Is morality objective or subjective?

Author: Fallaneze

Posts

Total: 753
Fallaneze
Fallaneze's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 948
2
2
5
Fallaneze's avatar
Fallaneze
2
2
5
-->
@secularmerlin
The statement in its entirety is prescriptive but not the term "innocent." The term innocent is descriptive. Prescriptive means that something should or ought to be the case. Descriptive means describing the way the thing is.

secularmerlin
secularmerlin's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 7,093
3
3
3
secularmerlin's avatar
secularmerlin
3
3
3
-->
@Fallaneze
The statement in its entirety is prescriptive
Then to pretend otherwise is naked hair splitting and muddying the waters. The idea that you are communicating is prescriptive.

secularmerlin
secularmerlin's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 7,093
3
3
3
secularmerlin's avatar
secularmerlin
3
3
3
-->
@Fallaneze
The term innocent is descriptive. 

The term innocent is subjective. 
Reece101
Reece101's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 1,893
3
2
2
Reece101's avatar
Reece101
3
2
2
Does anyone have an issue of how I define objective and subjective morality? 
My post is just below OP #2.

secularmerlin
secularmerlin's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 7,093
3
3
3
secularmerlin's avatar
secularmerlin
3
3
3
-->
@Reece101
I do. There is no number of people who hold a subjective opinion that will transform a subjective opinion into an objective fact.
Reece101
Reece101's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 1,893
3
2
2
Reece101's avatar
Reece101
3
2
2
-->
@secularmerlin
I would consider “fact” irrelevant when it comes to subjective/objective morality. Unless your talking about it with the emphasis on emotion. It only takes two people to have a common idea.

secularmerlin
secularmerlin's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 7,093
3
3
3
secularmerlin's avatar
secularmerlin
3
3
3
-->
@Reece101
Objective =/= agreed upon. Objective = irrespective of opinion.

It does not matter how many people hold the same opinion. It is still an opinion and opinions are subjective by definition 
Reece101
Reece101's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 1,893
3
2
2
Reece101's avatar
Reece101
3
2
2
-->
@secularmerlin
Agreed upon =/= common idea. 
Common ideas aren’t necessarily interpersonal.

Common idea = an idea irrespective of any one individual.

For example:
Haphazardly killing other humans is considered bad in all cultures. 

It’s a common idea, it’s an objective idea. 
There are various facts to consider.

Just remember, we are dealing with morality here.
It’s a biological/social phenomenon.

secularmerlin
secularmerlin's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 7,093
3
3
3
secularmerlin's avatar
secularmerlin
3
3
3
-->
@Reece101
Killing humans is sometimes considered justified in all cultures. What is disagreed upon is when the killing of humans is justified. This is because it is subjective.

Reece101
Reece101's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 1,893
3
2
2
Reece101's avatar
Reece101
3
2
2
H͟a͟p͟h͟a͟z͟a͟r͟d͟l͟y͟ killing other humans is considered bad in all cultures.

I pick my words carefully. 

That being said, I agree.
Reece101
Reece101's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 1,893
3
2
2
Reece101's avatar
Reece101
3
2
2
-->
@secularmerlin
What is disagreed upon is when the killing of humans is justified. This is because it is subjective.
Unless there’s a common idea.
secularmerlin
secularmerlin's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 7,093
3
3
3
secularmerlin's avatar
secularmerlin
3
3
3
-->
@Reece101
What constitutes haphazardly is entirely subjective.  I chose my words carefully. That an idea is common or that you and I have it in common does not make it objective. 

There is no number people who have a belief, opinion or idea that will tip the scales from subjective to objective. The number of people who agree is entirely uconnected with objectivity. 

Any number of people are able to hold the same subjective opinions and standards.

secularmerlin
secularmerlin's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 7,093
3
3
3
secularmerlin's avatar
secularmerlin
3
3
3
-->
@Reece101
Let me give you an example.

The sun is hot.

This may seem like an objective fact and indeed it is far hotter than you or I could survive, but as stars go the sun is very much average. Other stellar bodies make the sun seem down right cool.

The objective fact is that the heat output of the sun would kill us. The subjective opinion is that the sun is hot.

Reece101
Reece101's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 1,893
3
2
2
Reece101's avatar
Reece101
3
2
2
-->
@secularmerlin
What constitutes haphazardly is entirely subjective.
Okay, be honest. If we were just casually talking and I said “haphazardly killing people is bad.” You’d be like “ummm yeah, of course. WTF!”, right? Or even if you were internally talking to yourself. That’s what I mean when I say a common Idea. It doesn’t have to be an exact thought process. It’s the same notion as a “common ancestor” if you know what I mean.

That an idea is common or that you and I have it in common does not make it objective. 
I’ve given you the definition of what a common idea is. Can you care to explain?

