Posts: 5336
Threads: 198
Joined: June 24, 2010
Reputation:
77
RE: Do atheists even need an objective moral system?
December 12, 2012 at 9:36 pm
(December 12, 2012 at 8:53 pm)teaearlgreyhot Wrote: When theists throw the term "objective morality" around they mean that certain actions or states are right and wrong independent of anybody's opinion.
And how would this evaluation be made objectively if morality can't be measured in numbers. Temperature, kinetic energy, velocity, gravity, etc is objective because there are units of measure that can be expressed in numbers. Morality has no such unit of measure.
Quote:Why should we care if somebody has been wronged? Why is it wrong for somebody to be "wronged"?
Two words: social contract
Atheist Forums Hall of Shame:
"The trinity can be equated to having your cake and eating it too."
... -Lucent, trying to defend the Trinity concept
"(Yahweh's) actions are good because (Yahweh) is the ultimate standard of goodness. That’s not begging the question"
... -Statler Waldorf, Christian apologist
Posts: 3226
Threads: 244
Joined: April 17, 2012
Reputation:
54
RE: Do atheists even need an objective moral system?
December 12, 2012 at 9:40 pm
(December 12, 2012 at 9:36 pm)DeistPaladin Wrote: ...
Two words: social contract
And if one doesn't agree to the social contract?
My ignore list
"The lord doesn't work in mysterious ways, but in ways that are indistinguishable from his nonexistence."
-- George Yorgo Veenhuyzen quoted by John W. Loftus in The End of Christianity (p. 103).
Posts: 69248
Threads: 3759
Joined: August 2, 2009
Reputation:
259
RE: Do atheists even need an objective moral system?
December 12, 2012 at 11:56 pm
(December 12, 2012 at 9:28 pm)teaearlgreyhot Wrote: (December 12, 2012 at 9:18 pm)Darkstar Wrote: Objective morality isn't really possible. A bit of subjectivity can be good; ...
But "good" is subjective... 
"Subjectivity is objective."
-- Woody Allen ( Love and Death)
Posts: 35
Threads: 1
Joined: October 17, 2012
Reputation:
1
RE: Do atheists even need an objective moral system?
December 13, 2012 at 12:09 am
Tea, I actually like your approach to the moral "argument" quite a bit. I have my own responses, but it really does make a lot of more sense and it cuts away the extra layer of drama theists like to add to the debate by assuming objective morality and ultimate answers exist.
Posts: 5336
Threads: 198
Joined: June 24, 2010
Reputation:
77
RE: Do atheists even need an objective moral system?
December 13, 2012 at 12:33 am
(December 12, 2012 at 9:40 pm)teaearlgreyhot Wrote: (December 12, 2012 at 9:36 pm)DeistPaladin Wrote: ...
Two words: social contract
And if one doesn't agree to the social contract?
Then one is a hypocrite, asking for a different standard of treatment than one is willing to afford to others.
Atheist Forums Hall of Shame:
"The trinity can be equated to having your cake and eating it too."
... -Lucent, trying to defend the Trinity concept
"(Yahweh's) actions are good because (Yahweh) is the ultimate standard of goodness. That’s not begging the question"
... -Statler Waldorf, Christian apologist
Posts: 3226
Threads: 244
Joined: April 17, 2012
Reputation:
54
RE: Do atheists even need an objective moral system?
December 13, 2012 at 12:40 am
(December 13, 2012 at 12:33 am)DeistPaladin Wrote: (December 12, 2012 at 9:40 pm)teaearlgreyhot Wrote: And if one doesn't agree to the social contract?
Then one is a hypocrite, asking for a different standard of treatment than one is willing to afford to others.
So? What if the person values hypocrisy? Or doesn't care?
My ignore list
"The lord doesn't work in mysterious ways, but in ways that are indistinguishable from his nonexistence."
-- George Yorgo Veenhuyzen quoted by John W. Loftus in The End of Christianity (p. 103).
Posts: 5336
Threads: 198
Joined: June 24, 2010
Reputation:
77
RE: Do atheists even need an objective moral system?
