Is morality objective or subjective?

Discuss morality and ethics in this message board.
Featured Article: Philosophical Analysis of Abortion, The Right to Life, and Murder
Post Reply
Peter Holmes
Posts: 562
Joined: July 19th, 2017, 8:20 am

Re: Is morality objective or subjective?

Post by Peter Holmes »

Belindi

Thanks for those kind thoughts. I'll never stop missing him terribly.

Again, I have to disagree - and this is not to be picky. The assertion 'torture is wrong' is neither true nor false, full stop - because it's a value judgement. So the a priori / a posteriori distinction is irrelevant. What do you think could make it true a priori or a posteriori? What moral facts or truths are there of any kind? Can you suggest one that qualifies - that isn't a value judgement?

As it happens, I think it's confusing to talk about the truth - objective or absolute - of formal sign systems. Their assertions are tautologies. 2+2=4 is just correct within the rules. What could falsify it?
Eduk
Posts: 2466
Joined: December 8th, 2016, 7:08 am
Favorite Philosopher: Socrates

Re: Is morality objective or subjective?

Post by Eduk »

I can see a mechanism for falsifying moral claims. It's not perfect but it is objective, to a point. It's life. Generally things which are morally bad line up neatly with what is existentially bad for life. Reality being the arbiter of any arguments.
Of course the axiom is that life is good. This is not objectively true, as far as I can figure.
Unknown means unknown.
Peter Holmes
Posts: 562
Joined: July 19th, 2017, 8:20 am

Re: Is morality objective or subjective?

Post by Peter Holmes »

Eduk

I think you've floored your own suggestion. The point is, 'Life' isn't a moral assertion.
Belindi
Moderator
Posts: 6105
Joined: September 11th, 2016, 2:11 pm

Re: Is morality objective or subjective?

Post by Belindi »

Peter Holmes wrote: July 16th, 2018, 11:11 am Eduk

I think you've floored your own suggestion. The point is, 'Life' isn't a moral assertion.

No, but
what is existentially bad for life.
is quite good knife to cut with.
Belindi
Moderator
Posts: 6105
Joined: September 11th, 2016, 2:11 pm

Re: Is morality objective or subjective?

Post by Belindi »

Peter Holmes wrote: July 16th, 2018, 8:35 am Belindi

Thanks for those kind thoughts. I'll never stop missing him terribly.

Again, I have to disagree - and this is not to be picky. The assertion 'torture is wrong' is neither true nor false, full stop - because it's a value judgement. So the a priori / a posteriori distinction is irrelevant. What do you think could make it true a priori or a posteriori? What moral facts or truths are there of any kind? Can you suggest one that qualifies - that isn't a value judgement?

As it happens, I think it's confusing to talk about the truth - objective or absolute - of formal sign systems. Their assertions are tautologies. 2+2=4 is just correct within the rules. What could falsify it?
Every proposition is or contains a value judgement. There is no proposition of any kind that is not subjective to some degree with the exception which I already mentioned of maths and formal logic which are a priori, and therefore tautologies, or circular, as you say.

You said, Peter, that Hume's observation about the problem of induction is irrelevant. I believe that the problem of induction is relevant to the questions of how we cannot possibly know if any proposition is objectively true or not.
Peter Holmes
Posts: 562
Joined: July 19th, 2017, 8:20 am

Re: Is morality objective or subjective?

Post by Peter Holmes »

Belindi

Can you explain why the factual assertion 'the earth orbits the sun' contains a value judgement, and is therefore subjective to some degree? And - to what degree?

I know our choice of words is arbitrary and purely conventional - and so subjective. But having fixed the meanings, we're just following rules. And I know we value facts. But that we value facts doesn't mean that facts are values.

I'll get back to induction when I have time - not ignoring that point.
Belindi
Moderator
Posts: 6105
Joined: September 11th, 2016, 2:11 pm

Re: Is morality objective or subjective?

Post by Belindi »

Peter, The Earth orbits the Sun" contains a value judgement because the proposition rests upon theory. That theory is scientific, and the value judgement is that the science tells it like it is.

I don't know to what degree the proposition contains a value judgement. I do claim that without the value judgement of the worthiness of the scientific theory, i.e. astronomy or something, the proposition would not make sense.

That the Earth orbits the Sun is not a free standing claim but is part of the structure of the science as a whole. There are bits of evidence that accord with the proposition and those are needed too sine qua non.
User avatar
LuckyR
Moderator
Posts: 7937
Joined: January 18th, 2015, 1:16 am

Re: Is morality objective or subjective?

