Total Posts:6|Showing Posts:1-6
Jump to topic:

No Morality = No Morals

Wnope
Posts: 6,924
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/29/2012 1:56:40 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
A common response the claims like "there is no such as objective morality/all morality is subjective" is the following:

If you don't believe in objective morality, why not just act immorally?

To the theists who make this claim: assume, for the moment, that you no longer believed in God (it's called a thought experiment, people) and no longer held that objective morality exists. Let's say you take the extreme stance that moral statements aren't even logically coherent.

You find yourself in a situation where you can kill a child without any punishment whatsoever and in turn receive ten dollars.

You want to go to Burger King, and you're out of cash.

Why wouldn't you kill the child?
Wnope
Posts: 6,924
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/29/2012 1:58:13 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 9/29/2012 1:56:40 PM, Wnope wrote:
A common response the claims like "there is no such as objective morality/all morality is subjective" is the following:

If you don't believe in objective morality, why not just act immorally?

To the theists who make this claim: assume, for the moment, that you no longer believed in God (it's called a thought experiment, people) and no longer held that objective morality exists. Let's say you take the extreme stance that moral statements aren't even logically coherent.

You find yourself in a situation where you can kill a child without any punishment whatsoever and in turn receive ten dollars.

You want to go to Burger King, and you're out of cash.

Why wouldn't you kill the child?

And you have to assume you like Burger King.
Ahmed.M
Posts: 616
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/29/2012 1:59:44 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 9/29/2012 1:56:40 PM, Wnope wrote:
A common response the claims like "there is no such as objective morality/all morality is subjective" is the following:

If you don't believe in objective morality, why not just act immorally?

To the theists who make this claim: assume, for the moment, that you no longer believed in God (it's called a thought experiment, people) and no longer held that objective morality exists. Let's say you take the extreme stance that moral statements aren't even logically coherent.

You find yourself in a situation where you can kill a child without any punishment whatsoever and in turn receive ten dollars.

You want to go to Burger King, and you're out of cash.

Why wouldn't you kill the child?

You still accept the morality of that society even though you reject it in your mind. It is hard to put what one truly believes in his mind into practice if it goes against the norm of that society.
Paradox_7
Posts: 1,870
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/29/2012 2:54:48 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 9/29/2012 1:56:40 PM, Wnope wrote:
A common response the claims like "there is no such as objective morality/all morality is subjective" is the following:

If you don't believe in objective morality, why not just act immorally?

To the theists who make this claim: assume, for the moment, that you no longer believed in God (it's called a thought experiment, people) and no longer held that objective morality exists. Let's say you take the extreme stance that moral statements aren't even logically coherent.

You find yourself in a situation where you can kill a child without any punishment whatsoever and in turn receive ten dollars.

You want to go to Burger King, and you're out of cash.

Why wouldn't you kill the child?

If his parents are near by, you will most likely get beatin to death;or, You will go to prison; or, he could be a bad@ss kid, and kick your @ss.

Now, if you'd like to place that situation in a society that doesn't punish crime, because there is no way to determine if it is actually crime, or if a person was simply living out their world view; Different story... Kill the kid.
: At 10/23/2012 8:06:03 PM, tvellalott wrote:
: Don't be. The Catholic Church is ran by Darth Sidius for fvck sake. As far as I'm concerned, you're a bona fide member of the Sith.
Kali
Posts: 34
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/29/2012 3:04:52 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 9/29/2012 1:56:40 PM, Wnope wrote:
A common response the claims like "there is no such as objective morality/all morality is subjective" is the following:

If you don't believe in objective morality, why not just act immorally?

To the theists who make this claim: assume, for the moment, that you no longer believed in God (it's called a thought experiment, people) and no longer held that objective morality exists. Let's say you take the extreme stance that moral statements aren't even logically coherent.

You find yourself in a situation where you can kill a child without any punishment whatsoever and in turn receive ten dollars.

You want to go to Burger King, and you're out of cash.

Why wouldn't you kill the child?
Because you would go to jail, the restaurant would refuse to serve you (obviously) and the people inside might try to harm you or kill you. And, for some people, the psychological trauma isn't worth the $10/meal. As well, you'd have to put significant effort in to actually kill the kid, unless you just walk around town with a deadly weapon in your pocket.

Also, you've got a semantic error in your premise: you aren't acting immorally, you're just acting.
THEBOMB
Posts: 2,872
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/29/2012 3:13:00 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 9/29/2012 1:56:40 PM, Wnope wrote:
A common response the claims like "there is no such as objective morality/all morality is subjective" is the following:

If you don't believe in objective morality, why not just act immorally?

I see a slight contradiction, how can you act immorally if moral statements are incoherent?


To the theists who make this claim: assume, for the moment, that you no longer believed in God (it's called a thought experiment, people) and no longer held that objective morality exists. Let's say you take the extreme stance that moral statements aren't even logically coherent.

You find yourself in a situation where you can kill a child without any punishment whatsoever and in turn receive ten dollars.

You want to go to Burger King, and you're out of cash.

Why wouldn't you kill the child?

1. Society objects to the killings of innocent people.
2. Most people do not like to "play God" and decide who lives and who dies. Quite simply, you make yourself "god" when you choose to kill. Killing places yourself on a pedestal because you are basically saying "my wants/needs are greater than your wants/needs. I need BK and killing you allows me to get BK regardless of what you want. Since nothing I do not want (prison) will come about from killing you, I am justified in killing you to get my want." Absent of all other influences, people don't like playing god.