(March 19, 2014 at 7:57 am)tor Wrote: If morals are subjective what arguments you gonna propose against lets say bullying? Bullying comes from evolution.
Lets say there is a continent on which bullying is considered fine thing. How are you gonna argue against it?
First, I've said before and am glad to repeat:
Subjective does not mean all opinions are equal.
Some subjective opinions are supported by objective data and logical arguments and others are not. This is why we have a judicial system. If the defendant says "I'm innocent" and the prosecution says "he's guilty" we don't just consider it a wash because both are opinions. We weigh the evidence and hear the arguments before we make an evaluation.
As far as your bullying example, there are many different approaches. I could use the Bentham Utilitarian principle to show the long term damage and costs of bullying. I could use the Social Contract to show how we wouldn't want this to happen to ourselves and it would be hypocritical to consider it good enough for others. We could use the Rawl's Veil of Ignorance to imagine we will be cast in one of the two roles but we won't know which one until the "veil" is lifted and under such conditions we'd want the most just system we could create.
What all these arguments have in common is the use of objective reality and logical evaluation to make conclusions as to right and wrong. Morality is subjective but this should not mean that "anything goes".
...and evolution has nothing to do with anything here. Just because something is a certain way doesn't mean it ought to be so. Religious people often get confused because the "is" and "ought" are so intertwined in their world view.
To the religious minded, "it is so" is followed by "God made it that way" which is followed by "and so it ought to be".
To science, the "is" and "ought" are two separate issues. In fact, science isn't concerned with the ought at all. "It is so" is followed by a period and full stop. A scientist can legitimately feel that "...and it really sucks and I wish it were not" but that is not part of the scientific method.
Thus, "we evolved that way" is not to be taken as "and so it's right".
Atheist Forums Hall of Shame:
"The trinity can be equated to having your cake and eating it too."
... -Lucent, trying to defend the Trinity concept
"(Yahweh's) actions are good because (Yahweh) is the ultimate standard of goodness. That’s not begging the question"
... -Statler Waldorf, Christian apologist
"The trinity can be equated to having your cake and eating it too."
... -Lucent, trying to defend the Trinity concept
"(Yahweh's) actions are good because (Yahweh) is the ultimate standard of goodness. That’s not begging the question"
... -Statler Waldorf, Christian apologist
