(February 18, 2010 at 7:39 pm)objectivitees Wrote: Yo, void man... I already pointed out that there are repercussions for those who don't conform to societal norms. So, I really don't get why you keep repeating this point as if it will spark some realization in me, and lead me to finally get your point. my point in saying that is, that you aren't understanding my goal here.
It's all part of the package, if we are going to have moral codes we have to uphold them or else they become just as meaningless to us humans as it is cosmically.
Quote: The question is why? Why does it matter when every individual or society gets to choose their morality, if one or the other is offended?
Why do morals matter? Because they are the founding tenants of how a society chooses to function.
Society grew and evolved with moral norms, either genetically such as the moral stance against murder for the benefit of society or historically such as the rise and fall of the moral slave trade, at any given point in time a culture of humans will have a certain set of moral codes that represents how the majority of them wish to live. Break these moral laws and lose your place in society. If you are a minority on a given position then tough, you either behave how your society deems moral, leave the society, or you have consequences. It doesn't matter if in the future or on another continent people agree with your minority position, the society that you are currently part of and all of the benefits that come with it dictate what is morally accepted at that moment in time and space. If it's a minor moral offence you can either take scorn, such as the homosexual community often do around the world, or leave. If it's a major offence, such as murder, you suffer the consequences opposed or flea prosecution, either way society will judge you based on their majority morals.
Quote: If morals are subjective, as you claim, then no one's morals are "superior" to anyone else's. I ask "why" in an attempt to get you, the Atheist to justify your moral values as a rhetorical exercise to demonstrate to you it is not possible given your presuppositions.
Majority rules within it's territory, in another territory another majority rules. Don't like it? well too bad, because that's what happens all over the world. You can either pull your head out of the sand and start making judgements on the nature or morals based on what is actually happening in the world or you can stay in lala land. The choice is yours.
Quote: If all moral values are equal, then in effect, there can be no justification for any of them over and against any other moral value.
One man, one vote - Does that make everyone president?
Quote: Why is what you believe "better" or "good" or "superior to" or "preferable" to any other set of moral values? If you say it's for "survival", I'll just ask what makes "survival" a "preferable" condition when it matters not whether you survive in the struggle, or someone or something else does. In the end, something will survive, or not, and none of it will matter where there are no moral values. There will only be what there is.
1) I never said my views were absolutely better than anyone else's just on face value, they are representatively better amongst the society I currently live in. The only moral disagreements i have with the majority position are minor to the point of irrelevant at present, such as a few issues on victimless crime, such as legalizing weed.
2) Survival is preferable to death, for no other reason that life wants to live, death is not part of it's function, it is the antithesis of it's function.
3) None of it matters cosmically or eternally, but it matters to us as a community, nation, culture and species, all right here and now, and that is enough reason to give it the best damn shot we have. We need to work at it as a society and find the moral values that the majority agree with and try and live our lives by these tenants as best we can.
I noticed you dropped the last part so i will rephrase:
Why do you think that there is an absolute morality, do you have any rational or empirical reasons for this belief and why do you think that absolute morals explain the reality of the worlds moral situation better than evolutionary models of morality?
.
