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
Post Reply
Eduk
Posts: 2466
Joined: December 8th, 2016, 7:08 am
Favorite Philosopher: Socrates

Re: Is morality objective or subjective?

Post by Eduk » January 29th, 2019, 4:21 am

Yes the first thing to do would be to decide what makes an action morally right @Ultrackius
But you saying something is clearly right or clearly wrong proves absolutely nothing. I'll give you an example, it is clearly right that I am 200 foot tall.
Unknown means unknown.

Belindi
Moderator
Posts: 2343
Joined: September 11th, 2016, 2:11 pm

Re: Is morality objective or subjective?

Post by Belindi » January 29th, 2019, 7:42 am

Eduk wrote:
January 28th, 2019, 9:32 am
We are moral because we live in societies. Societies function only as long as there is a significantly shared set of values.
You could also argue we live in societies because we are moral.
I'd also say morals are more than shared sets of values. After all how many people need to believe something in order for it to be moral?
I'd also argue morality is real.
Yes, we could. Societies and morality are linked not as causes each of the other but as twin effects of human biology. Humans are biologically physically weak but intelligent and like all life forms have the urge to stay alive.

I don't think anyone knows the statistics of moral beliefs and correlating numbers of devotees. This cultural process is dynamic anyway. Passions fuelled by actual neediness surely come into the process as do charismatic leaders, and as do the attractions of the myths as stories.

Belindi
Moderator
Posts: 2343
Joined: September 11th, 2016, 2:11 pm

Re: Is morality objective or subjective?

Post by Belindi » January 29th, 2019, 7:52 am

Peter Homes wrote:
So even if the golden rule were universal, it would still manifest an opinion. The claim that every society has the golden rule in its moral code would be a fact - a true factual assertion - but the rule itself (obviously) isn't and can't be a fact.
I agree that the Golden Rule is not fact in the sense that a law of nature or a law of science is fact. The Golden Rule is fact insofar as it has been incorporated as the mainstay of all the universal religions. Despite the many faults and failings of the universal religions, including sectarianism of Christianity and Islam, they have kept the Golden Rule intact. While only the believers in the literal meanings of those universal faiths would say that God instituted and maintains the Golden Rule, the historical fact is that the Golden Rule has not perished but has survived to be the backbone of the United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

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

Re: Is morality objective or subjective?

Post by Peter Holmes » January 29th, 2019, 2:45 pm

Belindi wrote:
January 29th, 2019, 7:52 am
Peter Homes wrote:
So even if the golden rule were universal, it would still manifest an opinion. The claim that every society has the golden rule in its moral code would be a fact - a true factual assertion - but the rule itself (obviously) isn't and can't be a fact.
I agree that the Golden Rule is not fact in the sense that a law of nature or a law of science is fact. The Golden Rule is fact insofar as it has been incorporated as the mainstay of all the universal religions.
Perhaps our disagreement is purely grammatical. A fact is a true claim about reality. And the grammatical form of a fact is declarative.

But a rule such as 'do as you would be done by', is a command, and its grammatical form is imperative. A command doesn't make any claim about reality whatsoever. So the golden rule can't be a fact.

But if you're claiming that all the major religions have the golden rule in their moral codes - then that actually is a factual assertion which may be true.

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

Re: Is morality objective or subjective?

Post by Peter Holmes » January 30th, 2019, 5:45 am

athena wrote:
January 28th, 2019, 10:28 am
"An argument that objective morality is evidence for the existence of anything – let alone a god – is unsound, because morality is not objective. " Peter Holmes

This seems to oppose to everything I hold as important. I believe our liberty and democracy depends on understanding morality is a matter of cause and effect. That would be factual. Not having sex until marriage is not just about something read in the Bible, but about social organization and the care of a woman and child, and the risk of having a child without having a supportive husband, and the risk of social diseases.
Athena, your argument seems to be: we have moral values and rules in order to achieve certain goals. For example, we want to organise society successfully and care for a woman and her child, so we have the rule 'no sex until marriage'.

I hope I haven't misunderstood what you say. Before I go on - is this right so far?

athena
Contributor
Posts: 965
Joined: June 11th, 2009, 10:18 am

Re: Is morality objective or subjective?

Post by athena » January 30th, 2019, 11:56 am

Ultrackius wrote:
January 28th, 2019, 4:24 pm
I think that while everyone has subjective moral opinions an objective morality can be discovered, the first thing to do would be to decide what makes an action morally right, it can either be the action, consequence, or intended consequence. The easiest to disprove is Action, under Action if you killed one person to save one thousand it would be bad, this is clearly false. Next is consequence, the way to disprove this is as follows: Kill one person to save one thousand but the thing that you thought would stop when you killed the one person doesn’t stop and they die anyway. Killing the one person would be wrong under consequence even though it is clearly not. Finally we have intended consequence. Which is the hardest to disprove but can still be disproved. Say one insane person torturers one million people to death in the belief that it will couse a utopia because a subset of people are gone forever. This would still be wrong. In my opinion the most rational solution is a ratio between consequence and intended consequence favoring intended.
Nicely said. In all forums, on the internet, there seems to be resistance to agree a moral is a matter of cause and effect and I find this most curious because it seems so obvious. I am sure Socrates' concern about expanding our conscience (con- meaning "coming out of" and science meaning "knowledge") was about improving our moral judgment.

