Morals are objective. Nothing is right or wrong without someone that says so.

Posted by: s.ky

Just my 2 cents. I wanna see the consensus about whether people believe the idea.

  • I Agree

  • I Disagree

65% 13 votes
35% 7 votes
  • 100 percent. There are things that people think our "right" that other people disagree with. Like how I think it is immoral to get an abortion because it is technically murder, But others think otherwise. (if your a blm protester that gets ticked off easily maybe skip this part) I think the ruling of Breonna Taylors death is justified based of the evidence presented, While others are out chanting at the top of thier lungs and destroying sh*t over it. Long story short people have opinions about everything, Including morals.

Leave a comment...
(Maximum 900 words)
Pisx7 says2020-10-04T20:51:58.9906405Z
I agree with the second statement, Not the first. Unless you have had a deific authority imbue you with, Or inform you of a moral philosophy, Then all morals are a subjective construct. For them to be objective, There'd need to be a definitive higher figure making you aware of what is and isn't righteous.
FreedomBeforeEquality says2020-10-07T04:29:28.0292355Z
Yes the statement is contradictory. I think maybe you meant it was "subjective"? Objective would mean that it absolutely is right or wrong regardless of whether someone says it is or not. Naturally occurring.
FreedomBeforeEquality says2020-10-07T04:49:06.1941392Z
And I agree with the first, That there are some things that are indeed morally reprehensible from an objective standpoint. I don't believe you need a deific authority to be able to identify certain morals. . . All you need is one other person for the golden rule to be created. This differs from subjective morality in the sense that it is made completely unconsciously. You could take most any two people (or even some animals) and the two would come to the conclusion that torturing the other senselessly would be wrong. People feeling the way they do when they see this sort of thing is not subjective, Its by design. Be it due to whatever naturally occurring human fears or survival instincts that are present. . . Our mortality, Limited lifespans. That sort of reality commands a particular moral response to some things. Granted some people can say otherwise and try to lie outside of what is acceptable. . . But at risk. There is and has always been a singular moral path which provides the least risk and people have naturally existed within its boundaries for ages. It has not changed, And thats why scholarly types (and prophets) are able to capitalize on it so effectively. Its truth, They base their theories on this truth, And by proxy they will be generally on in line with what people already know to be true from their own experiences. I would question anything brought up as a subjective morality as being something that likely only works for a small subset of people and could not be applied universally across all of humanity and still sustain itself. Those things lie in a grey area of morality and fall back on objective morality for defense against criticism.
Pisx7 says2020-10-07T05:05:57.5421392Z
Despite all that, It is still subjective. In saying that other people possess an objective morality by virtue of something like appealing to the majority, There needs to be some mental authority they possess for you to have any reason to defer to them. However, People do not possess this capability, Morality is a social construct when you break it down to metaphysical base components, Even if as far as we know, We have justification for having one. I'm not saying morality does not exist. Assuming an omnipotent deity, They likely do have a moral stance on any given subject that their creations in humans could end up concurring with by chance (possibly multiple stances assuming a consistently "correct" philosophy). Even for atheists, They could possess a morality for the purpose of feeling good and satisfied with themselves internally, Even if there is no real frame of reference for it. However, Since a deity cannot be confirmed, Morality lies firmly within a layer of subjectivity given that all humans have the same mental authoritative ceiling. Morality can be "objective" in the vacuum of an isolated system or group where all defer to the same foundation for guidance, Like legality and religion, But these are not universal.
FreedomBeforeEquality says2020-10-10T12:38:54.3333410Z
"There needs to be some mental authority they possess for you to have any reason to defer to them. " They do not possess objective morality. . . Nobody possesses it. . . It exists. If they possessed the authority then it would be subjective. . . They do not possess it. All they can do is recognize it. That is evidenced in how much control we have over everything in our lives. That level of control may be increasing. . . But because we didn't create ourselves there is always going to be one element of it that has dominion over us. We can't subjectively come up with the true reason for that entities purpose for us. . . And as such we cannot dictate what is right or wrong about it. I see what youre getting at here, That one can possess a sense of it within themselves. . . But it has no authority. It is an isolated simulation that happens to work based on the fact that they built their sense of morality within the confines of the objective form of it that they live under. . . Where they derived it from, Where they derived all of their experience from. That exists as much as a thought exists. Objective morality is quite concrete and has physical consequences that apply to all things. Its almost synonymous with natural law.
Pisx7 says2020-10-10T22:12:31.7592045Z
Them possessing it would be no more subjective than the existence of the concept of morality in the first place, As neither can be confirmed without deific confirmation. There is no universal innate set of values, Only more common mentalities which lead to similar stigmas against certain concepts by virtue of humans ultimately being animals (thus deferring to nature in many ways). But, These aren't made objective by that because you cannot look at any aspect of the subject and say "This is what makes it objective" barring an authority on the matter who is unquestionable, Like a deity. If said deity exists, Then objective morality has a good chance at existing. If it doesn't (or doesn't make us aware that it exists) then you're merely looking at either your own morality or a different morality formed from a different source, Then applying yourself to it.

Freebase Icon   Portions of this page are reproduced from or are modifications based on work created and shared by Google and used according to terms described in the Creative Commons 3.0 Attribution License.

By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use.