Total Posts:36|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

Murder is wrong

nonentity
Posts: 5,008
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/31/2011 4:01:25 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
What is the argument for why murder would not be wrong?

The reason I ask is because most people (if not all) believe that murder is wrong to some degree (in that, at the very least, other people should not do it to them or ones they care about). As far as I can see, the only problem here is differences in the definition of murder.

For example:

I am pro-choice. I do not have a different moral standard (that affects my stance on this) than a person who is anti-abortion. We both believe that murder is wrong. The difference is we disagree on the definition of murder.

I guess I don't really have a point to this, except that I'm trying to reconcile my belief in objective morality. Thoughts?
mattrodstrom
Posts: 12,028
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/31/2011 4:09:16 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 3/31/2011 4:01:25 PM, nonentity wrote:
What is the argument for why murder would not be wrong?

The reason I ask is because most people (if not all) believe that murder is wrong to some degree (in that, at the very least, other people should not do it to them or ones they care about). As far as I can see, the only problem here is differences in the definition of murder.

For example:

I am pro-choice. I do not have a different moral standard (that affects my stance on this) than a person who is anti-abortion. We both believe that murder is wrong. The difference is we disagree on the definition of murder.

I guess I don't really have a point to this, except that I'm trying to reconcile my belief in objective morality. Thoughts?

I happen to not like to see people inflict pain on others... And I'm rather sentiental (i suppose you could say) when it comes to neat things like People existing... and I don't like to see them snuffed out especially when it's due to a person who goes around inflicting pain on people.

I just don't like it... makes me upset..
I'd rather it not happen, and would act to prevent it.

other than that.... It's just how things are sometimes... it's not "wrong" beyond the fact that I would prevent it.
"He who does not know how to put his will into things at least puts a meaning into them: that is, he believes there is a will in them already."

Metaphysics:
"The science.. which deals with the fundamental errors of mankind - but as if they were the fundamental truths."
mattrodstrom
Posts: 12,028
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/31/2011 4:10:08 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 3/31/2011 4:09:16 PM, mattrodstrom wrote:
I happen to not like to see people inflict pain on others... And I'm rather **sentimental** (i suppose you could say) when it comes to neat things like People existing..

correction!
"He who does not know how to put his will into things at least puts a meaning into them: that is, he believes there is a will in them already."

Metaphysics:
"The science.. which deals with the fundamental errors of mankind - but as if they were the fundamental truths."
nonentity
Posts: 5,008
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/31/2011 4:14:15 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
But why is it not wrong? It looks to me like people only reject the notion of "wrong" because they reject the notion of morality because the reject the notion of "wrong".

If you would rather people not do it, what makes it not wrong, except for the fact that people do it anyway?
nonentity
Posts: 5,008
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/31/2011 4:15:14 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 3/31/2011 4:14:15 PM, nonentity wrote:

If you would rather people not do it, what makes it not wrong, except for the fact that people do it anyway?

Actually, ignore this. Terrible argument. I have to go but I'll come back later.
GeoLaureate8
Posts: 12,252
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/31/2011 4:18:29 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
A petri dish is not a person.
"We must raise the standard of the Old, free, decentralized, and strictly limited Republic."
-- Murray Rothbard

"The worst thing that can happen to a good cause is, not to be skillfully attacked, but to be ineptly defended."
-- Frederic Bastiat
Greyparrot
Posts: 14,325
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/31/2011 4:22:42 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
A) Death is natural.
B) Man shapes his natural environment daily for his well being.
If B is morally okay, why is assisted death so wrong in every case?
mattrodstrom
Posts: 12,028
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/31/2011 4:24:30 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 3/31/2011 4:14:15 PM, nonentity wrote:
But why is it not wrong? It looks to me like people only reject the notion of "wrong" because they reject the notion of morality because the reject the notion of "wrong".

If you would rather people not do it, what makes it not wrong, except for the fact that people do it anyway?

it's "wrong" in that it's not how I would have it..

how Else would you claim it's "wrong"

Perhaps it's not how People Generally would have it? That people generally would Not like such a thing to occur?

well, then it's still subjective... just using "most of humanity" as the subject...

