We can say that there's an order to things.
Everything we can see has some cause to an effect. That's universal, that's objective, in some sense in how reality is detected, that's it .
We notice that people organize what's called right and wrong determined by the effect or result .
The do's and don'ts get organized and compartmentalized. The order of things. One thing leads to the next so forth and so on .
People do have their order of things and that is subjected to them.
So the universal order of things is tailored, subjected and adjusted to the individual.
Doesn't negate the objective universal order.
This is like with language. You have what is proper English universally but colloquially people choose or just speak according to select circumstances. No matter improperly, mispronunciation, common lingo or slang that suits right according to the individual.
So for some examples to solidify this into the order of life. What effect does a fire cause?
It will burn. That's universal law, universal order, objective. Somebody that is engulfed in a fire is burned. That's universal law, universal order, objective.
Somebody engulfed in a fire to the point where not only the fire is extinguished but the life of the individual as well.That's universal law, universal order, objective.
Now there are actions regarding this as much as other areas of activity. I understand that when people discuss morality they mention about doing.
As in what the right thing to DO is. What the wrong thing to DO would be. These doings are dividing into lists based on the effect.
In a nutshell, all actions that are done to cause one to perish in a fire is listed in one category divided from another for all actions to be done to avoid being consumed by a fire.
The categories are separated based on the type of effect which is one of existing/continuing to exist or not existing .
These two phenomenas are objective.That's universal law, universal order. What people may choose to call these two distinct categories of two distinct effects can be subjective. Whether they call one moral, right, correct, constructive, beneficial good, bad, wicked, heinous, macabre, destructive, adverse, detrimental, etc.
All matter of choice for what is true universally no matter whom you talk to.
"Somebody engulfed in a fire to the point where not only the fire is extinguished but the life of the individual as well. That's universal law, universal order, objective. Now there are actions regarding this as much as other areas of activity. I understand that when people discuss morality they mention about doing. As in what the right thing to DO is. What the wrong thing to DO would be. These doings are dividing into lists based on the effect. In a nutshell, all actions that are done to cause one to perish in a fire is listed in one category divided from another for all actions to be done to avoid being consumed by a fire."
What's not understood about what is said here?
Comment, send me a message. Otherwise irrefutable as always.
"Somebody engulfed in a fire to the point where not only the fire is extinguished but the life of the individual as well. That's universal law, universal order, objective. Now there are actions regarding this as much as other areas of activity. I understand that when people discuss morality they mention about doing. As in what the right thing to DO is. What the wrong thing to DO would be. These doings are dividing into lists based on the effect. In a nutshell, all actions that are done to cause one to perish in a fire is listed in one category divided from another for all actions to be done to avoid being consumed by a fire."
???
I believe I did state them correctly. I believe that the totality of morality is subjective and there is no objective morality. I don't know what you believe I stated incorrectly.
In reply to your current comment on this debate:
Then you should state your beliefs by using words properly next time.
Should have accepted the debate first. I don't believe any aspect of morality is objective.
"Morality is subjective" means that you're claiming what morality is.. is subjective. This is wrong. Morality is not subjective.. Morality is also subjective. Subjective is not the only part of morality, because objective is another part of morality.