The March Philosophy Book of the Month is Final Notice by Van Fleisher. Discuss Final Notice now.

The April Philosophy Book of the Month is The Unbound Soul by Richard L. Haight. Discuss The Unbound Soul Now

The May Philosophy Book of the Month is Misreading Judas by Robert Wahler.

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
Kaz_1983
Posts: 123
Joined: May 26th, 2019, 6:52 am

Re: Is morality objective or subjective?

Post by Kaz_1983 » August 13th, 2019, 5:59 pm

Sculptor1 wrote:
August 13th, 2019, 9:18 am
Kaz_1983 wrote:
August 13th, 2019, 8:54 am
Can be both subjective and objective at the same time?

I'm basing what is right and wrong on scientific objectivity not opinion. It comes down to context tho which is subjective I suppose.. that said, not all are equal - there are still right and wrong ways of going about maximizing well-being so it's kinda both.
This begs the question what is "well being", and further asks "well being" for whom?
No act is without consequences, both negative and positive. It is highly unlikely that any act to enhance the well being of a person or group will not have some negative effects on some other person or group.
The truth of this was so well known to Jeremy Bentham, that he promoted the idea of utilitarianism for moral questions, and asserted that as long as the majority benefited it was moral. But this leaves massive questions.
So, no, there is really no basis for the objective. At some point the whole question of morality relies on judgement.
Food for thought. I'll take a read laters, ta

Kaz_1983
Posts: 123
Joined: May 26th, 2019, 6:52 am

Re: Is morality objective or subjective?

Post by Kaz_1983 » August 13th, 2019, 6:30 pm

Oh one thing tho. I never said morality is objective, I said it's kinda both but I admitted that it's subjective whether well-being should be based on well-being but if we can agree on that (which it seems we can't) there are scientifically objective right and wrong answers to what constitutes positive well-being and negative well-being. That's what I said.

Peter Holmes
Posts: 166
Joined: July 19th, 2017, 8:20 am

Re: Is morality objective or subjective?

Post by Peter Holmes » August 14th, 2019, 3:22 am

Kaz_1983 wrote:
August 13th, 2019, 6:30 pm
Oh one thing tho. I never said morality is objective, I said it's kinda both but I admitted that it's subjective whether well-being should be based on well-being but if we can agree on that (which it seems we can't) there are scientifically objective right and wrong answers to what constitutes positive well-being and negative well-being. That's what I said.
We certainly can agree to make well-being our collective goal; and we can agree on what constitutes well-being; and we can agree on how to promote it. But these are all matters of judgement or opinion - not matters of fact, and so not objective - nor even 'kind of' objective.

Belindi
Moderator
Posts: 2321
Joined: September 11th, 2016, 2:11 pm

Re: Is morality objective or subjective?

Post by Belindi » August 14th, 2019, 5:10 am

Peter Holmes wrote:
We certainly can agree to make well-being our collective goal; and we can agree on what constitutes well-being; and we can agree on how to promote it. But these are all matters of judgement or opinion - not matters of fact, and so not objective - nor even 'kind of' objective.
If "we" means a society, then I agree. Societies codify morality via the accepted or established religion and the legal code derived from it. If I understand 'subjective' then this is inter-subjective morality based loosely on consensus and sometimes with a big component of oppressive terror.

Kaz_1983
Posts: 123
Joined: May 26th, 2019, 6:52 am

Re: Is morality objective or subjective?

Post by Kaz_1983 » August 15th, 2019, 5:27 am

Peter Holmes wrote:
August 14th, 2019, 3:22 am
Kaz_1983 wrote:
August 13th, 2019, 6:30 pm
Oh one thing tho. I never said morality is objective, I said it's kinda both but I admitted that it's subjective whether well-being should be based on well-being but if we can agree on that (which it seems we can't) there are scientifically objective right and wrong answers to what constitutes positive well-being and negative well-being. That's what I said.
We certainly can agree to make well-being our collective goal; and we can agree on what constitutes well-being; and we can agree on how to promote it. But these are all matters of judgement or opinion - not matters of fact, and so not objective - nor even 'kind of' objective.
I'm starting to think that even if I agree that morality is subjective, not completely but let me explain.. I can still say that are objectively bad and objectively good but you're right, it all depends on if we can subjectively agree that avoiding pain and maximising pleasure is a collective goal or not..