Cicero argued the consequences of our actions will be what they will be and no animal sacrifices or prayers will change that. He argued we have a conscience and are compelled to do good. That doesn't equal having good moral judgment, but that we have to justify to ourselves why our actions are right. Killing is not wrong when the people being killed are the enemy or a serious threat to our well being. What follows is- when we do wrong, it is because we are ignorant and lack the knowledge we need for better judgment. When we had liberal education, we taught this and gaining knowledge was associated with good moral judgment and the pursuit of happiness. This understanding is important to our liberty and justice, right?
born to master the art of love

athena
Contributor
Posts: 965
Joined: June 11th, 2009, 10:18 am

Re: Is morality objective or subjective?

Post by athena » January 30th, 2019, 12:03 pm

Peter Holmes wrote:
January 30th, 2019, 5:45 am
athena wrote:
January 28th, 2019, 10:28 am
"An argument that objective morality is evidence for the existence of anything – let alone a god – is unsound, because morality is not objective. " Peter Holmes

This seems to oppose to everything I hold as important. I believe our liberty and democracy depends on understanding morality is a matter of cause and effect. That would be factual. Not having sex until marriage is not just about something read in the Bible, but about social organization and the care of a woman and child, and the risk of having a child without having a supportive husband, and the risk of social diseases.
Athena, your argument seems to be: we have moral values and rules in order to achieve certain goals. For example, we want to organise society successfully and care for a woman and her child, so we have the rule 'no sex until marriage'.

I hope I haven't misunderstood what you say. Before I go on - is this right so far?
:D I love it! That is exactly right! I would just expand this a little to say not only is love and marriage vital to the well being of children, therefore the well being of the civilization, but also to our liberty, and social order without authority above us. Some have gone as far saying there is a deliberate effort to destroy families, because that gives the state more power over the people. Without family order, the people lose power.
born to master the art of love

athena
Contributor
Posts: 965
Joined: June 11th, 2009, 10:18 am

Re: Is morality objective or subjective?

Post by athena » January 30th, 2019, 12:07 pm

Peter Holmes wrote:
January 29th, 2019, 2:45 pm
Belindi wrote:
January 29th, 2019, 7:52 am
Peter Homes wrote:



I agree that the Golden Rule is not fact in the sense that a law of nature or a law of science is fact. The Golden Rule is fact insofar as it has been incorporated as the mainstay of all the universal religions.
Perhaps our disagreement is purely grammatical. A fact is a true claim about reality. And the grammatical form of a fact is declarative.

But a rule such as 'do as you would be done by', is a command, and its grammatical form is imperative. A command doesn't make any claim about reality whatsoever. So the golden rule can't be a fact.

But if you're claiming that all the major religions have the golden rule in their moral codes - then that actually is a factual assertion which may be true.
Oh yes, good work, we have agreement. I like that you point out this is a grammatical issue! It is amazing to me that we can communicate at all, given how complex the process is.
born to master the art of love

Eduk
Posts: 2466
Joined: December 8th, 2016, 7:08 am
Favorite Philosopher: Socrates

Re: Is morality objective or subjective?

Post by Eduk » January 30th, 2019, 12:10 pm

Some have gone as far saying there is a deliberate effort to destroy families, because that gives the state more power over the people.
The name for that condition is hyperactive agency detection. I like this article

https://theness.com/neurologicablog/ind ... cognition/
Unknown means unknown.

athena
Contributor
Posts: 965
Joined: June 11th, 2009, 10:18 am

Re: Is morality objective or subjective?

Post by athena » January 30th, 2019, 12:15 pm

Belindi wrote:
January 28th, 2019, 12:02 pm
Athena wrote:
However, when society is divided, and and the laborers are excluded from the reasoning, problems develop. Suppressing the people with brute force, instead of resolving problems leads to rebellions, right? The moral of this story is freedom of speech is essential to having good reasoning and working relationship
Not always. The Nazis managed to kill most of the Jews without the Jews rebelling. Also many societies have functioned only because of slave labour. The slaves could not rebel.

In a modern socialist society in which the workers have power, notably the power of trade unions, ACAS works not only through freedom of speech but also through the powers of the workers.
We might want to pay attention to the bureaucratic organization that made this possible. We might want to be concerned about the destruction of families and increasing reliance on authority. We might want to pay attention to the destruction of unions and that our industry uses the autocratic model, not the democratic model. There is a lot more to morals than who we sleep with and who we cheat. There are huge political ramifications as well. I am afraid the Bible is not very clear about this, as the book, edited and published by Rome, seems to favor obedience and reliance on authority.

