Morals Are Completely Subjective

[Nineveh]

I can't speak for someone else. I can only speak for myself.

Find a better moral standard.

 

[Freedomcry]

Find a better moral standard.

I'm content with my morals as they are. If I weren't content with them, then I'd have different morals.

 

[mighty_duck]

Doctrines of humanity and morality are the result of man doubting his instincts.

Or codifying them.
What if our basic instincts do lead us towards empathy, and from there the golden rule?

People can be brainwashed by society's norms for good or ill. But judging by the behavior of most animals, left to our own devices, our instincs should lead us to a society that is maintainable. It seems that the golden rule would be the best way of getting there.
If anything is hard wired, I submit that it is empathy. Choosing to ignore this instinct, has proven time and again (in hindsight), to lead to all the immorality the world has ever known.

 

[Freedomcry]

Or codifying them.
What if our basic instincts do lead us towards empathy, and from there the golden rule?

People can be brainwashed by society's norms for good or ill. But judging by the behavior of most animals, left to our own devices, our instincs should lead us to a society that is maintainable. It seems that the golden rule would be the best way of getting there.
If anything is hard wired, I submit that it is empathy. Choosing to ignore this instinct, has proven time and again (in hindsight), to lead to all the immorality the world has ever known.

As far as maintaining the status quo (ie, survival), you have a point. But for that matter, if everyone adhered to strict Christian morals, I'm sure we would still survive (and be somewhat happy.)

However, I'm a nihilist. I don't believe man has any predestined purpose for survival. I don't believe anything has any predestined purpose, period. Sure, we're biologically wired to survive. But it's my feeling that if tomorrow the earth gets hit by a giant meteor and goes out in a blaze of fire...well, so be it. Maybe in another few billion years the human experience will rise again.

 

[Nineveh]

I'm content with my morals as they are. If I weren't content with them, then I'd have different morals.

It baffles me how you can be "content" not knowing it's absolutely wrong always to rape a 3 year old comatose girl. : shrugs : but then again, we've already established you have a low standard.

 

[Freedomcry]

It baffles me how you can be "content" not knowing it's absolutely wrong always to rape a 3 year old comatose girl. : shrugs : but then again, we've already established you have a low standard.

Maybe someday you'll understand that reality is a giant Rorschach inkblot and that morals and solely based on our perception of reality.

 

[Nineveh]

Maybe someday you'll understand that reality is a giant Rorschach inkblot and that morals and solely based on our perception of reality.

A 3 year old comatose girl isn't ink on a paper. She is a rape victim. And you have absolutely no moral standing to convict the child rapist. Good for you! Aim high!

 

[Freedomcry]

And you have absolutely no moral standing to convict the child rapist.

I would put a rapist to death. I've said it numerous time already.

 

[Nineveh]

I would put a rapist to death.

Who are you to judge they should die?

 

[Freedomcry]

Who are you to judge they should die?

I'm me. I want them dead because I don't want them permanently out of society. It's a purely selfish reason. My ideals against theirs.

 

[Nineveh]

I'm me. I want them dead because I don't want them permanently out of society. It's a purely selfish reason. My ideals against theirs.

You have absolutely no standing to make that judgement or follow that line of action.

 

[mighty_duck]

As far as maintaining the status quo (ie, survival), you have a point. But for that matter, if everyone adhered to strict Christian morals, I'm sure we would still survive (and be somewhat happy.)

But if we wish to maximize human happiness (which is the end result of morals), we would have to use a different set of morals than is advocated by most Christians.

However, I'm a nihilist. I don't believe man has any predestined purpose for survival. I don't believe anything has any predestined purpose, period. Sure, we're biologically wired to survive. But it's my feeling that if tomorrow the earth gets hit by a giant meteor and goes out in a blaze of fire...well, so be it. Maybe in another few billion years the human experience will rise again.

I'm not sure what predestination has to do with it.
Is anything meaningful to you? I would bet something is. You mentioned avoiding pain or increasing pleasure...
Would your children and grandchildren be meaningful to you? I bet they would be. So regardless of ultimate purpose, you have a vested interest in the morals of your society, today and in the future.
As such, you would want to maximize happiness.