Peter Holmes
Posts: 166
Joined: July 19th, 2017, 8:20 am

Re: Is morality objective or subjective?

Post by Peter Holmes » August 15th, 2019, 11:58 am

Kaz

An opinion - even if everyone holds that opinion - is still an opinion, so it can't be objective, which means 'independent from opinion'. Agreement has nothing to do with it. An opinion that everyone holds doesn't therefore become a fact. It's just a universally held opinion. And 'morally good' and 'morally bad' express opinions, not factual claims.

Kaz_1983
Posts: 123
Joined: May 26th, 2019, 6:52 am

Re: Is morality objective or subjective?

Post by Kaz_1983 » August 15th, 2019, 3:15 pm

Peter Holmes wrote:
August 15th, 2019, 11:58 am
Kaz

An opinion - even if everyone holds that opinion - is still an opinion, so it can't be objective, which means 'independent from opinion'. Agreement has nothing to do with it. An opinion that everyone holds doesn't therefore become a fact. It's just a universally held opinion. And 'morally good' and 'morally bad' express opinions, not factual claims.
I get that..

It's like the sky is blue is a universally shared subjective experience.

Kaz_1983
Posts: 123
Joined: May 26th, 2019, 6:52 am

Re: Is morality objective or subjective?

Post by Kaz_1983 » August 15th, 2019, 5:14 pm

I still believe subjectively that what's right and wrong is based on the desire to maximize pleasure and minimise pain, (which can be objectively proven right scientifically).

I admit that the meaning of well-being is open to interpretation and just because something is, that doesn't mean that it ought to be - no matter how hard you try.

But don't tell me just because I see it as subjective now, that doesn't mean I can't pass judgement on you!

Of course I can.

I just can't say you're objectively wrong..

Just like I can say the sky is blue in a universal subjective sense - and that means, anybody who tries to tells me it's purple, is wrong - in a subjective way.

Look the large, large majority of people value maximizing pleasure and minimising pain and if you don't, that's okay that's just your opinion.. (anyways there are no objectively right or wrong answers)

That said, if you don't value minimising pain and maximising pleasure, in the eyes of the majority - you're dead wrong.

User avatar
Consul
Posts: 2101
Joined: February 21st, 2014, 6:32 am
Location: Germany

Re: Is morality objective or subjective?

Post by Consul » August 15th, 2019, 5:36 pm

Peter Holmes wrote:
August 13th, 2019, 2:16 pm
To repeat my earlier point: Whatever facts we deploy to justify a moral judgement, it remains a judgement. And others can deploy the same facts differently, or different facts, to justify different moral judgements. That is our inescapable moral predicament.
As for the role of facts in moral reasoning, here's yet another quotation, because it's centrally relevant:

