(August 23, 2011 at 1:22 pm)Captain Scarlet Wrote:(August 23, 2011 at 11:14 am)theVOID Wrote: That's contingent upon what a person means when they say "morality" and there is no rigid definition, just a collection of terms trying to get at roughly the same thing.You would need to help me understand that. Independent of what a person exactly means when they refer to morality, it still would seem to me to be an abstract, at least I have never heard a of a concrete instantiation of morality in the universe. And that is the point for me, without the framework of ethics talk of morality is meaningless as any abstraction needs a framework in which to 'exist'. But existence within a framework is not existence as we know it. Thus I would be forced to conclude that morality doesn't exist. But people and their actions clearly do, and what we at least know through study is that given time, cultures adopt certain values some shared and most not. But again I am not aware of any value that has been consistently shared throughout time/space.
For me the term refers to the conflict/interaction between subjective values and since subjective value does exist and interact then morality necessarily exists.
I agree that it does not exist in the concept that a theist would purport that is exists. However, objective morality may exist on some level. It may very well be the smallest of platforms, but I think it could be argued that it does exist. I don't know of any society (correct me if I'm wrong) that has ever endorsed random violence (killing) of its own people or a society that has ever excused all forms of murder, rape and theft. There does seem to be a general consensus the world over of a very basic nature that opposes violence when it is unchecked and unwarranted within it's own group.
Even the majority of captured serial killers (and of course there are exceptions) who admittedly do not understand why they killed for no reason understand that what they did was wrong on some level. Could this not be argued as objective morality? The understanding that unwarranted violence is inherently wrong seems to be a global phenomenon. Ruling out war and all things associated with conquest and even slavery, there seems to be a basic platform of object morality that may very well have never been defined but exists none the less.
Perhaps a natural ancient survival instinct ... "If I kill indiscriminately, I will be killed." or maybe, "I do not kill my own kind, cause we need each other to survive." Perhaps this concept became the platform we now call morality. Just theorizing at this point. All I'm saying is there seems to be a general sense of objective morality that seems to be at the core of all the subjective morality - which of course, is where you get the supernatural input. God gets to take the credit for all morality when in reality, the object morality platform is simply a result of millions of years of evolution.
Just theorizing of course.