It's still not wrong in some Absolute sense.. it's just people generally don't like such a thing to occur.

Also.. Claiming it's an inherent valuation to "human nature" is a bit tougher... it's quite clear that such valuations are Not universal (or else it wouldn't happen).. and though you can claim that All humans Generally are of a similar nature.. and that it's Only those who get "screwed up somehow" who deviate.. but I Really don't think it would be all too convincing.. and, as I said, regardless of whether you're convincing in that regard.. it's still Subjective.
"He who does not know how to put his will into things at least puts a meaning into them: that is, he believes there is a will in them already."

Metaphysics:
"The science.. which deals with the fundamental errors of mankind - but as if they were the fundamental truths."
GeoLaureate8
Posts: 12,252
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/31/2011 4:28:58 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 3/31/2011 4:18:29 PM, GeoLaureate8 wrote:
A petri dish is not a person.

I am against late-term abortion, however.
"We must raise the standard of the Old, free, decentralized, and strictly limited Republic."
-- Murray Rothbard

"The worst thing that can happen to a good cause is, not to be skillfully attacked, but to be ineptly defended."
-- Frederic Bastiat
badger
Posts: 11,793
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/31/2011 4:30:55 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
if you murder someone i like, i won't be happy.. otherwise i suppose i don't really care.

...well, i'd have the murderer locked up or killed incase he murders me or someone i like next time, so i suppose i do care..

there's no such thing as right or wrong!
signature
Extremely-Far-Right
Posts: 248
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/31/2011 5:58:19 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 3/31/2011 4:01:25 PM, nonentity wrote:
What is the argument for why murder would not be wrong?

The reason I ask is because most people (if not all) believe that murder is wrong to some degree (in that, at the very least, other people should not do it to them or ones they care about). As far as I can see, the only problem here is differences in the definition of murder.

For example:

I am pro-choice. I do not have a different moral standard (that affects my stance on this) than a person who is anti-abortion. We both believe that murder is wrong. The difference is we disagree on the definition of murder.

I guess I don't really have a point to this, except that I'm trying to reconcile my belief in objective morality. Thoughts?

Well it depends what kind of murder. Some may agree that the person who issues out the death penalty and then executes it is indeed murder. However, it is only murder to justify the attrocities that the criminal did to receive that sentence.
sal
Posts: 319
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/31/2011 10:17:18 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
If you feel murder is wrong can you conclude that it is wrong?
Compare it with I feel my hands typing on the keyboard therefore I conclude that my hands are typing on the keyboard.
TheAtheistAllegiance
Posts: 1,251
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/31/2011 10:33:04 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
I don't know if you're referring to objective morality in particular, but from what I can see, there is no objective basis for morality because it's all based on human preference, which has no objective foundation, whatsoever. But, if you use human preference as a starting point, then you could probably say that murder is wrong...
J.Kenyon
Posts: 4,194
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/31/2011 10:39:23 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 3/31/2011 10:33:04 PM, TheAtheistAllegiance wrote:
I don't know if you're referring to objective morality in particular, but from what I can see, there is no objective basis for morality because it's all based on human preference, which has no objective foundation, whatsoever. But, if you use human preference as a starting point, then you could probably say that murder is wrong...

Holy cow, you too now? Nihilism is spreading like wildfire. I feel so old school arguing for objective morality...
mattrodstrom
Posts: 12,028
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/31/2011 10:51:01 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 3/31/2011 10:39:23 PM, J.Kenyon wrote:
At 3/31/2011 10:33:04 PM, TheAtheistAllegiance wrote:
I don't know if you're referring to objective morality in particular, but from what I can see, there is no objective basis for morality because it's all based on human preference, which has no objective foundation, whatsoever. But, if you use human preference as a starting point, then you could probably say that murder is wrong...

Holy cow, you too now? Nihilism is spreading like wildfire. I feel so old school arguing for objective morality...

where have you argued for it? o.O

I'd debate ya on whether pursuit of Personal Utility (egoism) or General Utility makes more sense... or even if Utilitarianism makes any sense.
"He who does not know how to put his will into things at least puts a meaning into them: that is, he believes there is a will in them already."

