• You are currently viewing our forum as a guest, which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community, you will have access to additional post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), view blogs, respond to polls, upload content, and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free, so please join our community today! Just click here to register. You should turn your Ad Blocker off for this site or certain features may not work properly. If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us by clicking here.

Why ISN'T morality subjective?

danseen

New member
Joined
Oct 30, 2013
Messages
781
MBTI Type
INTP
I think this irks a lot of people, but to me at least (perhaps this is the "no rules" INTP part of me talking haha.) this is how I see it:

- IMO, subjectivism is meant in a cosmological sense. I don't know of any universal moral law
- I personally believe in equal rights for all, no matter who you are. But had I lived in early modern times, pre the Enlightenment, I may not have thought this.

So then, how isn't morality subjective?

IMO, I personally don't give a shit lol.. "Morals" are spent.
 

Avocado

Permabanned
Joined
Jun 28, 2013
Messages
3,794
MBTI Type
ENFP
Enneagram
7w6
Instinctual Variant
sp/so
I think this irks a lot of people, but to me at least (perhaps this is the "no rules" INTP part of me talking haha.) this is how I see it:

- IMO, subjectivism is meant in a cosmological sense. I don't know of any universal moral law
- I personally believe in equal rights for all, no matter who you are. But had I lived in early modern times, pre the Enlightenment, I may not have thought this.

So then, how isn't morality subjective?

IMO, I personally don't give a shit lol.. "Morals" are spent.

My intellectual side came to this conclusion a long time ago.
My emotional side still can't comprehend it.
I just settle midway and go with existentialism...
 

Typh0n

clever fool
Joined
Feb 13, 2013
Messages
3,497
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
My intellectual side came to this conclusion a long time ago.
My emotional side still can't comprehend it.
I just settle midway and go with existentialism...

Do you understand why I told the OP that he still believes in objective morals?
 

CheshireCat

New member
Joined
Oct 20, 2013
Messages
82
MBTI Type
GOO
Enneagram
954
I personally believe in equal rights for all, no matter who you are.

I recall reading "What is qualitatively different can never be equal" So, I'd have to disagree. All I can think of is the revolution of formula, that enabled women the option to pursue a career instead of nursing.... Only in that equation the baby is left with inferior health, both physical/ nutritional and psychological/ nurturing. Also, it has been said that “Our experiences teach us that psychological differences among people are the cause of misunderstandings and problems. We can overcome these problems only if we accept psychological differences as a law of nature and appreciate their creative value. This would also enable us to gain an objectice comprehension of man and human societies, unfortunetely, it would also teach us that equality under the law is inequality under the law of nature.”
 

danseen

New member
Joined
Oct 30, 2013
Messages
781
MBTI Type
INTP
I recall reading "What is qualitatively different can never be equal" So, I'd have to disagree. All I can think of is the revolution of formula, that enabled women the option to pursue a career instead of nursing.... Only in that equation the baby is left with inferior health, both physical/ nutritional and psychological/ nurturing. Also, it has been said that “Our experiences teach us that psychological differences among people are the cause of misunderstandings and problems. We can overcome these problems only if we accept psychological differences as a law of nature and appreciate their creative value. This would also enable us to gain an objectice comprehension of man and human societies, unfortunetely, it would also teach us that equality under the law is inequality under the law of nature.”

Sorry but I don't see how equal rights is evil. your opinion notwithstanding.
 

Typh0n

clever fool
Joined
Feb 13, 2013
Messages
3,497
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
Not entirely...
Could you elaborate?

Hah, so someone finally asks!

In order to believe that nothing has value, that morals are "sold" as says the OP, it is implied in that OP that this is because the universe has no objective standard of morality. This is nihilism. Not subjectivism. Nihilism is an objectivistic view of morality because it believes morals are contigent on there being some kind of objective rule out there, and since we cant find any objective rule of morals, they must not exist. How is this different from an objective outlook on morality? Its saying "morals can only exist if they exist as a universal standard. I see no such standard, hence, there are no morals, I give up and dont care about anything". This isnt subjectivism in the least, subjectivism does not deny morals. It believes those morals are subjective, but not nonexistant.