 

[Freedomcry]

Would your children and grandchildren be meaningful to you? I bet they would be. So regardless of ultimate purpose, you have a vested interest in the morals of your society, today and in the future.

Everything has meaning and value to me. When I speak of reality having to value or no purpose, I'm speaking on more of a philosophical and cosmic level. I'm speaking about the ultimate nature of reality.

 

[Freedomcry]

You have absolutely no standing to make that judgement or follow that line of action.

Nineveh, I hope you don't mind, but I'll respond in a few days. At the moment, I'm mentally exhausted.

 

[Nineveh]

Nineveh, I hope you don't mind, but I'll respond in a few days. At the moment, I'm mentally exhausted.

I can see why. It must be taxing chasing your tail.

I would put a rapist to death. I've said it numerous time already.

I'm glad you brought up the justice system. I don't believe in justice either. (Uh oh, here we go :grave: )

I'm not going to judge someone on whether they're actions are right or wrong. And I'm certainly not going to judge them on what they "deserve". However, I will make a decision as to what my actions will be in response to theirs.

As for punishment:

In my opinion, punishment has absolutely no value if there is no opportunity for the subjects to rehabilitate after their punishment.

cite

You really need to find a better moral standard.

 

[aharvey]

Well, you haven't really answered very clearly.

How do I decide whether or not something is moral? Usually, I figure it out on my own using my reasoning abilities. Of course, this is whithin the context of me being raised in our culture, etc, etc. Alot of times it is pretty easy for me and i don't need to think about it too much. But, I can come up with some tough cases to consider. [my emphasis]

Have you ever noticed, SUTG, that the folks who argue for universal black-and-whites adopt as different an approach to that as possible? You know, rape of 3 year old comatose girls, homosexual rape of 8 year old boys, that sort of thing. As if being able to categorize these atrocities according to a simple black-and-white system demonstrates the general applicability of the black-and-white system (Has there ever been a society that would not consider the raping of comatose three year old girls to be wrong? Did all those societies that do disapprove of the raping of comatose three year old girls all arrive at that same conclusion only by using the same black-and-white moral code?) And as if your wondering if such a system really can be applied to tough cases means that you must be in favor of raping 3 year old comatose girls.

 

[Freedomcry]

I can see why. It must be taxing chasing your tail.



cite

You really need to find a better moral standard.

Are you going to make any sort of intelligence conclusion based on those two posts you quoted?

 

[Freedomcry]

You have absolutely no standing to make that judgement or follow that line of action.

I act in my best interest, just as everyone else. That's all man has ever done and will ever do.

 

[Nineveh]

Are you going to make any sort of intelligence conclusion based on those two posts you quoted?

Let me see... in one you boast "I would put a rapist to death. I've said it numerous time already." in another you claim, "I'm not going to judge someone on whether they're actions are right or wrong. And I'm certainly not going to judge them on what they "deserve"."

Hard to see which way you wanna run with that.

I act in my best interest, just as everyone else. That's all man has ever done and will ever do.

Luckily for that 3 year old girl, others can act in her best interest. It still leaves you with the problem of "you putting the rapist to death", unless you want to appeal to vigilantism or anarchy.

 

[Freedomcry]

Let me see... in one you boast "I would put a rapist to death. I've said it numerous time already." in another you claim, "I'm not going to judge someone on whether they're actions are right or wrong. And I'm certainly not going to judge them on what they "deserve"."

Hard to see which way you wanna run with that.

I can understand why one could see these two sentences as contradictory, so I'll explain further.

My basic assertion here is that my actions are not based on external moral judgment. When I said "I would put a rapist to death," I say so not because of some external moral standard, but because I simply don't want to live in a society where rapists are present. I should also point out here that I do not want to live in a society with thieves either. However, I wouldn't support capital punishment in their case. Crime and punishment are another issue that we can start in a different thread if you like.

When it comes to atrocities like rape, it's easy to let one's emotions take hold. And I'm not saying that is a bad thing. Emotions definitely have their place. However, when discussing the philosophical nature of morality, I attempt to use logic and critical thinking rather than pure emotion.

I would be interested to know if you see this view as anarchy. If so, I'll explain further.