The Instigator
Christhulakhan
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
Mike_10-4
Con (against)
Winning
13 Points

Morality is relative.

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 2 votes the winner is...
Mike_10-4
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 9/16/2014 Category: Society
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 495 times Debate No: 61809
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (5)
Votes (2)

 

Christhulakhan

Pro

It is commonly argued by theists (and other like minded groups) that morality is an absolute; that there are natural laws that exist unconditionally. These are usually your run of the mill rules and laws: Don't Kill, Don't Murder, Don't Steal... And as where these are common, debatably universal, i argue that they are not absolute. Common morals are the product of social contracts- a compromise, if you will, to allow us humans to live together, and nothing more.
Mike_10-4

Con

Thank you Christhulakham (Pro) for bringing an important subject to the debating floor. I (Con) is looking forward in a learning experience in a constructive debate.

The Absolute Values of morality is Right (moral) or Wrong (immoral). The objective of morality is doing Right keeping a group alive. That is, when two or more humans form a group, the group becomes alive. The life of the group is sustained through goodwill and kindness leads to a mutual moral respect for embracing the Unalienable Rights (“Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness”) of the members within the group. Goodwill is a Conservative force that promotes order, stability, and harmony through the pursuit of group-wide positive feedback. Over time, group-wide positive feedback is the genesis of traditions, social values, beliefs, language, etc., the norms of society. These norms are tried and tested, and conservatively pass down from one generation to the next establishing its culture. A moral order guides an individual in the prudent exercise of judgment relative to those norms. The individual in a civil society strives, albeit imperfectly, to be virtuous; that is, restrained, ethical, and honorable, respecting and embracing the Unalienable Rights of others relative to those tested norms.

The objective of morality is to keep a group alive, is the evolution of traditions, social values, beliefs, language, etc., the norms of society. The empirical evidence of the diversity of language and social norms throughout history and today demonstrates the universal absolute moral thread that runs through the tapestry of humanity.

life's Unalienable Rights of “Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of positive-feedback (“Happiness” for us humans),” are part of the physical Laws of Nature, not man-made.
http://www.amazon.com...
http://www.amazon.com...

Of course morality is a man-made word that simply refers to the values of Right or Wrong. These values generate mutual positive- or negative-feedback, relative to the Unalienable Rights of another. Mutual positive-feedback, in group creation, is found throughout the spectrum of life in the beneficial formation in schools of fish, flocks of birds, packs of wolves, tribes of humans, and in addition, inter-species relationships, such as those between humans and their pets.

Morality is universal and absolute, having the objective of group formation, and maintaining the moral values of Right and Wrong supporting the binary position of life's Unalienable Rights resulting in positive- or negative-feedback respectively. Morality is an outgrowth of life's Unalienable Rights, which is an outgrowth of the Constructal Law, which is an outgrowth of the Second Law of Thermodynamics, and therefore, part of the Laws of Nature.

Since morality is part of the Laws of Nature, it “exists unconditionally” throughout the living universe in group formation.

Also, when morally working with the Laws of Nature improves the standard of living for the human family. For example, man's age-old objective of learning to fly like a bird. Historically, man attempted to achieve this objective by attaching wings to his limbs. These attempts were unsuccessful because nature's Laws of Aerodynamics decree that such a mode of flight is impossible for man. However, the Wright Brothers followed the Laws of Aerodynamics when they invented the airplane. Their invention, along with many others, showed that man can achieve amazing things when he morally follows the Laws of Nature in his pursuit of Happiness, providing positive-feedback throughout the human family.

With such understanding, the human family will have the natural tendency and the freedom to optimize the environment, working with the Laws of Nature, to improve the standard of living, and prolong human life in the pursuit of positive-feedback. Such moral positive-feedback is the fruits of technology, food production, and medicine, the stables of human existence throughout the world today. A compelling example of what happens when our Unalienable Rights are free to morally operate within the awesome machinery of nature.
Debate Round No. 1
Christhulakhan

Pro

Christhulakhan forfeited this round.
Mike_10-4

Con

Con finds it absolutely immoral when Pro starts a debate on morality and forfeits.
Debate Round No. 2
Christhulakhan

Pro

Christhulakhan forfeited this round.
Mike_10-4

Con

Con finds it absolutely immoral when Pro starts a debate on morality and forfeits.
Debate Round No. 3
5 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 5 records.
Posted by cheyennebodie 3 years ago
cheyennebodie
They are only subject to change by the by the one doing the changing. I said murder. I did not say killing.If I saw a man raping a 6 year old and had a gun, it would never be murder in anyone's eyes, except maybe the guy that was just shot and perhaps some whacked out bleeding heart liberal.There are absolutes that we can rely on for an orderly society. Disorder comes when those absolutes are compromised.
Posted by Christhulakhan 3 years ago
Christhulakhan
I'm not claiming you should have any right to go murder someone. I'm claiming that rights themselves are superficial, that they dissolve at some point. Such as with war or survival. If morals are absolute, they wouldn't be subject to change.
Posted by GoOrDin 3 years ago
GoOrDin
I argue moralities are absolute, a universal law,
where moralities venture into the unknown, the moral law has a defined parameter which regardless of ones awareness to it, is there to not be transgressed with innocence.
Posted by cheyennebodie 3 years ago
cheyennebodie
What you are saying is if I think that murder is an alright thing to do, then I should have the freedom to do it.That is nuts. Your kind of thinking is why here in America we have 50,000 laws on the books to enforce the ten commandments.
Posted by Emilirose 3 years ago
Emilirose
There is a such a thing as "objective morality", this is the stance that basic moralities (such as murder being wrong) can be proved and supported by evidence.
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by lannan13 2 years ago
lannan13
ChristhulakhanMike_10-4Tied
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 Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:06 
Reasons for voting decision: Forfeiture
Vote Placed by 1Credo 3 years ago
1Credo
ChristhulakhanMike_10-4Tied
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 
Reasons for voting decision: Forfeit