Why Moral Realism Is Almost Certainly True

Should you think about your duty, or about the consequences of your actions? Or should you concentrate on becoming a good person?

Moderators: AMod, iMod

DPMartin
Posts: 339
Joined: Tue Jan 10, 2017 12:11 am

Re: Why Moral Realism Is Almost Certainly True

Post by DPMartin »

Terrapin Station wrote: Mon Apr 19, 2021 5:33 pm
DPMartin wrote: Mon Apr 19, 2021 4:21 pm if morals are subjective then how is it you have to agree to another's set of morals.
You don't have to agree, first off. And if you don't agree, then obviously that isn't your moral view.

you don't have to agree if you come in contact with no one else, but to coexist peacefully, you must come to some sort of agreement, other wise, like the wild, all is fair.

therefore, one's own views are irrelevant unless one is a participant in the making of an agreement.
User avatar
Terrapin Station
Posts: 3840
Joined: Wed Aug 03, 2016 7:18 pm
Location: NYC Man

Re: Why Moral Realism Is Almost Certainly True

Post by Terrapin Station »

DPMartin wrote: Tue Apr 20, 2021 4:15 pm
Terrapin Station wrote: Mon Apr 19, 2021 5:33 pm
DPMartin wrote: Mon Apr 19, 2021 4:21 pm if morals are subjective then how is it you have to agree to another's set of morals.
You don't have to agree, first off. And if you don't agree, then obviously that isn't your moral view.

you don't have to agree if you come in contact with no one else, but to coexist peacefully, you must come to some sort of agreement, other wise, like the wild, all is fair.
Excactly. That's 100% on target.
User avatar
Terrapin Station
Posts: 3840
Joined: Wed Aug 03, 2016 7:18 pm
Location: NYC Man

Re: Why Moral Realism Is Almost Certainly True

Post by Terrapin Station »

Again, it's important to make a distinction between saying/acting as if you agree and actually agreeing.

I just gave an example. I don't actually think you're quite understanding what I'm saying. So I was lying above, but I acted as if I completely agreed with you.

There needs to be a distinction, because we can say things and act in ways that are not honest.
DPMartin
Posts: 339
Joined: Tue Jan 10, 2017 12:11 am

Re: Why Moral Realism Is Almost Certainly True

Post by DPMartin »

Terrapin Station wrote: Tue Apr 20, 2021 5:27 pm Again, it's important to make a distinction between saying/acting as if you agree and actually agreeing.

I just gave an example. I don't actually think you're quite understanding what I'm saying. So I was lying above, but I acted as if I completely agreed with you.

There needs to be a distinction, because we can say things and act in ways that are not honest.
well then unethical you may be, but others in the agreement that you agree to are justified to hold you accountable to them via the agreement. though in some cases the others may not have the ability to enforce it, and in some cases where there's a power and authority included in the agreement therefore they can forced you to make it right according to the agreement.
User avatar
Terrapin Station
Posts: 3840
Joined: Wed Aug 03, 2016 7:18 pm
Location: NYC Man

Re: Why Moral Realism Is Almost Certainly True

Post by Terrapin Station »

DPMartin wrote: Thu Apr 22, 2021 4:05 pm
Terrapin Station wrote: Tue Apr 20, 2021 5:27 pm Again, it's important to make a distinction between saying/acting as if you agree and actually agreeing.

I just gave an example. I don't actually think you're quite understanding what I'm saying. So I was lying above, but I acted as if I completely agreed with you.

There needs to be a distinction, because we can say things and act in ways that are not honest.
well then unethical you may be, but others in the agreement that you agree to are justified to hold you accountable to them via the agreement. though in some cases the others may not have the ability to enforce it, and in some cases where there's a power and authority included in the agreement therefore they can forced you to make it right according to the agreement.
Whether lying is unethical, whether anyone is justified to hold people accountable for agreements, etc. is subjective--it's a matter of individuals' preferences/dispositions. And again, it's something people can express agreement on and act in accord with while not actually agreeing with it. People would generally do that when there are benefits to be gained and/or consequences to avoid, where their preferences for those scenarios are stronger than their preference regarding what they disagree with.

Think of it this way: someone might prefer eating candy to eating broccoli, but if they know that they're going to be punished for doing so, or even for saying so, then their preference for not being punished may very well outweigh their preference for (saying that they prefer) eating candy to eating broccoli, so they're going to say things and behave in a way that avoids punishment--even though they don't at all agree with the situation. (They'll resent it, and it could eventually result in subversiveness or revolt.)

