RE: Atheists only vote please: Do absolute MORAL truths exist? Is Rape ALWAYS "wr...
October 31, 2014 at 6:37 am
My apologies if what I say below has been said before, I have not read the whole thread.
I think there are absolute and objective morals, here's why:
I think all morals are based on conscious creatures, as if something cannot experience it has no interest in morality. A world with no life, with only rocks, or even a world with only rocks and plants, would have no morals. I think this is a pretty safe thing to say.
However, once you get conscious creatures, I think morals can be objective, Sam Harris does a very good job of explaining it in his book The Moral Landscape.
Let's say we take the worst possible scenario; the most possible suffering for everyone. I cannot think of anything worse than that. If that is objectively the worst possible scenario for all conscious creatures then everything that moves away from that is moral and everything that moves towards that is immoral. As rape causes suffering for the victim, I think it can be objectively considered immoral. In a case where the victim enjoys the rape, however, would not necessarily be immoral.
Basically I think there is one big absolute moral truth; to minimize suffering is good, to increase suffering is bad.
I am not sure if this is an adequate explanation, feel free to ask questions.
I think there are absolute and objective morals, here's why:
I think all morals are based on conscious creatures, as if something cannot experience it has no interest in morality. A world with no life, with only rocks, or even a world with only rocks and plants, would have no morals. I think this is a pretty safe thing to say.
However, once you get conscious creatures, I think morals can be objective, Sam Harris does a very good job of explaining it in his book The Moral Landscape.
Let's say we take the worst possible scenario; the most possible suffering for everyone. I cannot think of anything worse than that. If that is objectively the worst possible scenario for all conscious creatures then everything that moves away from that is moral and everything that moves towards that is immoral. As rape causes suffering for the victim, I think it can be objectively considered immoral. In a case where the victim enjoys the rape, however, would not necessarily be immoral.
Basically I think there is one big absolute moral truth; to minimize suffering is good, to increase suffering is bad.
I am not sure if this is an adequate explanation, feel free to ask questions.
