it's pretty easily to prove that false — Darkneos
we made up morality (among other things). — Darkneos
This would only argue that we have common intuitions about morality. Is that the same thing as having an objective morality?
And what of the cases where someone has intuitions that don’t match the majority? I think all of us have a few of those. What do we do about them? — khaled
big hint that there are objective moral truths that our gut-feelings zero in on, no? — TheMadFool
You maybe right but then how does one distinguish intuitions from knowledge? — TheMadFool
Sure I enjoy peace and safety but I wouldn't really call such things "good" in any objective sense any more than I would label murder "bad". — Darkneos
If, as I argue, harm isn't merely subjective, and if, furthermore, moral good isn't merely a matter of opinion, show me what I'm missing or where my thinking goes wrong (re: posts linked).It's just hard to take seriously anyone arguing for objective morality when it's pretty easily to prove that false, considering we made up morality (among other things). — Darkneos
It really depends on what you mean by objective. If objective just means everyone agrees on it, then yes your statement above would apply (that there is an objective morality).
However if you want to divorce "objective" from "inter-subjective" (as in everyone agrees on it) then your statement doesn't apply. We would just have a hint that there is an "inter-subjective" morality but no reason to think it matches whatever the "objective" morality is. Now, having divorced them, I have no clue how you would ascertain what the "objective" morality is but that's a problem for moral realists. — khaled
that all of us see eye to eye on the value of that moral principle can't be a coincidence. — TheMadFool
It sounds to me that arguments about what constitutes "right" and "wrong" are mere opinions — Darkneos
considering we made up morality — Darkneos
First, which definition? If everyone agrees that something is moral does that make it objective? Or is it a bit more than just agreement?
Is it possible for everyone to simultaneously think that something is wrong and it be right anyways and vice versa? If so, then what is the method you use for determining what is moral? — khaled
I'll give you an empirical example to get my point across. If 1 person sees a boat on the horizon, you would be more doubtful than if 10 people had made the same claim. In essence, the rule of thumb for objectivity seems to be more the merrier. Thus my belief that the overlap in moral codes among various culitures and religion points to some objective moral facts that people seem to have intuited. — TheMadFool
To say moral convergence could be intersubjective would mean we already know that morality is subjective. Begging the question situation, no? — TheMadFool
Is it possible for everyone to simultaneously think that something is wrong and it be right anyways and vice versa? If so, then what is the method you use for determining what is moral? — khaled
Something can be intersubjective and also objective — khaled
Then why are we arguing. We're on the same side. — TheMadFool
No because I think morality is ONLY intersubjective. It is only based on agreement. It is not "out in the world" like a rock is. It's not written in stone (metaphorically) somewhere. Do you also think so? — khaled
Then you're misusing the term "intersubjective". — TheMadFool
How so? I find that unlikely since I'm the one that introduced it — khaled
which is wrong because you, yourself said "...Something can be intersubjective and also objective..." — TheMadFool
Something CAN be intersubjective and also objective.
Not in this case.
I did not say "whatever is intersubjective is objective". — khaled
So... we done or are we gonna go back to argue? — khaled
By objective I denote subjectivity [perspective, consensus (intersubjective), language, gauge]–invariance e.g. arithmetic, gravity, boiling point of water, species functional defects of homo sapien sapiens, etc. — 180 Proof
It's just hard to take seriously anyone arguing for objective morality when it's pretty easily to prove that false, considering we made up morality (among other things). — Darkneos
Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.