RE: Objective morality as a proper basic belief
June 24, 2017 at 11:10 pm
(This post was last modified: June 24, 2017 at 11:19 pm by Whateverist.)
(June 24, 2017 at 9:44 pm)Little Henry Wrote:(June 24, 2017 at 5:51 pm)Whateverist Wrote: @Little Henry - So here is how morality can be objective without any gods. It starts out as subjective. But then you take note of what morals people just do happen to have in common - and by far nearly everyone shares almost all morality in common. So then you look through all the morals people have in common and you start noticing common themes. From those you distill a hierarchy of morality - things like non-harm, mutual support, reciprocity, the usual suspects. That hierarchy of morals is objectively the morality of our species, the distillate of those 'shoulds' which have best served us and therefore been selected for through natural selection and culture.
That desnt make it objective at all...For something to be objective, it must be true or exist regardless of anyone's opinion.
Well technically that is what is generally meant by objective morality alright. But my statement that morality tends to consist of the same sentiments across the entire human species does not depend on my subjective opinion. It is an objective claim which can be tested.
(June 24, 2017 at 9:44 pm)Little Henry Wrote:(June 24, 2017 at 5:51 pm)Whateverist Wrote: If this seems hard it is probably because you subscribe to belief in radical free will. No one has dispositions which largely determine actions; according to that point of view all actions are freely chosen. This leads those who share this POV to imagine that either behavior must be governed by OM facts or else behavior would simply be random - which clearly it is not. But our actions are not chosen on a purely rational basis. I'm sure to a highly intelligent alien our actions would seem as predictable as those of a pet dog. We just don't see it from within our human framework. It is very hard to distinguish which actions reflect a rational decision and which show the sway of our dispositional heritage. That doesn't mean we don't have one. Those are the facts
Free will is a radical belief? if free will doesnt exist, then it is incoherent to assign moral blame to someone.
Not sure if you're being facetious but if not you should reread what I wrote. To call a variety of free will radical is hardly the same thing as saying all interpretations of free will are radical. The rest of what you wrote there seems not to apply to what I said.
[/quote]
