Objective morality and the Necessity of God

Discuss morality and ethics in this message board.
Featured Article: Philosophical Analysis of Abortion, The Right to Life, and Murder
Post Reply
User avatar
Marvin_Edwards
Posts: 1106
Joined: April 14th, 2020, 9:34 pm
Favorite Philosopher: William James
Contact:

Re: Objective morality and the Necessity of God

Post by Marvin_Edwards »

Pattern-chaser wrote: January 5th, 2021, 11:47 am
Marvin_Edwards wrote: January 5th, 2021, 8:24 am objective observation by unbiased observers (or by two biases that cross-checked each other) is still the better guide to what is true and real than subjective opinions.

Maybe ... except that there is no such thing, in practice, as an unbiased human observer. Your theory rather collapses at this point, doesn't it? 😉
Rather dire assessment, eh? But, no, it's not really my theory, but rather my understanding of the notion of scientific objectivity. Science is always expanding the envelope of useful knowledge by exploration and experimentation. Hypotheses that appear to produce reliable predictions of empirical phenomena are given the status of "fact" until a better hypothesis comes along with better and more consistent predictions of events. The hypothesis is subjective until it is demonstrated in objective reality. Then the hypothesis is treated as an objective truth about the nature of things.
Steve3007
Posts: 10339
Joined: June 15th, 2011, 5:53 pm

Re: Objective morality and the Necessity of God

Post by Steve3007 »

baker wrote:The Copernicans and the Ptolemaists were observing the same skies, they had the same raw data, they even had the same tools for observation. Yet they interpreted the data differently and developed different models of the movement of celestial bodies.
Now how do you think that came to be?
The underlying reason is ambiguity. The two statements "The Earth goes around the Sun" and "The Sun goes around the Earth" can both be held to be either true or false, given the same set of observational evidence, because neither statement is written sufficiently precisely in terms of what is actually observed, so both are ambiguous. That's why I asked:
Steve3007 wrote:In terms of things that can be sensed/observed/measured what does it mean to say "the Sun revolves around the Earth"? In those terms, how does that differ from saying "the Earth revolves around the Sun"?
The Sun rises in the east, moves across the sky and sets in the west. Clearly it moves relative to the Earth. So, in a reference frame that is fixed relative to the Earth the Sun goes around the Earth. Similarly, in a reference frame that is fixed relative to the Sun the Earth goes around the Sun. In an inertial (non-accelerating) reference frame they both orbit their common centre of mass. That common centre of mass is not fixed relative to either the Earth or the Sun. So it could also (ambiguously) be said that "The Earth and the Sun orbit each other".
User avatar
Papus79
Posts: 1798
Joined: February 19th, 2017, 6:59 pm

Re: Objective morality and the Necessity of God

Post by Papus79 »

it seems clear to me that almost everything we perceive is based on some internal or external 'fact' or another, and at worst we have some confabulations as to what means what.

I still don't know what God has to do with that, just that I think it was a great setup for confusing what it is we're discussing (awesome if this was really meant to be a social games thread, not as useful if it was a sincere question).
Humbly watching Youtube in Universe 25. - Me
User avatar
Pattern-chaser
Premium Member
Posts: 8268
Joined: September 22nd, 2019, 5:17 am
Favorite Philosopher: Cratylus
Location: England

Re: Objective morality and the Necessity of God

Post by Pattern-chaser »

Greta wrote: January 5th, 2021, 4:35 pm
baker wrote: January 5th, 2021, 6:58 am "Unbiased observers". Lol.
Balanced observers, rather than objective.
Exactly. 👍 Humans can attempt being unbiased, but only approach it distantly, and never consistently. Humans see what they see, and they judge it. This judgement is called bias, and is intrinsic to human, er, operation.
Pattern-chaser

"Who cares, wins"
User avatar
Pattern-chaser
Premium Member
Posts: 8268
Joined: September 22nd, 2019, 5:17 am
Favorite Philosopher: Cratylus
Location: England

Re: Objective morality and the Necessity of God

Post by Pattern-chaser »

Pattern-chaser wrote: January 5th, 2021, 11:47 am Maybe ... except that there is no such thing, in practice, as an unbiased human observer. Your theory rather collapses at this point, doesn't it? 😉
Marvin_Edwards wrote: January 5th, 2021, 5:32 pm Hypotheses that appear to produce reliable predictions of empirical phenomena are given the status of "fact" until a better hypothesis comes along with better and more consistent predictions of events. The hypothesis is subjective until it is demonstrated in objective reality. Then the hypothesis is treated as an objective truth about the nature of things.

