The Instigator
FallofEmpire888
Pro (for)
Losing
2 Points
The Contender
studentathletechristian8
Con (against)
Winning
68 Points

Morality does not exist

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  
Vote Here
Pro Tied Con
Who did you agree with before the debate?
Who did you agree with after the debate?
Who had better conduct?
Who had better spelling and grammar?
Who made more convincing arguments?
Who used the most reliable sources?
Reasons for your voting decision
1,000 Characters Remaining
The voting period for this debate does not end.
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 11/12/2009 Category: Religion
Updated: 4 years ago Status: Voting Period
Viewed: 2,514 times Debate No: 10097
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (18)
Votes (13)

 

FallofEmpire888

Pro

Morality does not actually exist it is simply peoples opinions and biological instincts. We can not truly say then that a person is immoral even murderers. Morality is subjective not objective. There is no evidence that one must not murder another purpose. I am not claiming that we shouldn't follow moral or ethical codes but we must remember that it is a subjective phenomena brought about by instinct and culture.
studentathletechristian8

Con

I thank my opponent for the debate.

I negate the resolution, "Morality does not exist."

I propose the following definitions:

morality- conformity to the rules of right conduct; moral or virtuous conduct. [1]

exist- to have being in a specified place or under certain conditions; be found; occur. [2]

I contend that morality does exist. Morality exists when there are displayed instances of right, moral conduct. If one was to find others and attempt to convert them into Christianity, that would be an outward display of right conduct, or morality. Clearly, in that situation, morality is found, or exists. Therefore, the resolution is negated, as I have proved that morality does exist.

Although morality may be subjective, that does not mean it does not exist. Although people have different perceptions of morality, that simply means that people interpret moral conduct in various manners. Morality still exists, although it is not consistent in the minds of a number of people.

[1] http://dictionary.reference.com...

[2] http://dictionary.reference.com...
Debate Round No. 1
FallofEmpire888

Pro

morality- conformity to the rules of right conduct; moral or virtuous conduct. [1]

One can certainly practice rules of conduct but this does not mean that one ought follow the rules of conduct. A person could say that beating children is "moral" and another could say it is immoral. What I define as "Morality" isn't merely the conformity to rules of conduct, but the belief that one ought follow those beliefs or codes of conduct. Certainly anyone can claim that that something is moral or immoral but this in itself does not make or justify moral propositions. When a shark kills a seal in the wild we don't say whether that was "moral" or "immoral", we understand that the seal nor the shark understand there action. We recognize that what we claim as morality is subjective and that we can not truly say whether the shark was justified in killing the seal.

Christianity claims that we ought to follow "god" but this statement alone does not justify it. There is no evidence that this is so. An advance alien civilization could look at us humans and consider are wars and feuds over wealth and power as "immoral", but this moral claim like all other ones have the same problem of justifying there proposition.
studentathletechristian8

Con

My opponent has not effectively refuted my argumentation.

My opponent quotes:
"We recognize that what we claim as morality is subjective..."
My opponent states that humans can reference morality as being subjective. The mere act of noting morality as subjective implies that morality exists, for things in existence are labeled as subjective or objective. The resolution is negated.

Although there are many preferences of morality, there is no doubt that it exists. It does not matter if different people have different feelings of morality. My opponent has already conceded that morality is subjective, and has thus recognized morality being existent. I urge a Con vote. Thank you.
Debate Round No. 2
FallofEmpire888

Pro

I now recognize that my debate statement "morality does not exist" is incorrect. I should have named it "Objective Morality does not exist" I was trying to debate that and not realizing what my statement debate statement actually meant. I urge the viewers of this debate to vote for con as he has adequately refuted my claim that "Morality does not exist".

I would like to thank studentathletechristian8 for the debate, I intend to do more debates on this site with like minded people.
studentathletechristian8

Con

I thank my opponent for his response.

As my opponent has stated, I have successfully negated the resolution.

"I urge the viewers of this debate to vote for con as he has adequately refuted my claim that 'Morality does not exist'."

I thank my opponent and the readers. Best of luck in future debates!
Debate Round No. 3
18 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by FallofEmpire888 4 years ago
FallofEmpire888
Correct TheSkeptic summarized it well.
Posted by TheSkeptic 4 years ago
TheSkeptic
If PRO were to show that morality is fundamentally subjective, then he could've done something. However, his failure to do that and to word the resolution to mean "moral facts do not exist" is probably what led to his loss.
Posted by RoyLatham 4 years ago
RoyLatham
Pro attempted to exclude instinct as a source of morality, that's a fundamental error. Instinct is objectively defined for the species, and therefore morality derived from instinct is objectively defined for our species. For example, the survival instinct leads to the morality of self-defense. Instincts can conflict, as with duties to self, family, and community, so there are moral questions that are difficult or perhaps impossible to resolve. However, there being difficult cases does not mean that all morality is arbitrary or subjective.
Posted by dogparktom 4 years ago
dogparktom
Morality, or norms of human conduct, exists in the sense that it is a BEING of REASON.
Posted by MTGandP 4 years ago
MTGandP
Pro has confused "subjective" with "does not exist".
Posted by TheSkeptic 4 years ago
TheSkeptic
Meh, weak arguments on both sides.
Posted by Maikuru 4 years ago
Maikuru
How many generations has it been since the bulk of humanity has had to depend primarily on its instincts to survive? Whatever natural reactions relating to the animal kingdom we still exhibit are likely so hard-wired that we won't lose sight of them until they are no longer environmentally or socially useful.
Posted by studentathletechristian8 4 years ago
studentathletechristian8
However, instinct is distinctive to natural processes. The human race is becoming less involved with the natural cycles and bountiness of the Earth, and thus is losing instinct in consequent generations. In several years, the statement could serve true.
Posted by Maikuru 4 years ago
Maikuru
Is that a common expression? It's new to me. Anyway, I'd disagree. Even if we assume instinct is their default behavior across all circumstances, I'd imagine their natural reactions would become honed over time to accommodate adult situations.
Posted by studentathletechristian8 4 years ago
studentathletechristian8
A child of instict becomes an adult of incompetence. Agree or disagree?
13 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Vote Placed by XimenBao 4 years ago
XimenBao
FallofEmpire888studentathletechristian8Tied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 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 Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:05 
Vote Placed by lelanatty 4 years ago
lelanatty
FallofEmpire888studentathletechristian8Tied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:06 
Vote Placed by ac1125 4 years ago
ac1125
FallofEmpire888studentathletechristian8Tied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Vote Placed by philosphical 4 years ago
philosphical
FallofEmpire888studentathletechristian8Tied
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 Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:04 
Vote Placed by RoyLatham 4 years ago
RoyLatham
FallofEmpire888studentathletechristian8Tied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 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:03 
Vote Placed by Apologician 4 years ago
Apologician
FallofEmpire888studentathletechristian8Tied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Vote Placed by Nails 4 years ago
Nails
FallofEmpire888studentathletechristian8Tied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Vote Placed by dogparktom 4 years ago
dogparktom
FallofEmpire888studentathletechristian8Tied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Vote Placed by KRFournier 4 years ago
KRFournier
FallofEmpire888studentathletechristian8Tied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 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:13 
Vote Placed by MrHardRock 4 years ago
MrHardRock
FallofEmpire888studentathletechristian8Tied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:15