Total Posts:10|Showing Posts:1-10
Jump to topic:

Contradictions?

000ike
Posts: 11,196
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/12/2011 5:57:46 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
There are people here who claim to believe in subjective morality, but then also believe in natural rights. If there is no such thing as objective morals, then the basis of the word "NATURAL" in natural rights is hence dissolved. For if this right is in the eye of the beholder, what makes it inherent and owed?

The implications of total subjective morality are that nothing is always immoral, and nothing is always moral. Yet, the implications of natural rights are that something is always immoral if it breaks the right without justification. How can one believe in natural rights and subjective morality at the same time?
"A stupid despot may constrain his slaves with iron chains; but a true politician binds them even more strongly with the chain of their own ideas" - Michel Foucault
PARADIGM_L0ST
Posts: 6,958
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/12/2011 6:45:01 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 10/12/2011 5:57:46 PM, 000ike wrote:
There are people here who claim to believe in subjective morality, but then also believe in natural rights. If there is no such thing as objective morals, then the basis of the word "NATURAL" in natural rights is hence dissolved. For if this right is in the eye of the beholder, what makes it inherent and owed?:

I don't think when most people espouse natural rights that they actually view it objectively. It's a figure of speech.
"Have you ever considered suicide? If not, please do." -- Mouthwash (to Inferno)
socialpinko
Posts: 10,458
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/12/2011 8:10:18 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
Who specifically holds that position? If I know who it is, I can check to see what they've actually posted and provide a somewhat cogent response.
: At 9/29/2014 10:55:59 AM, imabench wrote:
: : At 9/29/2014 9:43:46 AM, kbub wrote:
: :
: : DDO should discredit support of sexual violence at any time and in every way.
:
: I disagree.
popculturepooka
Posts: 7,926
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/12/2011 9:14:31 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 10/12/2011 6:45:01 PM, PARADIGM_L0ST wrote:
At 10/12/2011 5:57:46 PM, 000ike wrote:
There are people here who claim to believe in subjective morality, but then also believe in natural rights. If there is no such thing as objective morals, then the basis of the word "NATURAL" in natural rights is hence dissolved. For if this right is in the eye of the beholder, what makes it inherent and owed?:

I don't think when most people espouse natural rights that they actually view it objectively. It's a figure of speech.

What? Most people who do believe that the are natural rights also are moral realists explicitly and sometimes implicitly.
At 10/3/2016 11:49:13 PM, thett3 wrote:
BLACK LIVES MATTER!
DetectableNinja
Posts: 6,043
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/12/2011 9:35:03 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 10/12/2011 8:10:18 PM, socialpinko wrote:
Who specifically holds that position? If I know who it is, I can check to see what they've actually posted and provide a somewhat cogent response.

Squawk. It was me, who said this.

Though, I feel explanations are in order. I do believe that every person should have certain "natural" human rights preserved (life, liberty, property, expression, etc), but anything that falls OUTSIDE of this I feel has no specific moral value.

Also: you coulda just called me out, ike. No need to be so passive-aggressive.
Think'st thou heaven is such a glorious thing?
I tell thee, 'tis not half so fair as thou
Or any man that breathes on earth.

- Christopher Marlowe, Doctor Faustus
socialpinko
Posts: 10,458
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/13/2011 5:28:51 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 10/12/2011 9:35:03 PM, DetectableNinja wrote:
At 10/12/2011 8:10:18 PM, socialpinko wrote:
Who specifically holds that position? If I know who it is, I can check to see what they've actually posted and provide a somewhat cogent response.

Squawk. It was me, who said this.

Though, I feel explanations are in order. I do believe that every person should have certain "natural" human rights preserved (life, liberty, property, expression, etc), but anything that falls OUTSIDE of this I feel has no specific moral value.

Also: you coulda just called me out, ike. No need to be so passive-aggressive.

That's not moral subjectiveness, just not having a moral opinion on everything.
: At 9/29/2014 10:55:59 AM, imabench wrote:
: : At 9/29/2014 9:43:46 AM, kbub wrote:
: :
: : DDO should discredit support of sexual violence at any time and in every way.
:
: I disagree.
000ike
Posts: 11,196
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/13/2011 5:40:14 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 10/12/2011 9:35:03 PM, DetectableNinja wrote:
At 10/12/2011 8:10:18 PM, socialpinko wrote:
Who specifically holds that position? If I know who it is, I can check to see what they've actually posted and provide a somewhat cogent response.

Squawk. It was me, who said this.

Though, I feel explanations are in order. I do believe that every person should have certain "natural" human rights preserved (life, liberty, property, expression, etc), but anything that falls OUTSIDE of this I feel has no specific moral value.

Also: you coulda just called me out, ike. No need to be so passive-aggressive.

lol I'll admit it came to my attention after our debate, but Danielle said the same thing. She believes in total moral subjectivity yet believes in natural rights. Its not just you.
"A stupid despot may constrain his slaves with iron chains; but a true politician binds them even more strongly with the chain of their own ideas" - Michel Foucault
000ike
Posts: 11,196
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/13/2011 5:58:00 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 10/12/2011 8:10:18 PM, socialpinko wrote:
Who specifically holds that position? If I know who it is, I can check to see what they've actually posted and provide a somewhat cogent response.

Danielle: "No, because morality is subjective. You might think it is immoral for me to smoke pot. Should it be illegal just because you think it is immoral? No. The law should be responsible for upholding basic human rights..."

You can see the whole thing in the comments section on my profile.
"A stupid despot may constrain his slaves with iron chains; but a true politician binds them even more strongly with the chain of their own ideas" - Michel Foucault
socialpinko
Posts: 10,458
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/13/2011 8:07:45 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 10/13/2011 5:58:00 AM, 000ike wrote:
At 10/12/2011 8:10:18 PM, socialpinko wrote:
Who specifically holds that position? If I know who it is, I can check to see what they've actually posted and provide a somewhat cogent response.

Danielle: "No, because morality is subjective. You might think it is immoral for me to smoke pot. Should it be illegal just because you think it is immoral? No. The law should be responsible for upholding basic human rights..."

You can see the whole thing in the comments section on my profile.

That seems like a basic libertarian position to hold. She might hold rights as only needed through societal need or she might actually believe in rights. Either way, rights theories do not necessitate moral objectiveness.
: At 9/29/2014 10:55:59 AM, imabench wrote:
: : At 9/29/2014 9:43:46 AM, kbub wrote:
: :
: : DDO should discredit support of sexual violence at any time and in every way.
:
: I disagree.
M.Torres
Posts: 3,626
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/13/2011 10:51:06 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
Let's accept there are no objective truths.

Objectively, we still must accept that humans exist. They are living creatures. If we abolish presumptions about entitlement, we must start from the bottom-up.

Humans, in the eyes of nature, are all equal. Thus, our "natural right" is that of "equality". The question, however, is whether we are entitled to protect a "natural right". That is the question, not if we have "natural rights". Of course we do.
: At 11/28/2011 1:28:24 PM, BlackVoid wrote:
: M. Torres said it, so it must be right.

I'm an Apatheistic Ignostic. ... problem? ;D

I believe in the heart of the cards. .:DDO Duelist:.