. And I don’t think there are many moral realists on the forum either — khaled
Then there are moral relativists who define what’s “right” or “wrong” relative to something or other (the individual, the society, etc). Something can be wrong now and right later. This seems to be what applies to the majority of posters here from what I’ve seen. — khaled
Morality is a sense, like a sense of humour. Expression of this sense is opinion, but that doesn't mean morality is just glorified opinion. If you hear and joke and you laugh; you didn't decide to laugh. It's not merely your opinion that it's funny. It's the same with the moral sense. If you see something that's wrong, you don't decide that it's wrong. You feel it. You give expression to that feeling it becomes an opinion - but the feeling that something is wrong, isn't you forming an opinion. — counterpunch
Is having children a benign or innocent act, or is it an unfair imposition as the ANs would have it? This is not a question of opinion. Everybody, including ANs would say there is nothing wrong with doing benign or innocent acts. And everybody would say that unfair impositions are wrong. The question then is, which is happening here? — khaled
I agree, that people's moral intuitions are remarkably similar. — counterpunch
I’d like to agree with this, but I’m not so sure. For example, right now about half of the US sees things like discriminating against particular groups of people as tolerable, if not outright justified. This is illustrated in the amount of people who voted for Trump in the recent election, despite his obvious immoral (at least according to the other half of Americans) treatment of women, Muslims, immigrants, blacks, etc. Treating others with respect and decency regardless of religion, race, ethnicity, gender, etc. does not seem to be an overwhelmingly common moral intuition. — Pinprick
half of the US sees things like discriminating against particular groups of people as tolerable, if not outright justified. — Pinprick
I didn’t even say which side I agreed with. — Pinprick
It’s just a good example of how large groups of people can seemingly have very different moral intuitions. — Pinprick
it shows how easily our moral intuitions can be influenced by things like tribalism, or herd mentality in general. — Pinprick
How do you know what half the people in the US think? — counterpunch
No, it's not - because you cannot possibly know why people voted the way they did. — counterpunch
You are imposing your moral judgement on their choice. — counterpunch
You are a clear demonstration of tribalism and herd mentality; if that's what you were seeking to show, job done! — counterpunch
I take that to mean we don't go around killing, robbing and raping each other. — counterpunch
All are allowed in certain context which vary depending on who you talk to. — Isaac
Either we do not share any common moral intuitions, or we do, but they are easily swamped by other more important concerns. Either way, appeal to such commonalities is rendered pointless in resolving moral dilemmas. — Isaac
War is a situation in which moral norms have broken down. All property is theft is Proudhon; an anarchist - so again, a rejection of social norms. — counterpunch
The basic laws of the land are much the same the world over. — counterpunch
morality is fundamentally a sense. — counterpunch
That's wrong, because morality is a sense, and while there is a significant commonality of moral intuition, we do have different values based, one presumes on the facts we were exposed to - within our limited apprehensions, and the values we were encouraged to by early experiences, when the human organism is, by dint of evolution, trusting of authority figures. — counterpunch
Now you're just begging the question. "Killing is considered morally wrong because when we do sanction killing we're not being moral... because killing is considered morally wrong", "Theft is considered morally wrong because the people who don't consider it that way are themselves morally wrong because they don't consider theft morally wrong". — Isaac
Where do you get this stuff from? — Isaac
@BartricksI believe it's raining. You believe it is sunny. Therefore whether it is raining or sunny is just a matter of opinion.
No, your approach is all wrong here. — Cartesian trigger-puppets
If I believe it's raining and you believe it's sunny, it is, therefore, true that you hold a belief that it is sunny and also true that I hold a belief that it is raining. — Cartesian trigger-puppets
It is not an objective opinion, but rather a subjective one. — Cartesian trigger-puppets
If I say a "x is immoral", I am making a statement analogous to saying "vanilla is my favorite flavor." Notice that the analogous statement is not an objective one, such as "vanilla is the best flavor" but rather as a subjective one "to me, vanilla is the best flavor." It is the same with moral statements or other normative statements. If I make the statement "stealing is wrong" what I actually mean to say is "to me, stealing is wrong." — Cartesian trigger-puppets
@BartricksBut some beliefs are about objective matters - such as the belief that it is raining - and some beliefs are about subjective matters - such as my belief that I am believing something, or my belief that Jane is enjoying the donut.
@BartricksIf you believe stealing is wrong, what exactly do you believe about stealing? That is, provide a translation for that word 'wrong'.
Political allegiances are complex. They are not a simple matter that can be boiled down to some obvious exercise of moral intuition, so it's not a good example. — counterpunch
The moral sense isn't dictatorial of human behaviour. — counterpunch
When we talk about similar moral intuitions, I take that to mean we don't go around killing, robbing and raping each other. — counterpunch
I can give you a slightly deeper reason than that. It's morally wrong because the moral sense objects to it; classifies it as wrong instinctively. — counterpunch
Where do you get this stuff from? — Isaac
Does it matter? I'm saying it. This is my philosophy. I'll gladly explain it to you, but I honestly cannot understand your interest in something you apparently have such disdain for. — counterpunch
You do know there's a difference between 'Philosophy' and 'Making shit up' don't you? — Isaac
Can’t be used as evidence for having similar moral intuitions. IOW’s just because we don’t rape, rob, or kill doesn’t mean that’s due to having similar moral intuitions. — Pinprick
Why don't we just rob, kill and rape each other? I hope it's moral intuition, and not just because we're scared to. — counterpunch
I'd like to think there's some prohibition from empathy, — counterpunch
It's remarkably similar to all peoples because the relationship of the human organism to the reality of the environment is remarkably similar for all peoples. — counterpunch
Just as all human cultures invented art, music, pottery, agriculture, architecture, jewellery - albeit in culturally specific ways, they all have a moral sense expressed in culturally specific ways; because otherwise, the human organism could not have survived. — counterpunch
Morality isn't just an opinion. Any particular expression of the moral sense is an opinion. But the moral sense predates intellectual intelligence - if chimpanzees are anything to go by, and so is a behaviourally intelligent adaptation, advantageous to the individual within the tribe, and to the tribe made up of moral individuals. — counterpunch
Ok, but then you have to allow, and account for, questions like why do we rape, rob, and kill each other in certain circumstances. The fact that we do act in this way illustrates that we may not have similar moral intuitions. — Pinprick
By the way, those moral rules that we agree on - thou shalt not kill for example — TheMadFool
Not everyone agrees on these moral rules, and therefore apply a nearly instant exception to them. "Thou shalt not kill..." is qualified by adding exceptions "...except in defense of your life, or the life of another, or..." so really, it comes down to "Thou should not kill without reason", as do most other moral rules. Make a rule, create the exception. Only if the rule is universally accepted as 'Wrong", then would it really be rule? No one would do it anyway so no one would have to confirm its wrongness. — Book273
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.