(August 17, 2019 at 9:18 pm)Acrobat Wrote:And the hair splitting starts. It wasn't a difficult question until you fucked it up(August 17, 2019 at 1:52 pm)Abaddon_ire Wrote: So you think wellbeing is not a moral objective. Oh fucking boy.
Explain why wellbeing is not a moral objective.
You asked me if well-being is a reasonable basis to base morality on, not whether wellbeing is a moral objective.
(August 17, 2019 at 9:18 pm)Acrobat Wrote: So based on the original question, let take the example of gave of Japan.Let's not. That is trivial diversion. Grow up.
(August 17, 2019 at 9:18 pm)Acrobat Wrote: It would be beneficial to the wellbeing of Japanese society, if their younger generation got married and produced more children.No it wouldn't be beneficial to that country. It would be detrimental. Japan is already screwed by overpopulation.
(August 17, 2019 at 9:18 pm)Acrobat Wrote: The situation currently shows a growing trend that’s causing a significance demise of their society as a whole.Sure, Japan is dying. Right.
(August 17, 2019 at 9:18 pm)Acrobat Wrote: Yet, I don’t see the idea of forgoing marriage and children as immoral, do you?Strawman
(August 17, 2019 at 9:18 pm)Acrobat Wrote: Is it immoral for Japanese young people to be okay with the predicated decline of their society as a whole, as a result of low birth rates? I don’t think so.Strawman.
(August 17, 2019 at 9:18 pm)Acrobat Wrote: I also fail to see any reason to label what’s beneficial or not beneficial to wellbeing with moral components, not to mention the term is a bit hazy.Well that is just a dumb statement.
(August 17, 2019 at 9:18 pm)Acrobat Wrote: Has Christianity been beneficial to the wellbeing of society, has western societies been better off with it, than if they continued n their pagan tradition? I think so, does that mean Christianity is or at least was morally good?Sure, because stringing up those witched was a good thing. The crusades were a good thing. Raping those children was a good thing. Covering up the child rape was a good thing. Right?
(August 17, 2019 at 9:18 pm)Acrobat Wrote: How about slavery, if slavery benefited us more than cost our societies in the long term with several hundred years of free labor, does this mean it was a morally good thing?Wow. You are now defending slavery. That makes you immoral straight out of the box.
(August 17, 2019 at 9:18 pm)Acrobat Wrote: In addition in the real world morality works a lot more different, than any sort of rational system you devise for it. In fact our proactive moral behavior, has no real connection with any sort of moral rationalization.No, the moment you defended slavery, you lost any moral standing. That is on you, nobody else.