Post by LuckyR »

All descriptors are either subjective or objective. Morality and ethics, as it happens deals with issues that happen to be subjective, hence why morality is ultimately subjective.

Examples of objective descriptors are hot, or tall, or heavy, or fast. As we all know morality and ethics deal with subjective measures such as fair, valuable, cruel, painful, not to mention extremely vague terms such as good and evil.
"As usual... it depends."
Belindi
Moderator
Posts: 6105
Joined: September 11th, 2016, 2:11 pm

Re: Is morality objective or subjective?

Post by Belindi »

LuckyR wrote: July 16th, 2018, 2:33 pm All descriptors are either subjective or objective. Morality and ethics, as it happens deals with issues that happen to be subjective, hence why morality is ultimately subjective.

Examples of objective descriptors are hot, or tall, or heavy, or fast. As we all know morality and ethics deal with subjective measures such as fair, valuable, cruel, painful, not to mention extremely vague terms such as good and evil.
But hot, tall, heavy, fast, are relative to the observer and to other variables. Same as what we conventionally name moral terms such as fair, valuable, cruel , painful are relative to the observer and to other variables.
User avatar
LuckyR
Moderator
Posts: 7937
Joined: January 18th, 2015, 1:16 am

Re: Is morality objective or subjective?

Post by LuckyR »

Belindi wrote: July 16th, 2018, 2:43 pm
LuckyR wrote: July 16th, 2018, 2:33 pm All descriptors are either subjective or objective. Morality and ethics, as it happens deals with issues that happen to be subjective, hence why morality is ultimately subjective.

Examples of objective descriptors are hot, or tall, or heavy, or fast. As we all know morality and ethics deal with subjective measures such as fair, valuable, cruel, painful, not to mention extremely vague terms such as good and evil.
But hot, tall, heavy, fast, are relative to the observer and to other variables. Same as what we conventionally name moral terms such as fair, valuable, cruel , painful are relative to the observer and to other variables.
Ah, but while you can taller or shorter than me, your measurement is along a linear scale, say of cm. Say you are 163. My position can also be noted and a comparison made... or not, you are still 163 cm. However, fairness is commonly also attempted to be measured on a linear scale, but since the definition of what fairness is (unlike the universally understood meaning of height), varies dramatically, fairness is actually measured along a set of linear scales, not a single one (depending on the definition of what constitutes fairness).
"As usual... it depends."
User avatar
Felix
Posts: 3117
Joined: February 9th, 2009, 5:45 am

Re: Is morality objective or subjective?

Post by Felix »

One must start with the distinction between natural vs acquired needs and real vs apparent goods, as Aristotle did, to find objective morality. Hume went astray because he did not make this distinction.

Natural desires or needs are inherent to our human nature, while acquired desires or wants differ from individual to individual, due to temperament, upbringing, etc. Whatever we actually need is really good for us, there are no wrong needs. If this were not true, if natural needs were not common to all human beings at all times and under all circumstances, we would have no basis for a global doctrine that calls for the protection of human rights.

In contrast, acquired desires are only apparent goods, or as Spinoza put it, they appear good to us simply because we desire them. If all goods were merely apparent, than right and wrong would be merely subjective and relative, all moral judgements would be mere opinions, and "might makes right" would become the ruling paradigm, as it has among modern moral subjectivists.

Once you've made the essential distinction between natural and acquired desires (needs and wants), and real and merely apparent goods, you can arrive at the self evident truth that we ought to desire what is really good for us, which is the same for all human beings. By taking this first principle and adding to it descriptive truths about human nature, you can arrive at prescriptive truths, i.e., an objective moral code. Aristotle explains this succinctly in Book VI of his Nicomachean Ethics, you may want to refer to it.
"We do not see things as they are; we see things as we are." - Anaïs Nin
Peter Holmes
Posts: 562
Joined: July 19th, 2017, 8:20 am

Re: Is morality objective or subjective?

Post by Peter Holmes »

Felix

Aristotle was wrong about this. And Hume nailed the mistake.

Your equivocation with the word 'good' is revealing. We have natural needs, such as food, clothes and shelter. And it's common to call those things 'goods'. But to say 'whatever we actually need is really good for us, there are no wrong needs' slips over to a different meaning - which is what Aristotle does. From which it's a short step to the moral use of 'good'. That we need those things is a fact. But the claim that we and others should have those things is a value judgement, which is subjective.

