Backyard Skeptics Message Board › Morality: Where is square 1 ?

Morality: Where is square 1 ?

Cary C.
Tustin, CA
Post #: 59
1. I'm not saying I can determine objective morality(1). I'm saying that if morality(1) exists at all, it is necessarily objective. The existence of an objective fact is one thing; knowing or determining it is another. Even if an objective principle can be known objectively, particular examples of it are still determined subjectively.

2. Morality(2) is something that facilitates survival of a species, by causing its members to think they should act in accordance with it. If you don't want to call it a psychological mechanism, call it whatever you like.

2.1. Acts that harm individuals or classes of people without threatening the species as a whole are not part of morality(2); they're part of morality(1) - and that's if and only if morality(1) is objective. But even then, it is still sometimes moral(1 or 2) to harm some individuals or classes of people.

Morality(1 or 2) is necessarily defined without context, because all definitions of abstractions exist independent of context. It's examples of them that require context.

This statement:
there is no objective standard that would apply to eating the sandwich on the plane, ... but it would still be wrong to risk the life of another to do so.
is self contradictory, because "wrong" implies objectivity.
user 12371797
Los Angeles, CA
Post #: 64
John, I agree with your arguments. I don't agree that morality has anything to do with humanity's survival or happiness. I'm not happy because I'm moral. Sorry can do.
Jared P.
user 10058284
Buena Park, CA
Post #: 1
Well being may prove a bit more elusive but a better goal than happiness as a source for a moral code. Determining those things that provide the greatest well being for the collective members of a society will vary according to time and place, but I think that variation would prove a gradual thing insomuch as social groups tend to interact with neighboring groups and one generation with the previous as well as the next.
Who decides the moral code to adopt? Obviously, this creates considerable difficulty.
Who defines what constitutes well being? Same answer.
I am not aware of any society in which everyone agrees or a greed on a moral code. If they did or had, it seems unlikely that many would be or have been found guilty of violating it. Another issue of difficulty is deciding who to include and exclude as members for the collective well being. The issues of abortion, worker's rights (those not owning property), animal rights, women's rights and rights of minorities have all created changes in the moral code of our United States.
Powered by mvnForum

People in this
Meetup are also in:

Sign up

Meetup members, Log in

By clicking "Sign up" or "Sign up using Facebook", you confirm that you accept our Terms of Service & Privacy Policy