The Instigator
Sidex
Pro (for)
The Contender
GrimlyF
Con (against)

Can Morality be Objectified?

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Challenge Expired or Declined
GrimlyF either declined this challenge, or never responded to it. If you are Sidex, login to see your options.
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 11/26/2016 Category: Philosophy
Updated: 2 weeks ago Status: Challenge Declined
Viewed: 53 times Debate No: 97355
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (4)
Votes (0)

 

Sidex

Pro

I reserve the right to change my mind when given new information based on reason and logic.

The Objectivity of Morality:

What is right and wrong is what one should or should not do.
"The sole meaning of life is serving Humanity." -Leo Tolstoy
It is right to follow the sole meaning of life.
The only way to serve Humanity is maintaining its existence.
Therefore, it is right for Humanity to survive.
Thus it is wrong for Humanity to become extinct.
You should not maliciously or apathetically end humanity.

Would 5 surgeons help the survival of humanity or 50 shop assistants? With all the information we have currently, 5 surgeons are more likely to save more lives than 50 shop assistants in the foreseeable future, mostly because their job is to save lives. Thus it is right to save the 5 surgeons.
This round has not been posted yet.
Debate Round No. 1
This round has not been posted yet.
This round has not been posted yet.
Debate Round No. 2
This round has not been posted yet.
This round has not been posted yet.
Debate Round No. 3
This round has not been posted yet.
This round has not been posted yet.
Debate Round No. 4
This round has not been posted yet.
This round has not been posted yet.
Debate Round No. 5
4 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 4 records.
Posted by Sidex 1 week ago
Sidex
Yeah ok i agree. Do you have recommendations of where I can debate this theorem(not necessarily with you)? I am seriously being humble right now. I'm not asking rhetorically. It's ok not to have one, i'm just asking because I hate this site as well. I'm very constricted on this site.
Posted by GrimlyF 1 week ago
GrimlyF
You misundestand.I do not mean the debate would be a waste of time.I mean this forum Debate.Org is unsuitable for serious debate.I intend to report this site to Google because of the shambolic way it is "moderated".
Posted by Sidex 1 week ago
Sidex
I do look forward to that debate. Please understand even though my theorem can essentially obliterate ethics, ethics are still needed for lower governments as this theorem is for the biggest picture stuff. I know my literacy is trashed, but I hope you can understand what I'm saying. I do know what you mean when you say its a waste of time. I am trying to perfect this theorem, but in order to do that, I need people to try to make hypothetical or real scenarios and incorporate this to see new results. Ethics has created those scenarios. I do very much look forward when our paths cross. Also can you tell me those Sites in which this might be better debated? I haven't even touched on the dark side of all this, but I can't do it on this site.
Posted by GrimlyF 1 week ago
GrimlyF
I would have enjoyed debating this topic (it's a long time since I wrote strong negativity/weak reaction) but to be honest debate on this Site is a waste of time.I have just tied a debate on drug legalisation and the various results of douing so.This was viewed over 200 times but not a single comment nor a single vote was recorded.The apathetic nature of the participants on this Site make it not worth the effort.Our paths will surely cross elsewhere so sayonara.
This debate has 10 more rounds before the voting begins. If you want to receive email updates for this debate, click the Add to My Favorites link at the top of the page.