The Instigator
Saberen
Con (against)
Winning
6 Points
The Contender
ViceRegent
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points

Comprehensible Objective Morality

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  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 3 votes the winner is...
Saberen
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 1/28/2016 Category: Philosophy
Updated: 1 year ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 483 times Debate No: 85727
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (3)
Votes (3)

 

Saberen

Con

I would argue against the notion of comprehensible objective morality. As humans, there are simply things we have the inability to understand. This is one of them.

Morality: principles concerning the distinction between right and wrong or good and bad behavior.
ViceRegent

Pro

I am not sure how your lack of understanding (or is it acceptance), means I cannot understand?
Debate Round No. 1
Saberen

Con

When i was ignorant i would say objective morality does not exist. But that proposition destroys itself. If there is no such thing as objectivity then it is objective that objectivity does not exist Meaning objectivity does exist. I am arguing for subjective morality. The development of morality deriving itself from the creation of axioms. Any claim of knowing objective morality is ignorance.
ViceRegent

Pro

You said that already. I am awaiting proof.
Debate Round No. 2
Saberen

Con

For what? I am claiming it's unobtainable, and in our scope of knowledge is absent and non-existent. You choosing the side of pro is you claiming objective morality is obtainable and comprehensible. It is for you to state an argument for notion.
ViceRegent

Pro

I want you proof objective morality does not exist. You made the claim, the burden of proof is on you.
Debate Round No. 3
3 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Posted by Reformist 1 year ago
Reformist
Hey saberen can you vote?

http://www.debate.org...

Ty
Posted by canis 1 year ago
canis
Good and bad are subjective kvalities.
Posted by vi_spex 1 year ago
vi_spex
well you could just deny that you understand it even if i explain it to you easily
3 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Vote Placed by Bolas 1 year ago
Bolas
SaberenViceRegentTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:--Vote Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:00 
Reasons for voting decision: Con wins with Pro's lack of good conduct. 1 point allocated to Con.
Vote Placed by famousdebater 1 year ago
famousdebater
SaberenViceRegentTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro falsely declares that Con has the burden of proof in the final round leaving him no chance to respond. This is not true. Since Pro is affirming this means that he agrees with the resolution and if he agrees with the resolution he needs to prove the resolution to be true and since all Pro did was question Con's evidence he ended up providing no evidence in support of his case. Whilst Con's case wasn't as strong as it could have been it provided a sole argument that morality is beyond our understanding and since this was left unrefuted Con wins since Pro was unable to meet his burden of proof or refute Con's sole argument.
Vote Placed by Hayd 1 year ago
Hayd
SaberenViceRegentTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Reasons for voting decision: Con argues that objective morality is beyond human understanding and the proposition that morality is objective is contradictory, and thus morality is subjective. Pro makes no arguments for objective morality and only says that the argument has no proof. This is false, as Con showed it was contradictory, thus Pro's refutations all failed and Con wins.