RE: On theism, why do humans have moral duties even if there are objective moral values?
May 20, 2022 at 12:18 pm
(This post was last modified: May 20, 2022 at 12:41 pm by The Grand Nudger.)
(May 19, 2022 at 9:57 pm)Neo-Scholastic Wrote: IMHO references to objectivity often entail the notion that attaining a third-person perspective, i.e. a God's-Eye-View is conceivable. But if it is truly concievable, as opposed to say just imagined, then the object of that conception would be God. So really objectivity entails the concept of God in at least as much as it is possible to percieve the universe from the outside.
Few minor issues here, if we're speaking objectively. A third person perspective is not extra-universal. A third person perspective is not a god's eye view...or even close to it. A third person perspective is not a requirement for objectivity.
Do you think it might be consequential to a persons conclusions if they manage to get every assertion wrong? Handily, this does double duty in answering the OPQ.
@Pnerd
We insist that we have moral duties, regardless of whether any gods exist, because we understand that actions of moral import have consequences. We must be good, because if we weren't that would be bad. Duty (of any kind) is a strongly consequentialist notion - the foundations of deontology being laid in the known or imagined or perceived outcomes between disparate acts.
It's my duty to feed my children, for example..because they can't feed themselves. Because, were I not to feed them, they would starve, and starving people is bad. That's before you get to the elective nature of most duties. Not elective in that if you have a duty you can decide whether to do it - that's ruled out in the definition of a duty. In that we largely choose what we're duty bound by. To starve a person is bad. To create a person to starve..worse. Duty and deontology have been incredibly useful to institutions - read my sig for an example - so..while it may be that we don't have duties, things we must do, objectively...it's easy to see why we might assert as much anyway. In the end, there isn;t anything stopping people from engaging in an elective objective morality. You can clearly see what's right and what's wrong as a point of fact - but..even if so.. that's not the end of the story, only the beginning. We may see right clearly, and elect not to satisfy it. We may see a thing for the wrong it is, and wholeheartedly engage in it anyway. Picking and choosing when we're moral.
I am the Infantry. I am my country’s strength in war, her deterrent in peace. I am the heart of the fight… wherever, whenever. I carry America’s faith and honor against her enemies. I am the Queen of Battle. I am what my country expects me to be, the best trained Soldier in the world. In the race for victory, I am swift, determined, and courageous, armed with a fierce will to win. Never will I fail my country’s trust. Always I fight on…through the foe, to the objective, to triumph overall. If necessary, I will fight to my death. By my steadfast courage, I have won more than 200 years of freedom. I yield not to weakness, to hunger, to cowardice, to fatigue, to superior odds, For I am mentally tough, physically strong, and morally straight. I forsake not, my country, my mission, my comrades, my sacred duty. I am relentless. I am always there, now and forever. I AM THE INFANTRY! FOLLOW ME!
