont believe in objective morality.

For me, objective morality is nonsense.

As a sidenote, objective morality is well defined in moral philosophy. Its not ”mine” version. Thats why you should read up on the subject if you want to debate it.

I'm aware of the subject matter. Moral relativism and moral absolutism. I disagree that objective morality is well defined since I am arguing that the essence of morality is compassion/empathy/love and is therefore not ideological but factual.

 

[Bradskii]

I'm aware of the subject matter. Moral relativism and moral absolutism.

It seems that you aren't aware of the subject matter. We are discussing objective morality versus subjective morality. Not absolute v relative.

 

[VirOptimus]

I'm aware of the subject matter. Moral relativism and moral absolutism. I disagree that objective morality is well defined since I am arguing that the essence of morality is compassion/empathy/love and is therefore not ideological but factual.

Compassion/empathy/love are not objective.

 

[FireDragon76]

Compassion/empathy/love are not objective.

He never claimed it was, just that it was a more obvious guide to morality than appealing to religious authority.

 

[childeye 2]

It seems that you aren't aware of the subject matter. We are discussing objective morality versus subjective morality. Not absolute v relative.

When I said I'm aware of the subject matter, I was referring to the understanding of the theory, not the label. It seemed to me it would be redundant to simply state the label of the philosophical theory we're discussing to make that point.

So to make my point I mentioned relativism and absolutism instead. After all, since subjective morality means made by men and that it can vary from person to person, then such a morality would qualify as relative in that sense. If the opposite meaning is applied for objective morality, then morality is not a matter of personal opinion but a matter of fact and definitive for everyone, which is therefore absolute in that sense. Hence relativism and absolutism are part of the subject matter.

 

[childeye 2]

Compassion/empathy/love are not objective.

Do you mean they don't exist in the reality we experience?

 

[VirOptimus]

Do you mean they don't exist in the reality we experience?

It depends on how you define ”exist”, but yes.

 

[Bradskii]

When I said I'm aware of the subject matter, I was referring to the understanding of the theory, not the label. It seemed to me it would be redundant to simply state the label of the philosophical theory we're discussing to make that point.

So to make my point I mentioned relativism and absolutism instead. After all, since subjective morality means made by men and that it can vary from person to person, then such a morality would qualify as relative in that sense. If the opposite meaning is applied for objective morality, then morality is not a matter of personal opinion but a matter of fact and definitive for everyone, which is therefore absolute in that sense. Hence relativism and absolutism are part of the subject matter.

I'm not sure that any further discussion could be in any way productive. Thanks for your input.

 

[childeye 2]

Yes.

So you have never felt compassion. I'm sure your mother loved you. Wasn't that real?

 

[childeye 2]

I'm not sure that any further discussion could be in any way productive. Thanks for your input.

Why? I think your posts are rather insightful.

 

[VirOptimus]

So you have never felt compassion. I'm sure your mother loved you. Wasn't that real?

Thats not what I said.

Read up on value nihilism.

 

[childeye 2]

It depends on how you define ”exist”, but yes.

Reality
: the quality or state of being real
2a(1): a real event, entity, or state of affairs
(2): the totality of real things and events

Definition of exist


intransitive verb

1a: to have real being whether material or spiritual


Do you see Love/compassion/empathy existing in the reality we all share? You know, people caring for the needy, weeping at the loss of loved ones, Mothers/Fathers embracing their children, stuff like that. Does that happen in reality? Is love/compassion/empathy real?