Objective Morality (Once More Into The Breach)

[seer]

By the nature and definition of 'good' the survival of life and species evolution is good.

2. benefit or advantage to someone or something.

Shuny I asked why it is an objective good, that is the topic of this thread. But your point makes no sense. Is it then an evil when species go extinct?

[Charles]

Shuny I asked why it is an objective good, that is the topic of this thread. But your point makes no sense. Is it then an evil when species go extinct?

• Edited by a Moderator •

Moderator Notice

You have been instructed to leave this thread. You have received an official warning. Next comes points.

***If you wish to take issue with this notice DO NOT do so in this thread.***
Contact the forum moderator or an administrator in Private Message or email instead. If you feel you must publicly complain or whine, please take it to the Psychotherapy Room unless told otherwise.

[shunyadragon]

Shuny I asked why it is an objective good, that is the topic of this thread. But your point makes no sense. Is it then an evil when species go extinct?

This is objective good, because it is verifiable by objective evidence concerning the history of the nature of good in humanity.

If you are using objective here to only refer to Divine 'good' as objective, than you are making an theological claim of belief.

[seer]

This is objective good, because it is verifiable by objective evidence concerning the history of the nature of good in humanity.

If you are using objective here to only refer to Divine 'good' as objective, than you are making an theological claim of belief.

No Shuny I'm using objective in the sense that it is mind independent, that the truth of the statement would still be valid even if no minds or mind existed (see the OP). What you are posing is subjective. If materialism is true then our survival is not an objective good, nor would our extinction be an objective evil.

[Tassman]

So what is you point? He often uses the wicked for His purposes - like you...

You know this via your hotline to God, do you?

God does lie in the Bible, in a few different ways. This is understandable given that the bible was written by men and thus grounded in human values. E.g. God causes deception: In 1 Kings 22:23 God's "lying spirits" are put into people's mouths, causing them to lie. He also tests people by deception: In Deuteronomy 8:1-2 God reveals that the 40-years in the wilderness was a test done by God to find out what was in people's hearts - whether they would still obey orders. In Deuteronomy 13:1-5 God sends some false prophets and wonder-workers as tests to see if people will follow other gods.

The motives may be OK, but a lie is a lie as as one would expect...God is just a Man writ large.

[shunyadragon]

No Shuny I'm using objective in the sense that it is mind independent, that the truth of the statement would still be valid even if no minds or mind existed (see the OP). What you are posing is subjective. If materialism is true then our survival is not an objective good, nor would our extinction be an objective evil.

Well . . . again, you are using 'objective' in the sense of the assumption of the necessity of a mind (God) independent of the human minds of our world. This a Theistic assumption, and has no basis in the objective evidence. It remains a circular argument, assuming the existence of God apriori.

[seer]

Well . . . again, you are using 'objective' in the sense of the assumption of the necessity of a mind (God) independent of the human minds of our world. This a Theistic assumption, and has no basis in the objective evidence. It remains a circular argument, assuming the existence of God apriori.

No it is not Shuny, Moral Realists believe that objective moral truths exist that are not mind dependent (subjective). That is what this thread is about. And again, our survival is not an objective moral good.

Moral Realism (or Moral Objectivism) is the meta-ethical view (see the section on Ethics) that there exist such things as moral facts and moral values, and that these are objective and independent of our perception of them or our beliefs, feelings or other attitudes towards them. Therefore, moral judgments describe moral facts, which are as certain in their own way as mathematical facts.

http://www.philosophybasics.com/bran...l_realism.html

[shunyadragon]

No it is not Shuny, Moral Realists believe that objective moral truths exist that are not mind dependent (subjective). That is what this thread is about. And again, our survival is not an objective moral good.

I am not a Moral Realist. Let them present their argument. I am not in their box.

I believe morals and ethics are mind dependent, human mine dependent, and not objective nor subjective. Morals and ethics have subjective and objective properties. They evolved so that the human species will survive as a social cooperative species.

[Tassman]

No Shuny I'm using objective in the sense that it is mind independent, that the truth of the statement would still be valid even if no minds or mind existed (see the OP).

What you are posing is subjective. If materialism is true then our survival is not an objective good, nor would our extinction be an objective evil.

[seer]

I am not a Moral Realist. Let them present their argument. I am not in their box.

Good so you disagree with them.

I believe morals and ethics are mind dependent, human mine dependent, and not objective nor subjective. Morals and ethics have subjective and objective properties. They evolved so that the human species will survive as a social cooperative species.

I have no idea what you mean by "objective properties."

[seer]

Tass, I do not believe in objective, mind independent ethics...


Right so you are making my point, our survival is not an objective good, nor would our extinction be an objective evil.

[Tassman]

Tass, I do not believe in objective, mind independent ethics...

Well yes, of course morality is mind dependent...our minds and those of other primates. You won't find much of a moral code among amoebas or rocks.

Right so you are making my point, our survival is not an objective good, nor would our extinction be an objective evil.

I've never argued that "survival" is an objective good, but it is what underlies our morality because such behaviour is beneficial to the breeding and maintenance of our species.

[seer]

Well yes, of course morality is mind dependent...our minds and those of other primates. You won't find much of a moral code among amoebas or rocks.

I've never argued that "survival" is an objective good, but it is what underlies our morality because such behaviour is beneficial to the breeding and maintenance of our species.

Tass, this thread is about the existence of mind independent moral truths. I'm glad you agree with me that they don't exist - so why are we arguing?

[shunyadragon]

I have no idea what you mean by "objective properties."

Moral and ethical properties of cultures that are consistent and predicable over time and can be correlated with the nature of being human, such as the moral against 'those that commit wrongful death'. Objectively the moral standard 'against those who commit wrongful death' has become more uniform with time as in the evolution of international law. The subjective property of the moral 'against those who commit wrongful death' is the variation in different cultures.

[seer]

Moral and ethical properties of cultures that are consistent and predicable over time and can be correlated with the nature of being human, such as the moral against 'those that commit wrongful death'. Objectively the moral standard 'against those who commit wrongful death' has become more uniform with time as in the evolution of international law. The subjective property of the moral 'against those who commit wrongful death' is the variation in different cultures.

That is like saying it is an objective fact that bears poop in the woods.