Metaphysics:
"The science.. which deals with the fundamental errors of mankind - but as if they were the fundamental truths."
J.Kenyon
Posts: 4,194
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/31/2011 11:02:52 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 3/31/2011 10:51:01 PM, mattrodstrom wrote:
At 3/31/2011 10:39:23 PM, J.Kenyon wrote:
At 3/31/2011 10:33:04 PM, TheAtheistAllegiance wrote:
I don't know if you're referring to objective morality in particular, but from what I can see, there is no objective basis for morality because it's all based on human preference, which has no objective foundation, whatsoever. But, if you use human preference as a starting point, then you could probably say that murder is wrong...

Holy cow, you too now? Nihilism is spreading like wildfire. I feel so old school arguing for objective morality...

where have you argued for it? o.O

I'd debate ya on whether pursuit of Personal Utility (egoism) or General Utility makes more sense... or even if Utilitarianism makes any sense.

I'm not a utilitarian.
Reasoning
Posts: 4,456
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/31/2011 11:04:42 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 3/31/2011 10:39:23 PM, J.Kenyon wrote:
Holy cow, you too now? Nihilism is spreading like wildfire. I feel so old school arguing for objective morality...

All the cool kids are doing it.
"What we really ought to ask the liberal, before we even begin addressing his agenda, is this: In what kind of society would he be a conservative?" - Joseph Sobran
mattrodstrom
Posts: 12,028
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/31/2011 11:07:56 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 3/31/2011 11:02:52 PM, J.Kenyon wrote:
At 3/31/2011 10:51:01 PM, mattrodstrom wrote:
At 3/31/2011 10:39:23 PM, J.Kenyon wrote:
At 3/31/2011 10:33:04 PM, TheAtheistAllegiance wrote:
I don't know if you're referring to objective morality in particular, but from what I can see, there is no objective basis for morality because it's all based on human preference, which has no objective foundation, whatsoever. But, if you use human preference as a starting point, then you could probably say that murder is wrong...

Holy cow, you too now? Nihilism is spreading like wildfire. I feel so old school arguing for objective morality...

where have you argued for it? o.O

I'd debate ya on whether pursuit of Personal Utility (egoism) or General Utility makes more sense... or even if Utilitarianism makes any sense.

I'm not a utilitarian.

well... you know I'm going to say you seemed to be from your Averaging what people want in the other thread...

and then probably ask you what you 'are'...

so.. yep.. Suspense!
"He who does not know how to put his will into things at least puts a meaning into them: that is, he believes there is a will in them already."

Metaphysics:
"The science.. which deals with the fundamental errors of mankind - but as if they were the fundamental truths."
J.Kenyon
Posts: 4,194
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/31/2011 11:11:42 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 3/31/2011 11:07:56 PM, mattrodstrom wrote:
well... you know I'm going to say you seemed to be from your Averaging what people want in the other thread...

I was doing that to make a point about the average utility gained by casting a vote.

and then probably ask you what you 'are'...

so.. yep.. Suspense!

Libertarian natural law...I thought everyone knew this?

http://www.debate.org...
mattrodstrom
Posts: 12,028
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/31/2011 11:18:08 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 3/31/2011 11:11:42 PM, J.Kenyon wrote:
Libertarian natural law...I thought everyone knew this?

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

I don't really read the debates.. though I guess it makes sense with your politics..
"He who does not know how to put his will into things at least puts a meaning into them: that is, he believes there is a will in them already."

Metaphysics:
"The science.. which deals with the fundamental errors of mankind - but as if they were the fundamental truths."
nonentity
Posts: 5,008
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/31/2011 11:30:27 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 3/31/2011 4:28:58 PM, GeoLaureate8 wrote:
At 3/31/2011 4:18:29 PM, GeoLaureate8 wrote:
A petri dish is not a person.

I am against late-term abortion, however.

That wasn't really the point of what I was saying...