Your (and Aristotle's) confusion is evident in what you say here:

'If all goods were merely apparent, than [sic] right and wrong would be merely subjective and relative, all moral judgements would be mere opinions, and "might makes right" would become the ruling paradigm, as it has among modern moral subjectivists.'

The equivocation on 'goods' - first meaning 'things we need', then implicitly meaning 'moral good', as in 'things that are right and not wrong' is glaring.

Aristotle provides no justification for the claim that morality is objective. And your standard conclusion that, if morality is subjective, 'right and wrong would be merely ... relative, all moral judgements would be mere opinions, and "might makes right" would become the ruling paradigm, as it has among modern moral subjectivists' is a mechanical repetition of an irrational - and in my opinion puerile - canard.
Peter Holmes
Posts: 562
Joined: July 19th, 2017, 8:20 am

Re: Is morality objective or subjective?

Post by Peter Holmes »

We can always claim a deeply held moral judgement is a fact - and we're strongly inclined to do so. But that doesn't make it a fact. It isn't our judgements, beliefs or opinions that make assertions facts. The fact / value barrier is insuperable. And in ethical or moral discourse, an 'is' never logically entails an 'ought'. That's just the way it is.

And the irony is, that if there were moral facts, their source would be irrelevant, as it is for all factual assertions. There is no authority that can dictate what counts as a fact: this is a fact because I say it is. So moral objectivism precludes a god's moral authority, along with anyone else's. 'This is good because I say it is' doesn't wash.

And another irony is that moral subjectivism, which is correct, is entirely compatible with theism anyway. So a theistic insistence on objectivism is not only incorrect, because morality is subjective, but also a peculiar case of unwitting intellectual self-harm.
User avatar
Felix
Posts: 3117
Joined: February 9th, 2009, 5:45 am

Re: Is morality objective or subjective?

Post by Felix »

Peter Holmes: The equivocation on 'goods' - first meaning 'things we need', then implicitly meaning 'moral good', as in 'things that are right and not wrong' is glaring.
No equivocation there, do I need to spell out in detail the obvious logic of those statements? Is your position that there are no right or wrong desires, or real and apparent goods, this is all merely subjective?
That we need those things is a fact. But the claim that we and others should have those things is a value judgement, which is subjective.
Partly subjective, yes, but what isn't? Obviously our natural needs are the basis of our natural rights - our rights to the things we need to live good human lives. And it's not a command as to what people should have, only a statement of what is right to desire to have. The statement is self-evident because it is impossible for us to subscribe to the opposite view: that we should not desire what is really good for us, or desire what is really bad for us.
Aristotle provides no justification for the claim that morality is objective.
Sure he did, he provided a clear exposition of it, you either have not read it or did not understand it. He explains how true prescriptive judgements will conform to right desires - desire for those things that we by nature need. Unlike Aristotle, Hume failed to see that both prescriptive and descriptive premises can be, and in fact must be, combined to reach objective moral conclusions.
"We do not see things as they are; we see things as we are." - Anaïs Nin
Peter Holmes
Posts: 562
Joined: July 19th, 2017, 8:20 am

Re: Is morality objective or subjective?

Post by Peter Holmes »

Felix

1 The assertion that a desire is morally right or wrong is a judgement, not a falsifiable factual claim. If you disagree, please give an example.

2 You don't seem to understand the equivocation on the word 'good'. Please give an example of what you call a real good, and an example of what you call an apparent good. We can go on from there.

3 Our natural needs are objective, but 'natural rights' are not. Rights are things granted to people by decisions based on moral judgements.

4 In the assertion 'we should not desire what is really good for us, or desire what is really bad for us', the word 'should' is critical, because it indicates a judgement. You are still confusing values judgements with factual assertions, as does Aristotle.
Post Reply

Return to “Ethics and Morality”

2023/2024 Philosophy Books of the Month

Entanglement - Quantum and Otherwise

Entanglement - Quantum and Otherwise
by John K Danenbarger
January 2023

Mark Victor Hansen, Relentless: Wisdom Behind the Incomparable Chicken Soup for the Soul

Mark Victor Hansen, Relentless: Wisdom Behind the Incomparable Chicken Soup for the Soul
by Mitzi Perdue
February 2023

