RE: My views on objective morality
March 12, 2016 at 10:24 pm
(This post was last modified: March 12, 2016 at 10:32 pm by bennyboy.)
(March 12, 2016 at 10:00 pm)Catholic_Lady Wrote:(March 12, 2016 at 9:21 pm)bennyboy Wrote: /thread
CL, you have spent over 100 pages crowing that morality is objective, and double talking, and never giving any reasons, explaining any examples, or supporting your idea with any rationale or evidence.
What exactly do you want to know?
I want to know what you think morality is, and why you think it's objective. We're 100 pages in, and you've not really bothered (so far as I can see) to explain either of those things-- things which I would have expected to be done on the 1st page of any thread, ideally in the OP.
Here, let me give you an example. I think morality is a communal agreement about which behaviors are or aren't desirable. They represent a balance between our instincts (for example the instinct to protect loved ones) and the evolution of various cultural ideas (for example, religious ideas about God). I believe this because some morals (like the protection of children) are consistent across most cultures, while others (like views on homosexuality) are radically different. I'd argue this is because most people have instincts for/about children, but we do not have instincts about sexual alignment. My evidence for this is that North American culture just a few decades ago was massively against homosexuality, but now is much less so-- in such a short time, the instincts of people could not have changed (that takes thousands or millions of years), so it is only ideas which have changed.
See? I have ideas, can explain my reasons for holding them, and can even provide some evidence supporting my reasons.
Okay, now it's your turn. . . *begins holding breath*