Whether you believe abortion is morally right or wrong or neither doesn't matter. One could say that it's entirely subjective, based on different definitions of "murder" and different definitions of "personhood".

But based on the definition of "murder", a pro-choicer and an anti-abortionist would both agree that murder is wrong. I can't think of a situation where one could argue it's not. If someone says "abortion is wrong because abortion is murder", I can say "abortion is not murder".

If truth can be objective, why not moral truth?

My thoughts don't make any sense to me right now so maybe they're not making sense at all lol
nonentity
Posts: 5,008
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/31/2011 11:31:50 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 3/31/2011 4:22:42 PM, Greyparrot wrote:
A) Death is natural.
B) Man shapes his natural environment daily for his well being.
If B is morally okay, why is assisted death so wrong in every case?

Assisted death isn't murder. I'm not thanking a random stranger killing my mom for their assistance.
mattrodstrom
Posts: 12,028
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/31/2011 11:33:33 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 3/31/2011 11:30:27 PM, nonentity wrote:
At 3/31/2011 4:28:58 PM, GeoLaureate8 wrote:
At 3/31/2011 4:18:29 PM, GeoLaureate8 wrote:
A petri dish is not a person.

I am against late-term abortion, however.

That wasn't really the point of what I was saying...

Whether you believe abortion is morally right or wrong or neither doesn't matter. One could say that it's entirely subjective, based on different definitions of "murder" and different definitions of "personhood".

But based on the definition of "murder", a pro-choicer and an anti-abortionist would both agree that murder is wrong.

some people don't care that you and whoever else don't like "Murder"
and they'll 'murder' anyways...

they might figure the victim had it coming for being a jerk.. or a _______

but they don't necessarily have to think it wasn't 'murder'
"He who does not know how to put his will into things at least puts a meaning into them: that is, he believes there is a will in them already."

Metaphysics:
"The science.. which deals with the fundamental errors of mankind - but as if they were the fundamental truths."
nonentity
Posts: 5,008
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/31/2011 11:37:33 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 3/31/2011 4:24:30 PM, mattrodstrom wrote:

Also.. Claiming it's an inherent valuation to "human nature" is a bit tougher... it's quite clear that such valuations are Not universal (or else it wouldn't happen).. and though you can claim that All humans Generally are of a similar nature.. and that it's Only those who get "screwed up somehow" who deviate.. but I Really don't think it would be all too convincing.. and, as I said, regardless of whether you're convincing in that regard.. it's still Subjective.

Something doesn't have to be universal for it to be objectively true. Objectively, I can claim that red is red and green is green and it would be true. For some people, there is no difference between red and green and it would be true for them. But that doesn't make my statement that something is "green" subjectively true. Though one could argue that it does, I suppose.
TheAtheistAllegiance
Posts: 1,251
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/1/2011 12:01:32 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 3/31/2011 10:39:23 PM, J.Kenyon wrote:
At 3/31/2011 10:33:04 PM, TheAtheistAllegiance wrote:
I don't know if you're referring to objective morality in particular, but from what I can see, there is no objective basis for morality because it's all based on human preference, which has no objective foundation, whatsoever. But, if you use human preference as a starting point, then you could probably say that murder is wrong...

Holy cow, you too now? Nihilism is spreading like wildfire. I feel so old school arguing for objective morality...

Well, I haven't really heard the argument for objective morality, so maybe you could fill me in?
askbob
Posts: 7,254
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/1/2011 12:07:30 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 3/31/2011 4:01:25 PM, nonentity wrote:
What is the argument for why murder would not be wrong?

The reason I ask is because most people (if not all) believe that murder is wrong to some degree (in that, at the very least, other people should not do it to them or ones they care about). As far as I can see, the only problem here is differences in the definition of murder.

For example:

I am pro-choice. I do not have a different moral standard (that affects my stance on this) than a person who is anti-abortion. We both believe that murder is wrong. The difference is we disagree on the definition of murder.

