Universal and objective morality?

[Speed Gavroche]

Its the decision that most people are content with presently, I dont mean tolerating taxation either, I mean being bought cheap in the market place and believing that the obscenely rich who year on year pay themselves more are entitled to every penny.

The bankers and obscenely rich have no problem restricting the freedom of everyone else to solve their "selfish personal problems", hell, its the whole logic of the fortune five hundred, they didnt get there by altruism and benefice.

It's funny that you say so much bullshit with a libertarian actor as avatar, ha ha.

 

[RaptorWizard]

Morality is a human perception of good being joy and evil being pain, whereas on the cosmic scale of the universe, we and our morality mean pretty much nothing.

 

[Lark]

It's funny that you say so much bullshit with a libertarian actor as avatar, ha ha.

Its not funny that you say so much bullshit.

 

[Speed Gavroche]

Its not funny that you say so much bullshit.

Ah.

 

[xisnotx]

universal, maybe.
objective, i'm not so sure.

 

[Little_Sticks]

It's difficult to say anything, given that I consider the ability to reason as something quite profound. On the one hand, people will argue an objective reality, as that which exists independently from our consciousness; but on the other hand, our consciousness interacts with that reality, shapes it, and even defines it through our reason, where the definition of what is real would otherwise be undecided or simply undefined.

So there's a special problem (or paradox or answer) where our reason is limited by how it perceives reality; but similarly then, reality must also then be limited by how it is reasoned. Jung, being a philosopher, I understand tried to describe these aspects with rationality (reason) and irrationality (perception) making up all possible types of people, but...

So some will argue whether certain things are subjective or not, or whether logic describes reality when it can be true or false by the nature of logic, usually depending on how one chooses to reason. So...it might seem ridiculous to suggest this if whomever is reading this doesn't understand what I'm saying, but there can be universal and objective morality - and there can not; because with choice, there is potential for all kinds of meaning.

Sometimes I wonder if all philosophy really boils down to is the question "What is real(ity)?" And it would seem that everyone is a philosopher then, but that the distinction of philosopher would generally go to those that habitually look for more answers than what they are given or find.

 

[gmanyo]

if you steal then you go to jail so it must be wrong MYSTERY SOLVED