Liberal education internalizes authority. Christianity and education for technology externalize authority.
Last edited by athena on January 30th, 2019, 12:20 pm, edited 1 time in total.
born to master the art of love

Eduk
Posts: 2466
Joined: December 8th, 2016, 7:08 am
Favorite Philosopher: Socrates

Re: Is morality objective or subjective?

Post by Eduk » January 30th, 2019, 12:17 pm

increasing reliance on authority
What increasing reliance on authority?
our industry uses the autocratic model, not the democratic model.
Because it is better.
Unknown means unknown.

athena
Contributor
Posts: 965
Joined: June 11th, 2009, 10:18 am

Re: Is morality objective or subjective?

Post by athena » January 30th, 2019, 12:42 pm

Eduk wrote:
January 30th, 2019, 12:10 pm
Some have gone as far saying there is a deliberate effort to destroy families, because that gives the state more power over the people.
The name for that condition is hyperactive agency detection. I like this article

https://theness.com/neurologicablog/ind ... cognition/
What are you implying with that off-topic post? I absolutely love discussing the New World Order and the old order that was family order. I love talking about Eisenhower's warning of the Military Industrial Complex that is his label for the New World Order. But this not the thread for that.

Now if you are questioning my sanity, that is just rude. :lol:
born to master the art of love

athena
Contributor
Posts: 965
Joined: June 11th, 2009, 10:18 am

Re: Is morality objective or subjective?

Post by athena » January 30th, 2019, 12:52 pm

Eduk wrote:
January 30th, 2019, 12:17 pm
increasing reliance on authority
What increasing reliance on authority?
our industry uses the autocratic model, not the democratic model.
Because it is better.
It is not my policy to follow arguments that take threads off topic. However, if you want to start a thread and pm me, I will gladly answer your questions. In this thread about morality, I think it is important to say something about what our understanding of morals has to do with our liberty and political reality but I don't want to go too far with that. Objective morality and politics kind of go together. It is what our democracy is supposed to be about.

And seriously, not here but another thread, let us talk about the pros and cons of autocratic and democratic industry. I think your notion that autocracy is better is not based on understanding the democratic model and what autocratic industry has to do with destroying families and our democracy.
born to master the art of love

Eduk
Posts: 2466
Joined: December 8th, 2016, 7:08 am
Favorite Philosopher: Socrates

Re: Is morality objective or subjective?

Post by Eduk » January 30th, 2019, 12:58 pm

It wasn't off topic. If you (or others) say there is a deliberate effort to destroy families then I am pointing out the condition you (or they) are suffering from. Everyone is insane (by definition), I am sure you have noticed. Of course it is the extent and relevancy of the insanity which is pertinent.
And seriously, not here but another thread, let us talk about the pros and cons of autocratic and democratic industry. I think your notion that autocracy is better is not based on understanding the democratic model and what autocratic industry has to do with destroying families and our democracy.
I was just asking you questions based off of your posts, if you deem that off topic then please feel free to start a new thread.
Objective morality and politics kind of go together. It is what our democracy is supposed to be about.
Seen as there is no objective morality then I don't agree with your conclusion. You could argue morality is a part (but not the whole) of democracy, you could even argue it was a large (or even largest) part. But you have to separate objective from subjective otherwise you are immediately off on the wrong foot. For example I am sure you and me could agree on much that we find moral even if we disagree on the meaning of the word objective.
Unknown means unknown.

athena
Contributor
Posts: 965
Joined: June 11th, 2009, 10:18 am

Re: Is morality objective or subjective?

Post by athena » January 30th, 2019, 1:34 pm

Eduk wrote:
January 30th, 2019, 12:58 pm
It wasn't off topic. If you (or others) say there is a deliberate effort to destroy families then I am pointing out the condition you (or they) are suffering from. Everyone is insane (by definition), I am sure you have noticed. Of course it is the extent and relevancy of the insanity which is pertinent.
And seriously, not here but another thread, let us talk about the pros and cons of autocratic and democratic industry. I think your notion that autocracy is better is not based on understanding the democratic model and what autocratic industry has to do with destroying families and our democracy.
I was just asking you questions based off of your posts, if you deem that off topic then please feel free to start a new thread.
Objective morality and politics kind of go together. It is what our democracy is supposed to be about.
Seen as there is no objective morality then I don't agree with your conclusion. You could argue morality is a part (but not the whole) of democracy, you could even argue it was a large (or even largest) part. But you have to separate objective from subjective otherwise you are immediately off on the wrong foot. For example I am sure you and me could agree on much that we find moral even if we disagree on the meaning of the word objective.
I love your questions but it sure would derail this thread if I answered them here. The best we might be able to do is start a thread about the Military Industrial Complex versus family order in the ethics and morality forum, so that thread hopefully remains close to this thread. I will do that now.
born to master the art of love

Post Reply