Rediscovering the Wisdom of Human Nature: How Civilization Destroys Happiness

Rediscovering the Wisdom of Human Nature: How Civilization Destroys Happiness
by Chet Shupe
March 2023

The Unfakeable Code®

The Unfakeable Code®
by Tony Jeton Selimi
April 2023

The Book: On the Taboo Against Knowing Who You Are

The Book: On the Taboo Against Knowing Who You Are
by Alan Watts
May 2023

Killing Abel

Killing Abel
by Michael Tieman
June 2023

Reconfigurement: Reconfiguring Your Life at Any Stage and Planning Ahead

Reconfigurement: Reconfiguring Your Life at Any Stage and Planning Ahead
by E. Alan Fleischauer
July 2023

First Survivor: The Impossible Childhood Cancer Breakthrough

First Survivor: The Impossible Childhood Cancer Breakthrough
by Mark Unger
August 2023

Predictably Irrational

Predictably Irrational
by Dan Ariely
September 2023

Artwords

Artwords
by Beatriz M. Robles
November 2023

Fireproof Happiness: Extinguishing Anxiety & Igniting Hope

Fireproof Happiness: Extinguishing Anxiety & Igniting Hope
by Dr. Randy Ross
December 2023

Beyond the Golden Door: Seeing the American Dream Through an Immigrant's Eyes

Beyond the Golden Door: Seeing the American Dream Through an Immigrant's Eyes
by Ali Master
February 2024

2022 Philosophy Books of the Month

Emotional Intelligence At Work

Emotional Intelligence At Work
by Richard M Contino & Penelope J Holt
January 2022

Free Will, Do You Have It?

Free Will, Do You Have It?
by Albertus Kral
February 2022

My Enemy in Vietnam

My Enemy in Vietnam
by Billy Springer
March 2022

2X2 on the Ark

2X2 on the Ark
by Mary J Giuffra, PhD
April 2022

The Maestro Monologue

The Maestro Monologue
by Rob White
May 2022

What Makes America Great

What Makes America Great
by Bob Dowell
June 2022

The Truth Is Beyond Belief!

The Truth Is Beyond Belief!
by Jerry Durr
July 2022

Living in Color

Living in Color
by Mike Murphy
August 2022 (tentative)

The Not So Great American Novel

The Not So Great American Novel
by James E Doucette
September 2022

Mary Jane Whiteley Coggeshall, Hicksite Quaker, Iowa/National Suffragette And Her Speeches

Mary Jane Whiteley Coggeshall, Hicksite Quaker, Iowa/National Suffragette And Her Speeches
by John N. (Jake) Ferris
October 2022

In It Together: The Beautiful Struggle Uniting Us All

In It Together: The Beautiful Struggle Uniting Us All
by Eckhart Aurelius Hughes
November 2022

The Smartest Person in the Room: The Root Cause and New Solution for Cybersecurity

The Smartest Person in the Room
by Christian Espinosa
December 2022

2021 Philosophy Books of the Month

The Biblical Clock: The Untold Secrets Linking the Universe and Humanity with God's Plan

The Biblical Clock
by Daniel Friedmann
March 2021

Wilderness Cry: A Scientific and Philosophical Approach to Understanding God and the Universe

Wilderness Cry
by Dr. Hilary L Hunt M.D.
April 2021

Fear Not, Dream Big, & Execute: Tools To Spark Your Dream And Ignite Your Follow-Through

Fear Not, Dream Big, & Execute
by Jeff Meyer
May 2021

Surviving the Business of Healthcare: Knowledge is Power

Surviving the Business of Healthcare
by Barbara Galutia Regis M.S. PA-C
June 2021

Winning the War on Cancer: The Epic Journey Towards a Natural Cure

Winning the War on Cancer
by Sylvie Beljanski
July 2021

Defining Moments of a Free Man from a Black Stream

Defining Moments of a Free Man from a Black Stream
by Dr Frank L Douglas
August 2021

If Life Stinks, Get Your Head Outta Your Buts

If Life Stinks, Get Your Head Outta Your Buts
by Mark L. Wdowiak
September 2021

The Preppers Medical Handbook

The Preppers Medical Handbook
by Dr. William W Forgey M.D.
October 2021

Natural Relief for Anxiety and Stress: A Practical Guide

Natural Relief for Anxiety and Stress
by Dr. Gustavo Kinrys, MD
November 2021

Dream For Peace: An Ambassador Memoir

Dream For Peace
by Dr. Ghoulem Berrah
December 2021