"Any moral problem one cares to take is bound to be divisible into the following elements. There are first of all questions of fact. To take the example I have just been discussing: the question, whether the psychologists are right who say that it is possible to identify genetic elements in the causes of crime, is a question of fact, which can be investigated empirically. In most practical moral problems it will be found that the huge majority of the questions which have to be settled before we can solve them are factual ones. This has tempted some philosophers to think that the only questions that have to be answered before we can solve them are of this sort—that once all the facts are known, no further problem will remain: the answer to the moral question will be obvious. This is, however, not so, as we shall see in due course. But certainly the factual questions are the ones that cause 99 per cent of the trouble. We can see this if we study any two people arguing about a moral question. We shall nearly always find them disputing each other's facts. To revert for a moment to the problem of the draftee who has to decide whether to go into the army: most of his problem is to find out what is actually happening in, for example, Vietnam, and what the actual consequences of various courses of action, whether on his or his governments part, are likely in fact to be.
Nevertheless, it is fairly obvious that one might find out all the facts that anybody wanted to adduce, and still be in doubt what one ought to do. We can see this more clearly if we suppose that there are two draftees and they are arguing with one another about the question. It is obvious that they could agree, for example, that if they went into the armed forces and obeyed their orders, they would find themselves killing a lot of civilians in the course of attacks on military objectives. One of them might think it morally indefensible to kill civilians in the course of fighting (especially if the civilians had nothing to do with the fighting, but were innocent bystanders). The other might think that this, although in itself an evil, had to be done if necessary in order to secure some greater good. One can agree about a fact, but disagree about its bearing on a moral issue."


(Hare, R. M. Sorting Out Ethics. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1997. pp. 35-6)
"We may philosophize well or ill, but we must philosophize." – Wilfrid Sellars

User avatar
Consul
Posts: 2101
Joined: February 21st, 2014, 6:32 am
Location: Germany

Re: Is morality objective or subjective?

Post by Consul » August 15th, 2019, 5:41 pm

Sculptor1 wrote:
August 13th, 2019, 5:58 pm
you need to stop quoting and start thinking and saying what you think.
You need to stop telling me what to do!
(FYI: I have started thinking a long time ago, and I don't hide my opinions.)
"We may philosophize well or ill, but we must philosophize." – Wilfrid Sellars

Kaz_1983
Posts: 123
Joined: May 26th, 2019, 6:52 am

Re: Is morality objective or subjective?

Post by Kaz_1983 » August 15th, 2019, 6:38 pm

Ohh the meaning of pleasure is: that which is wanted whilst experiencing it. The meaning of pain is: that which is not wanted whilst experiencing it.

Everything we do because we desire it more (they're always competing desires) and we desire to do it, because we believe it will give us the most pleasure.

By default, everything we do is because we believe we will get pleasure out of doing it - regardless of the action, we always look to maximize pleasure and minimise pain.

Some people get pleasure from pain too.

And beside if we are going to call that subjective, which is okay - practically everything is subjective, we could be in a simulation (it's just our opinion that we are not) or that gravity will stop working tomorrow (it's just an opinion that it will be working tomorrow)

Kaz_1983
Posts: 123
Joined: May 26th, 2019, 6:52 am

Re: Is morality objective or subjective?

Post by Kaz_1983 » August 16th, 2019, 6:59 pm

Is colour subjective?

User avatar
Greta
Site Admin
Posts: 7934
Joined: December 16th, 2013, 9:05 pm

Re: Is morality objective or subjective?

Post by Greta » August 16th, 2019, 7:02 pm

Yes, colour is subjective. Just ask Stevie Wonder. Or a bat (which can only see in monochrome).

Kaz_1983
Posts: 123
Joined: May 26th, 2019, 6:52 am

Re: Is morality objective or subjective?

Post by Kaz_1983 » August 16th, 2019, 7:47 pm

Greta wrote:
August 16th, 2019, 7:02 pm
Yes, colour is subjective. Just ask Stevie Wonder. Or a bat (which can only see in monochrome).
I appreciate the quick reply. I asked because somebody doesn't agree with me saying it's objective. Annoying me that but yes I just wanted to double check here.

Kaz_1983
Posts: 123
Joined: May 26th, 2019, 6:52 am

Re: Is morality objective or subjective?

Post by Kaz_1983 » August 16th, 2019, 7:49 pm

Typo oppps: I asked because somebody doesn't agree with me saying it's *subjective*

Subjectivity is essential for us to reason. If there were no subjectivity it would not have been any use for Greta to say a bat sees in monochrome.

Post Reply