Is morality objective or subjective?

[FlashDangerpants]

If a claim is subjective, you cannot check it against anything, and that subsequently brings into question whther it can have a truth value at all.

That would make subjective morality pretty well useless.

Morality is useful for what we use it for, which is a set of social practises that make it possible for us to live together and form societies, which is something most of us seem to like. Objective morality is a fiction, so I would question the suggestion that it is the useful type while the thing we actually do have and make daily use of is the useless one.

You can waste an entire lifetime trying to crowbar morality open and find a special truth inside that makes you right about everything and anyone who dares spite you a fool, but that's implementally irrational so I suggest stopping. And I suggest VA stops too, and also IC.

The fact that everyone agrees that Paris is smelly cannot make it and objective fact, it just makes it a commonly held subjective belief.

Smelliness is defined by people smelling it.

If people find that something smells fishy then it objectively smells fishy. It has that property but a human nose is required to detect it.

That make no difference to what I wrote. The presence of molecules wafting on the breeze may be claimed to demonstrate an objective odour (although you should probably look into Lockean secondary properties before over comitting there), but detectability of odour compounds does not make the judgment that something is smelly an objective claim.

[Immanuel Can]

Why were you suddenly talking about your private sexual proclivities? I can't recall having asked, and it's certainly none of my business..."

Well, as a Christian, aren't your sexual propensities the business of God?

Everyone's are business of God. But yours and Harbal's are not mine. I am not the Judge. And it's not my job to set the standard for you. There is One who does that, and you must do your business with Him.

[Immanuel Can]

Nevertheless, you are obviously fascinated by it.

Ummm...nope, sorry. Not even remotely interested, actually. It was you who brought it up -- for what reason I'll never know. I'm fine with moving on.

[Skepdick]

Morality is useful for what we use it for,

The same goes for objectivity.

And it goes without saying that neither morality nor objectivity are useful for the things we don't use them for.

Objective morality is a fiction

All morality is fiction. Nothing precludes fiction from being objective.

This is how social constructions work. Like every single philosophical social norm you are clutching onto and enforcing/upholding.

[phyllo]

Why were you suddenly talking about your private sexual proclivities? I can't recall having asked, and it's certainly none of my business..."

Well, as a Christian, aren't your sexual propensities the business of God?

Everyone's are business of God. But yours and Harbal's are not mine. I am not the Judge. And it's not my job to set the standard for you. There is One who does that, and you must do your business with Him.

So what do you do? Stand by and watch? Wait for the last judgement?

That's your ethics and morality???

[Harbal]

What if you don't have a sense of smell? What if one person finds that something smells fishy, but another thinks it smells peppery, with a slight hint of cinnamon? What is the objective truth of the matter then?

If you don't have the sense of smell then you don't have the organ for detecting smells.

In which case you would probably not consider it an objective fact that Paris smells fishy. And suppose a virus swept around the world, causing every living creature to lose its sense of smell. Would Paris still smell fishy then?

Can people be wrong about smells?

They can if they think something smells of fish and no element of fish is present, but if they claim that something smells like fish to them, who is to say that it doesn't?

[Will Bouwman]

That's just your point of view.

Which is precisely the fucking point...

[Skepdick]

That's just your point of view.

Which is precisely the fucking point...

There's something in teeth. Need a floss?

[Harbal]

Nevertheless, you are obviously fascinated by it.

Ummm...nope, sorry. Not even remotely interested, actually. It was you who brought it up --

If you don't want to hear about it, has it occurred to you to stop referring to it?

[Will Bouwman]

There's something in teeth. Need a floss?

Careful Skepdick; you're in danger of learning something.

[Immanuel Can]

Well, as a Christian, aren't your sexual propensities the business of God?

Everyone's are business of God. But yours and Harbal's are not mine. I am not the Judge. And it's not my job to set the standard for you. There is One who does that, and you must do your business with Him.

So what do you do? Stand by and watch? Wait for the last judgement?

What do you do? You believe God now, and go His way, accept His moral standard, and establish your ongoing relationship with Him. Or, you use yourself as your moral 'standard,' and wait and hear the truth later.

We aren't "standing by." We all get to choose actively...in fact, we're all choosing actively right now, whether we realize it or not.

[Immanuel Can]

Nevertheless, you are obviously fascinated by it.

Ummm...nope, sorry. Not even remotely interested, actually. It was you who brought it up --

If you don't want to hear about it, has it occurred to you to stop referring to it?

Gladly.

Now, what did you want to say, before you did the spontaneous, "Here are my proclivities" thing?

[Harbal]

Ummm...nope, sorry. Not even remotely interested, actually. It was you who brought it up --

If you don't want to hear about it, has it occurred to you to stop referring to it?

Gladly.

Now, what did you want to say, before you did the spontaneous, "Here are my proclivities" thing?

Nothing, except don't forget to let me know about the knickers.

[iambiguous]

Why were you suddenly talking about your private sexual proclivities? I can't recall having asked, and it's certainly none of my business..."

Well, as a Christian, aren't your sexual propensities the business of God?

Everyone's are business of God. But yours and Harbal's are not mine. I am not the Judge. And it's not my job to set the standard for you. There is One who does that, and you must do your business with Him.

Right, right. You're job is to remind us that no one can be saved unless they accept Jesus Christ as their own personal savior. And, surely, that entails asking yourself "what would Jesus do?".

In or out of bed.

Would Jesus masturbate? Would Jesus watch porn? Would Jesus tolerate homosexuality? Would Jesus condone sex outside of marriage? Would Jesus sanction "scarlet letters" for adultery?

Start here: https://www.google.com/search?q=the+chr ... s-wiz-serp

Then get back to us on what truly is okay or not okay for Christians to do sexually all the way up to Judgment Day.

[Skepdick]

There's something in teeth. Need a floss?

Careful Skepdick; you're in danger of learning something.

I'm dusting off old skills... Horses for courses.