Instigator / Pro
20
1402
rating
44
debates
40.91%
won
Topic
#872

Morality Discussion

Status
Finished

The debate is finished. The distribution of the voting points and the winner are presented below.

Winner & statistics
Better arguments
9
0
Better sources
6
2
Better legibility
3
1
Better conduct
2
1

After 3 votes and with 16 points ahead, the winner is...

Wrick-It-Ralph
Parameters
Publication date
Last updated date
Type
Standard
Number of rounds
5
Time for argument
Three days
Max argument characters
10,000
Voting period
One week
Point system
Multiple criterions
Voting system
Open
Contender / Con
4
1697
rating
556
debates
68.17%
won
Description

I'm not aiming for a full on debate here, but rather a back and forth discussion about the possibilities of morality. If it turns into a debate, that's cool too.

I will dip my toes into the water by stating that I will be advocating for Moral Particularism and I will define some terms.

Morals (noun) = Values by which one judges something to be moral or immoral.
Moral (adjective) = A judgement that something coheres with a moral value.
Immoral (adjective) = A judgement that something does not cohere with a moral value.
Morality (noun) = A broad system of Morals used to judge something to be moral or immoral.

Moral Particularism = A general belief that there are no moral absolutes.

Absolute = Something that is not qualified or limited in any way (to be exactly itself and nothing else in all times and places)

Objective = true regardless of one's opinion.

Subjective = that which aligns with one's opinion whether it is true or false.

Intrinsic = existing apart from humanity.

Universal = That which is true without exception across a particular group or field of thought.

I apologize to the voters in advance for making things complicated. If this does not turn into a hard debate, then I suggest that voters vote based on who brought the best points to the conversation.

-->
@Dustandashes

I'll hit you up in a couple days when I've wiped a couple of these debates out.

-->
@Wrick-It-Ralph

Sorry I missed this one. Feel free to challenge me to a similar one, or even anything you want. I'm usually up

-->
@RationalMadman

You mean 10K

-->
@RationalMadman

I have adopted a similar thought, but I don't word it the same and it probably doesn't have the same implications.

The way I word it is "No person actually thinks they're evil". My point here being that even Hitler thought he was doing the right thing or "being the hero of his own story".

-->
@Wrick-It-Ralph

It will take some time and I will likely fill most of the 30k.

Ramshutu will probably downvote me for 'gish gallop' but I took this because I want to have my teachings found if I were to die and this site is finally becoming googlable.

-->
@Wrick-It-Ralph

I will come at you from an angle of moral relativism as opposed to particularism. Meaning I am going to prove there is an absolute polarity to morality in every single person's 'code'. The selfish root of morality will become something I defy particularism with because what I am going to prove is something I realised at around age 13-14; all people are the heroes of their own story, even when they deny it.

-->
@Dustandashes

I think you'd be a great person for this discussion if you're interested.