Objective Morality, Anyone?

[Jovanian Teapot]

OK. let me lay it out.

Objective morality is real? I'd say not. It seems to me that all of our moral judgments are based chiefly on how the event in question makes us feel. I can see no reason to assume there is some set value system with which to judge an action morally better or worse that exists independent of the human mind. It is interesting for me to think that so many people Hold onto their idea of objective morality. At any rate, i just want to see if anyone has a quick argument that could show me what all the fuss is about.

[Alex K]

What is objective morality?

[max-greece]

What is objective morality?

Whatever you find moral - I object to.

[Alex K]

What is objective morality?

Whatever you find moral - I object to.

[*Deidre*]

When it comes to the justice system though, seems we can somewhat collectively agree on what is objectively illegal? Yes? We have laws in place that I think we can all agree, make sense. Do you think laws are decided based on a collective concept of morality? (Objective morality?) (Right vs. wrong)

I know that the idea of morality goes outside of just the legal system, but that is just something I've wondered about. If there is no such thing as objective morality, why are laws created and enforced?

Think we attach objective morality to the idea of a Deity, and we balk at that, but can objective morality stem from a secular society?

[Alex K]

What do you all mean by "objective" again?

[MindForgedManacle]

Trying to term morality "objective" or "subjective" has always seemed stupid to me and very confused. The word objective as used here doesn't even make sense. If by "objective morality" you mean "moral truths independent of any mind's beliefs about them" that doesn't really work. After all, one still has to accept some particular ethical framework as the most suitable one even if you take this meta-ethical view (which is called "moral realism" by the way).

The problem is that moral statements are normative statements, close siblings to statements like "Chess is better than checkers"; they entail value judgements, which have a different logical standing. That itself certainly doesn't negate the possibility of moral realism being true but it does, I think, clue one in on how not to argue for it.

[FreeTony]

What is objective morality?

Theist "You are an immoral Atheist because you don't follow God's laws"
Atheist "How do you know they are moral laws?"
Theist "God is the ultimate moral authority"
Atheist "How do you know that?"

At this point the Theist has a problem. They may claim:

1. Faith - problem is that you could turn around and say that anyone is the ultimate moral authority through Faith. I could turn around and say I have faith in my own morals, which is not objective morality.
2. The Bible - however God breaks his own laws and if the only means of testing whether something is moral is through adherence to said laws, God is now classed as immoral. Even if God was totally moral and was nice to people in the bible, you still wouldn't know whether you are being moral or not as you are restricted by this one scale. God could be evil in the grand scheme of things and have given humans evil laws, and you would have no way of knowing.


I personally think morality has to be based on interactions between humans. I won't steal from you because I don't want you to steal from me as would be a massive annoyance to have to keep stealing from each other. Another problem is that we as humans have empathy, which doesn't neatly tie in to morality.


If you went back to various times in the past and asked people whether their society was more moral than that at the times they didn't live in, they would all say yes.

[Alex K]

What is objective morality?

Theist "You are an immoral Atheist because you don't follow God's laws"
Atheist "How do you know they are moral laws?"
Theist "God is the ultimate moral authority"
Atheist "How do you know that?"

At this point the Theist has a problem. They may claim:

1. Faith - problem is that you could turn around and say that anyone is the ultimate moral authority through Faith. I could turn around and say I have faith in my own morals, which is not objective morality.
2. The Bible - however God breaks his own laws and if the only means of testing whether something is moral is through adherence to said laws, God is now classed as immoral. Even if God was totally moral and was nice to people in the bible, you still wouldn't know whether you are being moral or not as you are restricted by this one scale. God could be evil in the grand scheme of things and have given humans evil laws, and you would have no way of knowing.


I personally think morality has to be based on interactions between humans. I won't steal from you because I don't want you to steal from me as would be a massive annoyance to have to keep stealing from each other. Another problem is that we as humans have empathy, which doesn't neatly tie in to morality.


If you went back to various times in the past and asked people whether their society was more moral than that at the times they didn't live in, they would all say yes.

Yes exactly. I think there is a monotheistic variation of Euthyphro's dilemma as well which goes in the same direction.

[bennyboy]

Search button. It works.