There is no number people who have a belief, opinion or idea that will tip the scales from subjective to objective. The number of people who agree is entirely uconnected with objectivity.
So what you are saying is objectivity is irrespective of observation? Seems to me you’re putting objectivity on a pedestal, making it worthless.


What you call “objectivity” is what I call “absolute”, which we’re ignorant about.

Any number of people are able to hold the same subjective opinions and standards.
They would be both subjective and objective. Opinions are multifaceted. Some aspects of a reasonable opinion are common, and some aspects aren’t.

Let me give you an example.

The sun is hot.

This may seem like an objective fact and indeed it is far hotter than you or I could survive, but as stars go the sun is very much average. Other stellar bodies make the sun seem down right cool.

The objective fact is that the heat output of the sun would kill us. The subjective opinion is that the sun is hot.
What if you said the sun is hot, relative to humans. 

All you need to do is understand context. Do you understand?

It’s like I’m saying our ancestors are common and you’re saying they’re not. 
secularmerlin
secularmerlin's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 7,093
3
3
3
secularmerlin's avatar
secularmerlin
3
3
3
-->
@Reece101
Okay, be honest. If we were just casually talking and I said “haphazardly killing people is bad.” You’d be like “ummm yeah, of course. WTF!”, right? Or even if you were internally talking to yourself. That’s what I mean when I say a common Idea. It doesn’t have to be an exact thought process. It’s the same notion as a “common ancestor” if you know what I mean.
We seem to be talking past each other. Do you not understand that even if the entire world shares a subjective opinion or feeling it does not become objective?

If not what about the concept specifically is eluding you?

Common idea = an idea irrespective of any one individual.
This is not the definition of objective. Objective is irrespective of opinion. This goes further than simply irrespective of the individual. Irrespective of the individual in and of itself does not necessarily mean objective. It only necessitates concencus and a consensus opinion is still an opinion.
So what you are saying is objectivity is irrespective of observation? Seems to me you’re putting objectivity on a pedestal, making it worthless.
People do love to put words in my mouth. You are not talking about an observation. An observation would be a human was killed. This is objectively true or false. The human was either killed or not. The human was killed haphazardly is an opinion about the observation and an opinion others might disagree with depending on the circumstances surrounding the incident.
They would be both subjective and objective. Opinions are multifaceted. Some aspects of a reasonable opinion are common, and some aspects aren’t.
Objective and subjective are mutually exclusive concepts. It is dichotomous.

If objective then not subjective.
What if you said the sun is hot, relative to humans
Do you understand why the above is an objective fact but if the last part is removed it becomes subjective? 

Objective: the sun is hot relative to humans.

Subjective: the dun is hot.

Objective: the human was killed

Subjective: the human was killed haphazardly.
Reece101
Reece101's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 1,893
3
2
2
Reece101's avatar
Reece101
3
2
2
-->
@secularmerlin
*Sigh*

You win.

secularmerlin
secularmerlin's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 7,093
3
3
3
secularmerlin's avatar
secularmerlin
3
3
3
-->
@Reece101
I do not wish to win I wish to be understood. 
Reece101
Reece101's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 1,893
3
2
2
Reece101's avatar
Reece101
3
2
2
-->
@secularmerlin
You said:

There is no number people who have a belief, opinion or idea that will tip the scales from subjective to objective. The number of people who agree is entirely uconnected with objectivity.
Of course I’ve already told you “common ideas aren’t necessarily interpersonal.”
I previously gave you the benefit of the doubt that you understood what I meant.

So I asked “so what you are saying is objectivity is irrespective of observation?”

What is objectivity other than belief, opinion or idea? All knowledge is predicated on observation, correct?



secularmerlin
secularmerlin's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 7,093
3
3
3
secularmerlin's avatar
secularmerlin
3
3
3
-->
@Reece101
Do you mean is objective irrespective of our experiential awareness? Quite possibly, our individual perception and memories have been shown to be unreliable and subject to bias. That is why peer reviewed science is so important. We may actually be incapable of objectivity but science is our best attempt.
Reece101
Reece101's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 1,893
3
2
2
Reece101's avatar
Reece101
3
2
2
-->
@secularmerlin
Do you mean is objective irrespective of our experiential awareness?
Precisely.

Quite possibly, our individual perception and memories have been shown to be unreliable and subject to bias. That is why peer reviewed science is so important. We may actually be incapable of objectivity but science is our best attempt.
Okay, it’s good we’ve narrowed our discussion down to its core. 

Let’s come back to morality and its possible connections to objectivity.
Do you think fundamentals of morality are founded in genetics which manifest as common ideas?




secularmerlin
secularmerlin's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 7,093
3
3
3
secularmerlin's avatar
secularmerlin
3
3
3
-->
@Reece101
I think there is a genetic component and also that it is a learned behavior. The ideas reached are not necessarily universal however.