December 13, 2012 at 12:42 am
(December 13, 2012 at 12:40 am)teaearlgreyhot Wrote: (December 13, 2012 at 12:33 am)DeistPaladin Wrote: Then one is a hypocrite, asking for a different standard of treatment than one is willing to afford to others.
So? What if the person values hypocrisy? Or doesn't care?
OK. ...but I think such an admission would compromise one's argument and credibility.
Atheist Forums Hall of Shame:
"The trinity can be equated to having your cake and eating it too."
... -Lucent, trying to defend the Trinity concept
"(Yahweh's) actions are good because (Yahweh) is the ultimate standard of goodness. That’s not begging the question"
... -Statler Waldorf, Christian apologist
Posts: 5598
Threads: 112
Joined: July 16, 2012
Reputation:
74
RE: Do atheists even need an objective moral system?
December 13, 2012 at 12:47 am
(December 13, 2012 at 12:40 am)teaearlgreyhot Wrote: So? What if the person values hypocrisy? Or doesn't care?
As diverse as human social constructs can be, persons like this are rarely tolerated in any of them unless they have the power to outright control the construct or the willingness to submit to a system they dislike. It also depends on how objectionable they find the system and their willingness to actively disrupt it.
Posts: 3226
Threads: 244
Joined: April 17, 2012
Reputation:
54
RE: Do atheists even need an objective moral system?
December 13, 2012 at 12:48 am
(This post was last modified: December 13, 2012 at 12:51 am by Tea Earl Grey Hot.)
(December 13, 2012 at 12:42 am)DeistPaladin Wrote: (December 13, 2012 at 12:40 am)teaearlgreyhot Wrote: So? What if the person values hypocrisy? Or doesn't care?
OK. ...but I think such an admission would compromise one's argument and credibility.
And there really isn't a reason I can see based on non-arbitrary values to be concerned with such things as hypocrisy or credibility. It seems that for all the "good" moral values that most people hold, a person could just as easily hold the exact opposite set of values.
(December 13, 2012 at 12:47 am)Ryantology Wrote: (December 13, 2012 at 12:40 am)teaearlgreyhot Wrote: So? What if the person values hypocrisy? Or doesn't care?
As diverse as human social constructs can be, persons like this are rarely tolerated in any of them unless they have the power to outright control the construct or the willingness to submit to a system they dislike. It also depends on how objectionable they find the system and their willingness to actively disrupt it.
True, but I'm not talking about how a person could get away with such things. That's irrelevant.
My ignore list
"The lord doesn't work in mysterious ways, but in ways that are indistinguishable from his nonexistence."
-- George Yorgo Veenhuyzen quoted by John W. Loftus in The End of Christianity (p. 103).
Posts: 5336
Threads: 198
Joined: June 24, 2010
Reputation:
77
RE: Do atheists even need an objective moral system?
December 13, 2012 at 1:05 am
(December 13, 2012 at 12:48 am)teaearlgreyhot Wrote: And there really isn't a reason I can see based on non-arbitrary values to be concerned with such things as hypocrisy or credibility. It seems that for all the "good" moral values that most people hold, a person could just as easily hold the exact opposite set of values.
See my previous argument about how not all subjective evaluations are equal. Some can be better supported by logical argument and objective data than others.
To use another example, let's say two people are running for political office, an incumbent for re-election and a challenger. The incumbent will obviously claim to have done a "good job" while the challenger will say the opposite. The public doesn't just call this a wash, that both subjective opinions are equally valid and reality is up for grabs anyway. No, both candidates are then expected to support their case with objective data and reasoned arguments. The one who can support their subjective evaluation with objective data and logic has a stronger case.
The same is true for moral issues. Admitting that morality is a subjective matter doesn't mean all moral codes are equal.
Atheist Forums Hall of Shame:
"The trinity can be equated to having your cake and eating it too."
... -Lucent, trying to defend the Trinity concept
"(Yahweh's) actions are good because (Yahweh) is the ultimate standard of goodness. That’s not begging the question"
... -Statler Waldorf, Christian apologist
|