Again, this all sounds great, until we remember that no hypothesis has ever, in the history of humanity, been "demonstrated in objective reality".
Pattern-chaser

"Who cares, wins"
User avatar
Marvin_Edwards
Posts: 1106
Joined: April 14th, 2020, 9:34 pm
Favorite Philosopher: William James
Contact:

Re: Objective morality and the Necessity of God

Post by Marvin_Edwards »

Pattern-chaser wrote: January 6th, 2021, 1:34 pm
Pattern-chaser wrote: January 5th, 2021, 11:47 am Maybe ... except that there is no such thing, in practice, as an unbiased human observer. Your theory rather collapses at this point, doesn't it? 😉
Marvin_Edwards wrote: January 5th, 2021, 5:32 pm Hypotheses that appear to produce reliable predictions of empirical phenomena are given the status of "fact" until a better hypothesis comes along with better and more consistent predictions of events. The hypothesis is subjective until it is demonstrated in objective reality. Then the hypothesis is treated as an objective truth about the nature of things.

Again, this all sounds great, until we remember that no hypothesis has ever, in the history of humanity, been "demonstrated in objective reality".
Of course they have, tons of them. Even some very astounding hypotheses, like time-dilation, have been demonstrated. Two atomic clocks, one on the ground, the other in a flying plane, and one clock ran faster than the other. (Don't ask me which).
baker
Posts: 608
Joined: November 28th, 2020, 6:55 am

Re: Objective morality and the Necessity of God

Post by baker »

Steve3007 wrote: January 6th, 2021, 8:32 am The underlying reason is ambiguity. The two statements "The Earth goes around the Sun" and "The Sun goes around the Earth" can both be held to be either true or false, given the same set of observational evidence, because neither statement is written sufficiently precisely in terms of what is actually observed, so both are ambiguous. That's why I asked:
Steve3007 wrote:In terms of things that can be sensed/observed/measured what does it mean to say "the Sun revolves around the Earth"? In those terms, how does that differ from saying "the Earth revolves around the Sun"?
The Sun rises in the east, moves across the sky and sets in the west. Clearly it moves relative to the Earth. So, in a reference frame that is fixed relative to the Earth the Sun goes around the Earth. Similarly, in a reference frame that is fixed relative to the Sun the Earth goes around the Sun. In an inertial (non-accelerating) reference frame they both orbit their common centre of mass. That common centre of mass is not fixed relative to either the Earth or the Sun. So it could also (ambiguously) be said that "The Earth and the Sun orbit each other".
The historical dispute has been about the model of the movement of celestial bodies relative to eachother. The reference frame is the Universe.
Steve3007
Posts: 10339
Joined: June 15th, 2011, 5:53 pm

Re: Objective morality and the Necessity of God

Post by Steve3007 »

baker wrote:The historical dispute has been about the model of the movement of celestial bodies relative to each other.
Yes, and one of the defining characteristics of a model is that it is a simplification; it describes and predicts some, but not all, of the features of reality. Different models of the same reality for different purposes.
The reference frame is the Universe.
Is it? So what is the velocity of the Earth relative to the Universe? The term "the fixed stars" has often also been used in the past to denote a universal reference frame. But, of course, the stars aren't fixed. They're all moving relative to each other and to the Sun and Earth. As I said, one possible reference frame to choose would be a non-accelerating one. As I said, in that reference frame the Earth and Sun are in mutual orbit.
baker
Posts: 608
Joined: November 28th, 2020, 6:55 am

Re: Objective morality and the Necessity of God

Post by baker »

Steve3007 wrote: January 7th, 2021, 6:22 amIs it?
For the historical dispute between heliocentrism vs. geocentrism, yes.

Anyway, to try to remotely get back on topic ... We were talking about the various theories of truth and how they apply to the problem of objective morality and the necessity of God ...
Steve3007
Posts: 10339
Joined: June 15th, 2011, 5:53 pm

Re: Objective morality and the Necessity of God

Post by Steve3007 »

baker wrote:For the historical dispute between heliocentrism vs. geocentrism, yes.
I disagree. I think the historical dispute existed precisely because the reference frame was not agreed on and clearly specified, and it also existed for various psychological reasons tied to the human tendency to want to regard ourselves as being central to things. Clearly the Ptolemaic model uses the surface of the Earth as the reference frame. Given that we're all more or less stationary in that reference frame, that's fairly sensible for a lot of purposes, so long as we remember that other purposes exist and other models are available.
Anyway, to try to remotely get back on topic ... We were talking about the various theories of truth and how they apply to the problem of objective morality and the necessity of God ...
Fair enough. I realise I'd drifted away from that OP a bit. It happens.