This is why I feel OP is still stuck in the framework of objective morals, as is every nihilist I ave come across as well. This is why I dot agree with nihilism to begin with; morals(or at least ethics) are subjective, they dont depend on a higher power or cosmic law to exist...
 

danseen

New member
Joined
Oct 30, 2013
Messages
781
MBTI Type
INTP
Hah, so someone finally asks!

In order to believe that nothing has value, that morals are "sold" as says the OP, it is implied in that OP that this is because the universe has no objective standard of morality. This is nihilism. Not subjectivism. Nihilism is an objectivistic view of morality because it is believes morals are contigent on there being some kind of objective rule out there, and since we cant find any objective rule of morals, they must not exist. How is this different from an objective outlook on morality? Its saying "morals can only exist if they exist as a universal standard. I see no such standard, hence, there are no morals, I give up and dont care about anything". This isnt subjectivism in the least, subjectivism does not deny morals. It believes those morals are subjective, but not nonexistant.

This is why I feel OP is still stuck in the framework of objective morals, as is every nihilist I ave come across as well. This is why I dot agree with nihilism to begin with; morals(or at least ethics) are subjective, they dont depend on a higher power or cosmic law to exist...

I disagree. Morals don't exist, period. Only children/silly people need morals.

Morals are merely in the eye of the beholder.
 

Typh0n

clever fool
Joined
Feb 13, 2013
Messages
3,497
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
I disagree. Morals don't exist, period. Only children/silly people need morals.

Morals are merely in the eye of the beholder.

And heres to you completely misunderstanding everything I wrote in that last post.

*facepalm*
 

Cellmold

Wake, See, Sing, Dance
Joined
Mar 23, 2012
Messages
6,266
People often collectively agree on morals, which is still subjective, but it's as close as we can get to being objective about morality.

The subtle play of individual judgement always comes into play and human beings are more likely to align with those they hold the highest value of in their own lives.

Rights are a rough way of making sure negative things don't happen to an individual, or rather yourself as the individual and so through those rights people believe they are setting a standard, I suppose if it could be adhered to strictly, there would be a rough standard, but the individual level always takes over in the heat of a moment.
 
G

garbage

Guest
[MENTION=20143]danseen[/MENTION] [MENTION=360]prplchknz[/MENTION]

Stop replying to one another. In all threads. Just.. stop. Your back-and-forth is ruining a few threads.

This is, like, the pre-warning.
 

Avocado

Permabanned
Joined
Jun 28, 2013
Messages
3,794
MBTI Type
ENFP
Enneagram
7w6
Instinctual Variant
sp/so
Hah, so someone finally asks!

In order to believe that nothing has value, that morals are "sold" as says the OP, it is implied in that OP that this is because the universe has no objective standard of morality. This is nihilism. Not subjectivism. Nihilism is an objectivistic view of morality because it believes morals are contigent on there being some kind of objective rule out there, and since we cant find any objective rule of morals, they must not exist. How is this different from an objective outlook on morality? Its saying "morals can only exist if they exist as a universal standard. I see no such standard, hence, there are no morals, I give up and dont care about anything". This isnt subjectivism in the least, subjectivism does not deny morals. It believes those morals are subjective, but not nonexistant.

This is why I feel OP is still stuck in the framework of objective morals, as is every nihilist I ave come across as well. This is why I dot agree with nihilism to begin with; morals(or at least ethics) are subjective, they dont depend on a higher power or cosmic law to exist...
Indeed, I believe I understand, now...

Men and women create their own meanings and values, and these meanings and values accrue into the collective subjective consciousness. Values that are highly different from the accepted norms of the subjective collective consciousness are considered wrong. While there is no objective standard of right and wrong, within a given society there will be a collectively subjective norm which members of that society are expected to follow. Thus, morals exist and effect the world in often drastic ways, but they are still subjective...
 

CheshireCat

New member
Joined
Oct 20, 2013
Messages
82
MBTI Type
GOO
Enneagram
954
Sorry but I don't see how equal rights is evil. your opinion notwithstanding.

Its not the "equal rights", its the power of legislation over the law. Arguments have been brought up time and time again asserting that legislation is a mere tool to hold one class of persons in subjection by another class of persons.

"But if justice be a natural principle, then it is necessarily an immutable one; and can no more be changed- by any power inferior to that which established it- than can be the law of gravitation, the laws of light, the principles of mathematics, or any other natural law or principle whatever;" The science of Justice
 
Top