You waste my time by being a useless troll.

That's what you are being.

Thank you @InternetStranger for demonstrating to us what many moral philosophers call, "being a dick".

They differ to some degree. I'm not aware of anyone who likes to be sick all the time for instance however.

huh? This is a non-sequitur. Why must people agree en masse for morality to be objective? — darthbarracuda

Because beyond the self, reality becomes objective only when people agree 'en-masse'.

If you see an elephant and no one else can see it, the objective reality of the elephant becomes increasingly less likely.

M

If you see an elephant and no one else can see it, the objective reality of the elephant becomes increasingly less likely. — Marcus de Brun

What are your thoughts, then, on moral progress? Civil rights advocacy?

What we see as morally correct today often was a minority view in the past and these appeals to the majority population were used to silence them.

Why is it ambiguous by extending to the brain? I'm not sure what you mean with your example. Would hating every aspect of society mean that health is bad?

Of course it's limited to health. There are many kinds of progress that happen.

It's true there is not a uniform agreement. At the same time however, there do seem some things which can be agreed upon, for instance being in constant pain is bad.

They differ to some degree. I'm not aware of anyone who likes to be sick all the time for instance however. — mcc1789

Smokers
Alcoholics
Drug users
Chronics
Criminals
Depressives
Sucidal

All or most embrace sickness and death before health.

I'm drinking a Jameson as I type!

M

So were Galileo or Copernicus wrong when they said heliocentrism was true because most astronomers didn't agree at the time?

They don't actually want bad health (and in moderation not all of these things cause it). However, addiction gets in the way.

What are your thoughts, then, on moral progress? Civil rights advocacy? — darthbarracuda

I see no progress in any of these areas through the course of human history. I see only the reality that many societies have grown wealthy and can afford these nice delusions. Take away the wealth and the horror returns.

The 'moral progress' of the white westerner comes at the cost of continued slavery, in the 'third world' and the moral ugliness of humanity is lately transferred onto the other species with whom we share the earth.

'Moral progress' my arse, humanity is as ugly as he has ever been, perhaps more so when one considers what morals might be achieved at the cost of his guns.

Is the democratically elected leader of the free world a reflection of this 'moral progress'?

When the Europeans entered South America they used the Bible to spread their syphilis. White people equally love this notion of 'moral progress' to justify the ongoing plague of capital and consumption.

M

So were Galileo or Copernicus wrong when they said heliocentrism was true because most astronomers didn't agree at the time? — mcc1789

Yes they were completely and utterly wrong.... until other people started to believe they were right.

M

That's absurd. Are you saying until then the earth really was the center of the solar system? Come on.

That's absurd. Are you saying until then the earth really was the center of the solar system? — mcc1789

Yes the earth was the center of the solar system until people believed otherwise. What would you have believed back then?

Many of the beliefs we hold dear today will equally be laughed at, as soon as people begin to think otherwise. Where is the absurdity?

M

It was believed, but wasn't true. There is a difference.

Quite probably. However my point is certain facts exist independent of opinion. Do you disagree?

The 'moral progress' of the white westerner comes at the cost of continued slavery, in the 'third world' and the moral ugliness of humanity is lately transferred onto the other species with whom we share the earth. — Marcus de Brun

This has a moral seriousness to it. You degrade the moral progress of the West because it comes at a great cost, which is a moral claim.

'Moral progress' my arse, humanity is as ugly as he has ever been, perhaps more so when one considers what morals might be achieved at the cost of his guns. — Marcus de Brun

...or at least, is an aesthetic claim. Not that I necessarily disagree, since I think morality is probably aesthetic.

What is good and what is bad, what is right and what is wrong, ultimately intersects at the human being and what she ought to do. When she does her duty, she is praised for her character. When she fails to do her duty, she is condemned for being a bad person.

Ethics (or morality, philosophers use the terms interchangeably) differs from aesthetics only insofar as it prescribes behavior in accordance to an aesthetic ideal. Goodness, righteousness, these are aesthetic dimensions of the highest degree.

However my point is certain facts exist independent of opinion. Do you disagree? — mcc1789

No fact is independent of at least one opinion.

M

Which opinion is that?

Complete bollox.

Adult Human beings are without question the ugliest and most immoral 'things' on this planet. They represent the single greatest threat to the continued existence of life upon this planet, they have destroyed most of the other species living on this planet, and their cruelty to one another is exemplary throughout the animal kingdom. Human cruelty is so refined as to presently have a local cause and a transcontinental effect.

Unlike every other life form on this planet human beings have a word to describe themselves when they are not behaving normally, that word is 'morality'.

Moral progress? Delusional in the extreme.

M

Which opinion is that? — mcc1789

Your own.

M

You are correct in that humans are the most murderous and destructive species on the planet.

But it is a non-sequitur to assert that because of this, moral progress cannot occur. I agree that we should not rest on our laurels. But we can and must make a distinction between the past and the present. And we have made progress, even if it doesn't justify the carnage that we have and continue to inflict on ourselves, other species and the planet at large.

That the sun will rise and set is independent of my opinion. Whether or not I happen to agree with it, this will happen nonetheless. That is simply one example.

That the sun will rise and set is independent of my opinion. Whether or not I happen to agree with it, this will happen nonetheless. That is simply one example. — mcc1789

A guess.

One that I agree with.. but ultimately nothing more than a Guess.

M

A guess? If you mean it's not absolutely certain, perhaps so. Certain as anything gets though. However even if I have my guess wrong, it will or won't happen no matter what anyone thinks of the matter.

But we can and must make a distinction between the past and the present. And we have made progress, even if it doesn't justify the carnage that we have and continue to inflict on ourselves, other species and the planet at large. — darthbarracuda

Would all make a nice religious eulogy.

I am not religious and must contend with the real for as long as I am here.

M

Well, regardless, you're still making moral claims here, and extremely passionate ones at that. Nobody ever said a moral evaluation of mankind has to paint it in a good light.

Nope
What will have happened, will be what everyone at the time thinks has happened. Reality is a function of thought.

M

Why do you think that? How does this explain things happening people profoundly dislike, if it's just thought?

Ouch!