I guess I don't really have a point to this, except that I'm trying to reconcile my belief in objective morality. Thoughts?

you don't have a different definition of murder, you have a different outtake on the assignation of the rights to life.
Me -Phil left the site in my charge. I have a recorded phone conversation to prove it.
kohai -If you're the owner, then do something useful like ip block him and get us away from juggle and on a dofferent host!
Me -haha you apparently don't know my history
Kohai - Maybe not, but that doesn't matter! You shoukd still listen to your community and quit being a tyrrant!
Me - i was being completely sarcastic
Kohai - then u misrepresented yourself by impersonating the owner—a violation of the tos
askbob
Posts: 7,254
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/1/2011 12:07:54 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 3/31/2011 4:18:29 PM, GeoLaureate8 wrote:
A petri dish is not a person.

Is something with a heartbeat alive?
Me -Phil left the site in my charge. I have a recorded phone conversation to prove it.
kohai -If you're the owner, then do something useful like ip block him and get us away from juggle and on a dofferent host!
Me -haha you apparently don't know my history
Kohai - Maybe not, but that doesn't matter! You shoukd still listen to your community and quit being a tyrrant!
Me - i was being completely sarcastic
Kohai - then u misrepresented yourself by impersonating the owner—a violation of the tos
nonentity
Posts: 5,008
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/1/2011 12:16:56 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 4/1/2011 12:07:30 AM, askbob wrote:

you don't have a different definition of murder, you have a different outtake on the assignation of the rights to life.

Both agree that murder is wrong, but for one group abortion fits under the definition of murder and, for another group, it does not. It depends on your definition of murder, and by extension, your definition of life or personhood.

Maybe a better example would be that, for some people, killing animals is murder. For others, it's not. It depends on your definition of murder.

But just because as humans we give different valuations to things, I don't believe that that means there can't be any objectivity. The problem is, I'm having a hard time coming up with an argument in favour of objectivity morality, and I don't want to give up the notion that it exists.
J.Kenyon
Posts: 4,194
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/1/2011 12:42:40 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 4/1/2011 12:01:32 AM, TheAtheistAllegiance wrote:
At 3/31/2011 10:39:23 PM, J.Kenyon wrote:
At 3/31/2011 10:33:04 PM, TheAtheistAllegiance wrote:
I don't know if you're referring to objective morality in particular, but from what I can see, there is no objective basis for morality because it's all based on human preference, which has no objective foundation, whatsoever. But, if you use human preference as a starting point, then you could probably say that murder is wrong...

Holy cow, you too now? Nihilism is spreading like wildfire. I feel so old school arguing for objective morality...

Well, I haven't really heard the argument for objective morality, so maybe you could fill me in?

Lol, it's kind of a hot topic in modern philosophy...

http://scholar.google.com...
mattrodstrom
Posts: 12,028
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/1/2011 12:51:49 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 4/1/2011 12:42:40 AM, J.Kenyon wrote:
At 4/1/2011 12:01:32 AM, TheAtheistAllegiance wrote:
At 3/31/2011 10:39:23 PM, J.Kenyon wrote:
At 3/31/2011 10:33:04 PM, TheAtheistAllegiance wrote:
I don't know if you're referring to objective morality in particular, but from what I can see, there is no objective basis for morality because it's all based on human preference, which has no objective foundation, whatsoever. But, if you use human preference as a starting point, then you could probably say that murder is wrong...

Holy cow, you too now? Nihilism is spreading like wildfire. I feel so old school arguing for objective morality...

Well, I haven't really heard the argument for objective morality, so maybe you could fill me in?

Lol, it's kind of a hot topic in modern philosophy...

http://scholar.google.com...

I'm a Real moral Realist :p

but morality is still UTTERLY subjective

Rocks don't care... lizards don't care... People care (but still not all of them, and not necessarily in the same ways)

Valuation is rooted in caring... it's impossible to describe the process of valuation otherwise.. and is quite natural and satisfactory to base your decision in those feelings/emotions you happen to experience.
"He who does not know how to put his will into things at least puts a meaning into them: that is, he believes there is a will in them already."

Metaphysics:
"The science.. which deals with the fundamental errors of mankind - but as if they were the fundamental truths."