This site makes extensive use of JavaScript.
Please enable JavaScript in your browser.
Classic Theme
Thottbot Theme
Abortion Scenerio
Post Reply
Return to board index
Post by
184848
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
Hyperspacerebel
believing in objective morals is so dangerous.
That's an objective statement.
Lol, irony.
Post by
165617
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
184848
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
Hyperspacerebel
And objective statement = objective morals?
Not quite the same.
As statement about the morality of morals.
So in this case...yup, the same.
Post by
165617
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
MyTie
He never even considered her situation and the reason she had this change of heart.
Great point, I think we should touch on this. MyTie, wanna add in why she had this change of heart?
No, I left it out intentionally. The scenerio perfectly illustrates the problem of 'ends vs means'. Let's take it at face value.
Post by
Hyperspacerebel
The morality of morals is not the same as morals.
Lol, irony.
Post by
165617
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
Skyfire
believing in objective morals is so dangerous.
I don't agree, but to each their own! Perhaps a thread for another time.
Odd.
Wittgenstein will show you the way.
Post by
Hyperspacerebel
Repeating yourself saying lol, irony. does not prove your point.
Try again.
The irony is that you proved it for me.
Lol, irony.
Post by
184848
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
438256
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
Hyperspacerebel
As statement about the morality of morals.
So in this case...yup, the same.
Objective morals means that regardless of what any act entails there is a singular, unchanging essence of morality behind it and that regardless of our own views, opinions, or experiences this essence does not bend. It does not mean they
are
the single, true morals that may or may not exist.
If my religion tells me that all Jews have to die, it means that it is moral for me to kill all Jews. This is an unchanging truth about morality, so everyone must kill a Jew or they will be behaving immorally.
When you say that the act of believing in morals is dangerous/bad, you're making an objective moral statement.
Post by
Hyperspacerebel
This is actually what happened in the case MyTie described, the man believed that there was an unwavering truth that was the sanctity of human life and held a woman hostage due to his own beliefs.
You don't understand objective and subjective.
Post by
184848
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
184848
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
Hyperspacerebel
Objective; from outside ourselves. The morality of our actions are not defined by our own beliefs, but some outside force.
Objective morals means that regardless of what any act entails there is a singular, unchanging essence of morality behind it and that regardless of our own views, opinions, or experiences this essence does not bend.
It does not mean they are the single, true morals that may or may not exist.
That last part isn't anywhere in your definition.
You don't understand what objective and subjective means in morality.
Show me where I wrongly defined them.
Post by
Hyperspacerebel
And actually, the danger comes from believing that our own morals are the objective morals. How can you really know they are? Divine command? Ha, good one.
It's not my fault your God isn't Truth itself. Take out your cynical despair on someone else.
Post by
165617
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post Reply
You are not logged in. Please
log in
to post a reply or
register
if you don't already have an account.