Obviously I disagree with the OP writer that objective morality exists and he doesn't seem to make an argument for it. He just asserts it and hasn't replied to my earlier comments, so not much more to say on that. My own view about what constitutes objective truth and how we discover it was most recently summarized here:

viewtopic.php?p=375972#p375972
baker
Posts: 608
Joined: November 28th, 2020, 6:55 am

Re: Objective morality and the Necessity of God

Post by baker »

Steve3007 wrote: January 7th, 2021, 7:59 amObviously I disagree with the OP writer that objective morality exists and he doesn't seem to make an argument for it. He just asserts it
Actually, I think this is precisely what a believer in objective morality and a necessary existence of God does and must do: he merely asserts it, and he must merely assert it. Because anything beyond that, providing any kind of reasoning or arguments beyond mere assertion would take away from the objectivity of what is being asserted.
User avatar
Pattern-chaser
Premium Member
Posts: 8268
Joined: September 22nd, 2019, 5:17 am
Favorite Philosopher: Cratylus
Location: England

Re: Objective morality and the Necessity of God

Post by Pattern-chaser »

Pattern-chaser wrote: January 6th, 2021, 1:34 pm Again, this all sounds great, until we remember that no hypothesis has ever, in the history of humanity, been "demonstrated in objective reality".

Marvin_Edwards wrote: January 6th, 2021, 4:20 pm Of course they have, tons of them. Even some very astounding hypotheses, like time-dilation, have been demonstrated. Two atomic clocks, one on the ground, the other in a flying plane, and one clock ran faster than the other. (Don't ask me which).

You misunderstand. I refer to Objective reality: what actually is, irrespective of our beliefs, thoughts or opinions; you are describing actions taken within apparent reality. If that's the route you wish to follow, then you need to demonstrate that Objective reality and apparent reality are the same thing. This cannot be done. Your arguments keep running into contradictions, it seems. 🤔
Pattern-chaser

"Who cares, wins"
User avatar
Pattern-chaser
Premium Member
Posts: 8268
Joined: September 22nd, 2019, 5:17 am
Favorite Philosopher: Cratylus
Location: England

Re: Objective morality and the Necessity of God

Post by Pattern-chaser »

baker wrote: January 7th, 2021, 8:24 am
Steve3007 wrote: January 7th, 2021, 7:59 amObviously I disagree with the OP writer that objective morality exists and he doesn't seem to make an argument for it. He just asserts it
Actually, I think this is precisely what a believer in objective morality and a necessary existence of God does and must do: he merely asserts it, and he must merely assert it. Because anything beyond that, providing any kind of reasoning or arguments beyond mere assertion would take away from the objectivity of what is being asserted.
I'm sorry, this argument doesn't hold water. Beyond assertion, the believer in objective morality can refer to empirical evidence that things are as he believes they are. If there is morality out there, in the universe, then surely it can be observed? And if it can be observed, it can be referred to by objective-moralists, to demonstrate the correctness of their views. So where is all that morality, out there in the universe? 🤔
Pattern-chaser

"Who cares, wins"
baker
Posts: 608
Joined: November 28th, 2020, 6:55 am

Re: Objective morality and the Necessity of God

Post by baker »

Pattern-chaser wrote: January 7th, 2021, 9:12 amI'm sorry, this argument doesn't hold water. Beyond assertion, the believer in objective morality can refer to empirical evidence that things are as he believes they are.
He can, but he doesn't have to. It even hurts his case to do so.

The moment one ventures into empirical evidence and analytical argument is the moment one has left objectivity.
If there is morality out there, in the universe, then surely it can be observed? And if it can be observed, it can be referred to by objective-moralists, to demonstrate the correctness of their views.
A consequent moral objectivist does not "demonstrate the correctness of their views". Anyone who tries to "demonstrate the correctness of their views" is not a moral objectivist.
User avatar
Pattern-chaser
Premium Member
Posts: 8268
Joined: September 22nd, 2019, 5:17 am
Favorite Philosopher: Cratylus
Location: England

Re: Objective morality and the Necessity of God

Post by Pattern-chaser »

baker wrote: January 7th, 2021, 9:24 am
Pattern-chaser wrote: January 7th, 2021, 9:12 amI'm sorry, this argument doesn't hold water. Beyond assertion, the believer in objective morality can refer to empirical evidence that things are as he believes they are.
He can, but he doesn't have to. It even hurts his case to do so.

The moment one ventures into empirical evidence and analytical argument is the moment one has left objectivity.


I think the time has come for you to say clearly what you mean by "objective" and/or "objectivity"? Thanks.
Pattern-chaser

"Who cares, wins"
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