(December 4, 2017 at 6:40 pm)Catholic_Lady Wrote: With that beimg said, this is why I don't think morality is subjective to empathy, as many people here claim. Because some folks, such as yourself as an admitted sociopath, don't have it. If morality is built on empathy, how can we really tell a sociopath to not rape (for example) because it is immoral? He can just as easily say "Well, I don't feel sorry for that girl, she means nothing to me, raping her will have 0 negative impact on myself or my community, and im horny... so why should it still be immoral for me to do so?" Its seems logical then that I can't really tell this person that rape is wrong, if my arguments against it is purely subjective empathy. Yet even folks who claim that morality is subjective would still not be ok with that answer from the rapist. Which brings me back to my point #2 - most people still act as though morality is objective even though they claim not to think it is.
Most people think/act as though morality is objective. But 150 years ago, most people thought/acted as though black people were subhuman. What conclusion can you draw from a bunch of people thinking the same thing?
But again, going back to my OP, what I think we are seeing here, is that you are wishing to have the authority to tell everybody unequivocally "No raping!" But that authority just doesn't exist. So you say "what if there's a God, then I have the authority!" Which is true, but it doesn't make God any more likely.
This probably plays a part in the establishment of religion way back when. Do as I say! "No!" Do as I say or I'll take your stuff. "I don't have any stuff." Do as I say or I'll kill you. "Meh, my life's shit anyways, I'll risk it." Do as I say...Because God said for me to tell you this, and he said you'll go to hell if you don't. "Well, I don't want to go to hell!"
