Debate Rounds (5)
Subjective-based on or influenced by personal feelings, tastes, or opinions.
Absolute-a value or principle that is regarded as universally valid or that may be viewed without relation to other things.
Math is purely objective, while morality is purely subjective. One concept cannot be both objective and subjective. If morality is objective and absolute, why does it differ between cultures? An example of this is the fundmentalist sect within the larger Muslim culture and religion. Muslim fundamentalists believe offensive murder can be justified if it is in the name of their God. As we all know, most people do not hold this belief. Most people in the west believe murder can only be justified if a person was defending oneself. And even some people won't agree with that. Some people think murder is immoral in any situation. In this case, we can think of quakers and pacifists.
If morality is objective and absolute, nature/reality will agree with it. Nature's consistency in supporting mathematics is evidence of math's objectivism. If you have 50 trees standing in a forest and then you chop 5 down, you will be left with 45 trees standing in that forest. It doesn't matter what forest in the world you visit to perform this experiment; you will always get the same answer. Whether people want to ignore the answer is another story, but nature will always leave you with 45 trees standing. This is also what makes math absolute. Reality will always give you the same result.
On the other hand, morality won't. You can have two forests in the world with 50 trees standing in them. One forest is in China, while the other is in North Korea. The Chinese can chop down 5 trees, and accept the fact that reality left them with 45 trees standing in the forest. Reality will support their claim that "45 trees are left standing in the forest". And as a result, their claim is absolute and objective. Meanwhile, the North Koreans can believe the number 45 is an immoral and evil number. They will go ahead and chop down 5 trees in their forest, but when they count, their morals require that they avoid the number 45. So, the North Koreans decide to skip the number 45 when substracting and conclude 44 is their answer. The North Koreans can believe with all of their heart that the result should be 44. But reality will not support this, nor will it recognize it. When the North Koreans claim "there are 44 trees left in the forest", they will be at odds with reality.
It doesn't matter what you think is right or wrong, if your idea of right and wrong doesn't correlate with reality/nature, it will be anything but objective and it will be proven to be invalid by the use of logic and reasoning. Morality is just a belief, and beliefs are separate from reality. Morality may seem natural because it is so wide-spread, but it is not and it's popularity is the result of constant indocrination and manipulation.
1+1=3(not objective, based on objective)
concepts are not objects, and morality is subjective
religion is belief, belief is subjective
self preservation is logical, moral
i agree that math is absolute
ideas are information, not objects.. there would be much discussion on debating on morality if it were objective, like the coca label is red, no disagreement there i bet
morality is right, not wrong, you just said right and wrong is absolute, concession?
I never said right and wrong is absolute. My position is of one that claims right and wrong, in the ethical/moral sense, does not exist. Therefore, it is not absolute like math. Morality, like religion, is just a set of beliefs. And those beliefs do not correlate with reality, so they cannot be objective. In round 1, you claimed morality is guided by objectivism, like math, and is absolute. I disagree. I am arguing how morality is not objective, rather how it is subjective and not absolute.
Logic and morality are two different things. This is where you are getting your distorted view from. According to Oxford dictionaries, logic is "Reasoning conducted or assessed according to strict principles of validity" and morality is "Principles concerning the distinction between right and wrong or good and bad behavior". These definitions lead me to the conclusion that morality cannot be objective, nor can it be logical, because "right and wrong" and "good and bad" are not natural/real. Morality is not related to reason, it is purely emotional. 1+1=2 will be the reality no matter where you go. You can't say the same for morality. Math is logical and absolute, while morality is not.
healthy apple=moral to give my kid for food
belief are not objctive, not true
reason is the opposite of logic
morality is not objective..
is it right to smash your computer with a hammer to turn it on?
Explain how reason is the opposite of logic.
Computer analogy: You're confusing ethics and logic. These are two different things.
Prove your point. Stop just making claims.
you show me why i am wrong con.. but you have been detroyed
My guess is that English is not your primary language. Or who knows what the problem is...
No votes have been placed for this debate.
You are not eligible to vote on this debate
This debate has been configured to only allow voters who meet the requirements set by the debaters. This debate either has an Elo score requirement or is to be voted on by a select panel of judges.