Morality.

[Justin.]

I'd like to double this thread up as an introduction. Hi there, my name's Justin. I'll only be using this section, otherwise pausing to peruse whatever else the Forum offers.

 

Now onto the point.

 

Morality is defined by ethical subjectivism. There is no adherence to objectivity in morality. The collectivity of the human race each acts within a different state, frame or individual sense of mind.

 

Either refute or agree to this. Basically:

 

Side A: Morality is objective.

 

Side B: Religion is objective, pertaining to moral influence, but morality is predominately influenced by the perception of the individual.

 

Side C: Morality is subjective.

 

GOGOGO.

[clairekundinger]

Are you serious? I feel like I'm in college all over again :|

 

totally subjective. Everyone lives by their own set of rules and religion doesn't even play that big of a part in it because everyone interprets the rules of their religion differently.

 

But thats a way heavy topic for so early in the morning :D

[Unstream]

I think it really depends on the moral. Things like murder and theft generally go under the objective category - I think just about everybody would say that those two things aren't good. But then morals like gay rights or abortion would definitely be subjective.

[persephoniekali]

Morality is subjective. Thats why some people think it's not a crime to say steal from the rich. Look at the Iceman; he thinks it's perfectly fine to murder someone. Other cultures would view things differently, i.e., not eat a certain food or animal.

[Unstream]

If morals were completely subjective, then that'd mean most people are either pathetic or conformists, because they either disagree with the laws in place but are too afraid to say anything or they'll just go along with whatever's there because it's there.

 

No, I think most people are born with this innate sense of what's right and what's wrong. It's called a conscious.

 

And the people who think stealing from the rich is okay have never been rich and they're ignorant and have never really thought that concept through. You'll always be richer than someone.

 

Plus I doubt the "Iceman" thought he was doing a good thing for the world unless he was removing a greater evil, which he wasn't really doing. To him, it was probably just business, and just because he does it doesn't mean he thinks that it's good.

 

See, we don't know if the Iceman thinks it was fine to murder. It's what we think he thinks based on his actions. But morality isn't the actions people choose, but what they think is write or wrong. He may very well have known that what he was doing was wrong.

 

And like I said, they can be both objective and subjective. So there will be some subjective ones, like eating meat, but there are still some objective ones.

 

And just because there are a few anomalies doesn't mean that it isn't objective. Or else we can never objectively say something about humans. I can't say "Humans have 10 toes", because there's going to be that one who has 11.

[clairekundinger]

Murder is completely subjective! Look at the death penalty! I watched Saddam hang just like the rest of the world and I didn't feel bad at all. If thats not subjective then I don't know what is! Look at all the people who kill in the name of "god" they think they are doing the right thing.

 

People totally conform. If it was common practice in the US to shoot people who stole from you everyone would and no one would feel bad about it at all.

[Unstream]

But see, there's a difference between murder and "justified" killings.

[clairekundinger]

Says you! And I think that too! But there are plenty of people out there who think the death penalty IS murder! :rolleyes_anim:

[Unstream]

Yeah, and those that think it's murder think it's wrong. So everything under the category of murder is wrong, and people objectively agree that murder is wrong.

 

So what's murder might be subjective, but the moral that murder is wrong is objective.

[clairekundinger]

Eh. Murder is just a word with a negative connotation. You attach feelings to a word and then push it out there that its horrible and of course people are going to think its wrong... its called advertising. People use extreme words to make situations that are not extreme sound more so. The fact that murder is a "bad word" (and george carlin comes to mind) has nothing to do with the act of murdering and calling it something else doesn't make it something else.

 

unless your saying the word is objective, because I don't think that means the act is objective.

[Unstream]

What I'm saying is that there are some morals or ideas that people think are wrong. Murder is one of them. The idea of murder is unjustified killing, and people think that's wrong, which makes it immoral.

[clairekundinger]

I think your applying the general opinion to everyone. Not everyone thinks killing for no reason is wrong. There are whole countries that don't think that. I really think thats more of a social upbringing then an innate sence. In a nurture vs. nature scenario my money is on nurture every time!

[Unstream]

Can you name for me the countries that think killing for no reason is okay? List them individually.

 

I'd still like to argue the idea of a conscious. Some people can ignore it more easily than others, but it's still there.

[clairekundinger]

We're just going to have to agree to disagree! I'm not saying EVERYONE in certain countries are killers... but look at the LAR in Uganda!

[Seliphra]

We're just going to have to agree to disagree! I'm not saying EVERYONE in certain countries are killers... but look at the LAR in Uganda!

The point is, you have no way to back your claim up. Murder is illegal in EVERY country, therefore you can't find one. The LAR in Uganda are a group of extremists usually following one very mentally ill leader. And extremists appear in EVERY county, Canada and USA included.

Somethings I think are universally agreed as immoral. I believe in a conscience as well, however I don't think everyone has one either, just 4/5 really. the other 1/5 is a sociopath.

[Slinky]

I think it really depends on the moral. Things like murder and theft generally go under the objective category - I think just about everybody would say that those two things aren't good.

 

It wasn't always that way though. Thousands of years ago, modern humans (not neanderthals) would steal and kill, partially because there wasn't any 'laws' against it, and because what was thought of as being justified was different. Therefore it's subjective, but the term 'subjective' is subjective in itself so hey, what do I know...

 

This topic has been edited by a member of staff (Spritzie) because of a violation of the forum rules.

Please do not bump topics over 21 days old.

Please check your user inbox to see if you have been contacted regarding this incident, then review our rules.

Per the reason above, this topic has been LOCKED. Please contact Spritzie if you have any questions regarding this action.