(July 16, 2017 at 8:11 pm)Mr.wizard Wrote: Morality itself is not objective, you can get to objective moral conclusions depending on the foundation you are using to measure it. For example, if you use well-being as a foundation, then it is objectively immoral to chop off somebody's head.Unless, apparently, you're chopping off the head of a despot who caused massive ill-being to millions.
Everything is contextual, even with wellbeing as a basis.
I'm having a debate with a theist on another forum who insists that morality is objective. His go-to example is the apologist canard of "torturing innocent babies purely for personal pleasure", or in other words, "the most contrived example I can possibly concoct that you would be afraid to disagree with." Since "everyone agrees" that torturing innocents is objectively wrong, then at least some morality is objective.
I think this is confusing clarity with objectivity. There's nothing particularly objective about the visceral reaction most people would have to torturing innocents. It's just that virtually all societies in all eras instinctively sanction such behavior because allowing it would make the society collapse rather quickly. There are a handful of things like this that virtually no one disagrees with, but that does not make it objective.
