RE: In Defense of a Non-Natural Moral Order
August 29, 2019 at 12:46 pm
(This post was last modified: August 29, 2019 at 1:00 pm by John 6IX Breezy.)
Earlier in the thread I mentioned that, to me, the boundaries between objective and subjective are blurred to begin with. However, even if we set up discreet and absolute boundaries, it also seems to me that both have an intimate relationship with one another. That is to say, that the contents of each often references or overlaps with the contents of the other.
In terms of overlap you have things such as sounds, in which the subjective experience of loudness corresponds to the objective observation of amplitude.
In terms of reference, you have subjective opinions such as personal views on abortion, which clearly reference the external acts of abortion.
When I see individuals in this thread saying morality is subjective and others objective, it makes me wonder if both are saying that morality is exclusively subjective or exclusively objective without any referent or overlap into the other category.
Thoughts?
In terms of overlap you have things such as sounds, in which the subjective experience of loudness corresponds to the objective observation of amplitude.
In terms of reference, you have subjective opinions such as personal views on abortion, which clearly reference the external acts of abortion.
When I see individuals in this thread saying morality is subjective and others objective, it makes me wonder if both are saying that morality is exclusively subjective or exclusively objective without any referent or overlap into the other category.
Thoughts?