You keep bringing up haphazard killing which I take to mean unjustified. So you have put a modifier on killing. This is tacit admission that some killing is justified. Killing humans is not therefore in your opinion immoral only killing them under certain circumstances. What constitutes a justifiable killing is not going to be the same for everyone. That is subjective by definition. 
Athias
Athias's avatar
Debates: 20
Posts: 3,192
3
3
9
Athias's avatar
Athias
3
3
9
Morality's being objective depends on its premise; and there's only one objective premise: self-interest. We can then rationalize and argue that which best maximizes self-interest, and minimize infractions or violations of it. Hence, individualism is objective morality because it embodies the objective subjectivity.
secularmerlin
secularmerlin's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 7,093
3
3
3
secularmerlin's avatar
secularmerlin
3
3
3
-->
@Athias
Firstly subjective and objective are dichotomous.  If one then not the other. Also natural selection can predict amd explain at least these four kinds of traits/behaviors.

Those that promote species interest (sometimes manifesting as altruism/empathy).

Those that promote self interest as individual survival is necessary for a viable species.

Those that are incidental but not detrimental to species or individual survival.

Those which once promoted species or individual survival but which no longer serve their purpose in an organism's current environment. 
secularmerlin
secularmerlin's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 7,093
3
3
3
secularmerlin's avatar
secularmerlin
3
3
3
-->
@Athias
Morality would appear to be a product of the first kind of behavior. 
Reece101
Reece101's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 1,893
3
2
2
Reece101's avatar
Reece101
3
2
2
-->
@secularmerlin
I think there is a genetic component and also that it is a learned behavior. The ideas reached are not necessarily universal however.
Yes they are. They don’t have to be exact thoughts to be “universal”. And like I’ve said before, it only takes two people to have a common (objective) idea.

You keep bringing up haphazard killing which I take to mean unjustified. So you have put a modifier on killing. This is tacit admission that some killing is justified. Killing humans is not therefore in your opinion immoral only killing them under certain circumstances. What constitutes a justifiable killing is not going to be the same for everyone. That is subjective by definition. 
No I don’t keep bringing “haphazard killing” up. You are. 

What constitutes a justifiable killing doesn’t have to be the exact same for everyone. Especially When you’re looking at countless possibilities.
But there are some like the killing of family, friends, community that are “universally” immoral. Also you need to consider that a person can know killing people is wrong but still does it anyway for financial gain or what have you. Justifiability might not be a great word to use when it comes to morality.

secularmerlin
secularmerlin's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 7,093
3
3
3
secularmerlin's avatar
secularmerlin
3
3
3
-->
@Reece101
Common does not equal objective. Us sharing an idea does not make it objective. It must be objective despite us outside of us irrespective of us. We are not a part of the equation at all. I'm not sure how else to put this. What you are talking about, common ideas, that is not objectivity it is agreement. 
crossed
crossed's avatar
Debates: 62
Posts: 516
2
2
6
crossed's avatar
crossed
2
2
6
Morals are biological.
Giving to other can make you live longer



The creator would have to have knowledge of good and bad when creating life.The creator would have to have Morals and have knowledge of good and evil


Pectin is the key ingredient that encourages growth of good bacteria and reduces "bad" bacteria

Sovereign Silver ONLY kills the BAD bacteria and strengthens the good!



immune system help good germs And helps them fight bad germs.How is the creator intelligent and have knowledge of good and evil




The creator has to be intelligent because he has knowledge of good and evil


7 but you must not eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil; for in the day that you eat of it, you will surely die.


This is proof the creator is an intelligent being because he has knowledge.Only an intelligent being can have knowledge



Reece101
Reece101's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 1,893
3
2
2
Reece101's avatar
Reece101
3
2
2
-->
@secularmerlin
Common does not equal objective. Us sharing an idea does not make it objective. It must be objective despite us outside of us irrespective of us. We are not a part of the equation at all. I'm not sure how else to put this. What you are talking about, common ideas, that is not objectivity it is agreement.
Again you’ve put objectivity on a pedestal, making it worthless to human experience. 

How many times do I have to say it- a common idea isn’t necessarily interpersonal if that that’s what you mean by agreement. 
A foundation of a common idea can be found in beneficial evolutionary adaptations that we all share.
secularmerlin
secularmerlin's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 7,093
3
3
3
secularmerlin's avatar
secularmerlin
3
3
3
-->
@Reece101
Objectivity has nothing to do with human experience and it may in fact be completely beyond us.
Reece101
Reece101's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 1,893
3
2
2
Reece101's avatar
Reece101
3
2
2
-->
@secularmerlin
The fact that objectivity is a concept at all has everything to do with human experience.