This is why, if we want people to be honest, we have to make it so that they're not penalized for their honesty, whatever it might happen to be.
DPMartin
Posts: 339
Joined: Tue Jan 10, 2017 12:11 am

Re: Why Moral Realism Is Almost Certainly True

Post by DPMartin »

Terrapin Station wrote: Thu Apr 22, 2021 4:23 pm

Whether lying is unethical, whether anyone is justified to hold people accountable for agreements, etc. is subjective--
nope its the group that is agreed, and the morals are the agreement, and those morals are relative to the group only. if there be no agreement there be no morals and it takes more than one to have an agreement. unless you have mental issues and shake your own hand on things, like maybe a duel personality and you believe you can come into an agreement with yourself.

and personal goals are not agreements, because you can not offend an other should you fail.
User avatar
Terrapin Station
Posts: 3840
Joined: Wed Aug 03, 2016 7:18 pm
Location: NYC Man

Re: Why Moral Realism Is Almost Certainly True

Post by Terrapin Station »

DPMartin wrote: Thu Apr 22, 2021 4:44 pm
Terrapin Station wrote: Thu Apr 22, 2021 4:23 pm

Whether lying is unethical, whether anyone is justified to hold people accountable for agreements, etc. is subjective--
nope its the group that is agreed, and the morals are the agreement, and those morals are relative to the group only. if there be no agreement there be no morals and it takes more than one to have an agreement. unless you have mental issues and shake your own hand on things, like maybe a duel personality and you believe you can come into an agreement with yourself.

and personal goals are not agreements, because you can not offend an other should you fail.
No. Agreements on moral stances are agreements on moral stances. Agreements are by no means necessary for moral stances, and moral stances can't obtain via agreements anyway, because there are no conjoint semantics, conjoint attitudes, conjoint dispositions, etc. Those are individual things that only obtain via individual brain function (which amounts to individual mental phenomena).

Morality/moral stances (or just "morals" if you like) are individual dispositions about interpersonal behavior (behavior that the individual feels is more significant than etiquette). Insofar as an individual doesn't have a disposition about interpersonal behavior, there is no morality, regardless of what people utter by way of agreements. And an individual's moral stance can be different than, including the opposite of, whatever agreement they reached with someone else. It depends on what their disposition is, a la their mental phenomena.
DPMartin
Posts: 339
Joined: Tue Jan 10, 2017 12:11 am

Re: Why Moral Realism Is Almost Certainly True

Post by DPMartin »

Terrapin Station wrote: Thu Apr 22, 2021 5:01 pm
DPMartin wrote: Thu Apr 22, 2021 4:44 pm
Terrapin Station wrote: Thu Apr 22, 2021 4:23 pm

Whether lying is unethical, whether anyone is justified to hold people accountable for agreements, etc. is subjective--
nope its the group that is agreed, and the morals are the agreement, and those morals are relative to the group only. if there be no agreement there be no morals and it takes more than one to have an agreement. unless you have mental issues and shake your own hand on things, like maybe a duel personality and you believe you can come into an agreement with yourself.

and personal goals are not agreements, because you can not offend an other should you fail.
No. Agreements on moral stances are agreements on moral stances. Agreements are by no means necessary for moral stances, and moral stances can't obtain via agreements anyway, because there are no conjoint semantics, conjoint attitudes, conjoint dispositions, etc. Those are individual things that only obtain via individual brain function (which amounts to individual mental phenomena).

Morality/moral stances (or just "morals" if you like) are individual dispositions about interpersonal behavior (behavior that the individual feels is more significant than etiquette). Insofar as an individual doesn't have a disposition about interpersonal behavior, there is no morality, regardless of what people utter by way of agreements. And an individual's moral stance can be different than, including the opposite of, whatever agreement they reached with someone else. It depends on what their disposition is, a la their mental phenomena.
and where does one get that moral stance from, if one even have the courage to do so? one agrees to a certain thing and stands for it. and that certain thing comes from what? something one was exposed to and agreed to. which is not the morals of the ones contesting the stance. they agree to something else and they just might be doing the same moral stance of another set of morals they agree to. duh.
User avatar
Lacewing
Posts: 4527
Joined: Wed Jul 29, 2015 2:25 am

Re: Why Moral Realism Is Almost Certainly True

Post by Lacewing »

Terrapin Station wrote: Thu Apr 22, 2021 4:23 pm This is why, if we want people to be honest, we have to make it so that they're not penalized for their honesty, whatever it might happen to be.
That's a very interesting point.

Where beliefs are concerned, we cannot prevent people from penalizing themselves, of course. Self-flagellation and judgment could be their biggest obstacle to honesty, even if other people welcome and celebrate their honesty. If the desire to be honest is strong enough, I think it can show itself despite most (if not all) repercussions.

(Maybe you've already said this...) The nice thing about honesty is that it doesn't have to be right... it doesn't have to have all the answers. It's more about being honorable and true to oneself and others. It's a relief. Deception takes so much work to maintain a certain landscape. Honesty allows a landscape to expand.
Last edited by Lacewing on Thu Apr 22, 2021 5:57 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Terrapin Station
Posts: 3840
Joined: Wed Aug 03, 2016 7:18 pm
Location: NYC Man

Re: Why Moral Realism Is Almost Certainly True

Post by Terrapin Station »

DPMartin wrote: Thu Apr 22, 2021 5:43 pm and where does one get that moral stance from, if one even have the courage to do so?
Your brain. It's a way that brains work. You can't get a moral stance from someone else. It has to be a way that you feel, a disposition you have, or it's not actually a moral stance for you. You can't gain the way you feel or a disposition you have from someone else. Other people can influence your feelings and dispositions, but influencing them is different than gaining them from others, and influence can go in all sorts of directions--positive/parallel to, negative/contrary to, and anything in between.
DPMartin
Posts: 339
Joined: Tue Jan 10, 2017 12:11 am

Re: Why Moral Realism Is Almost Certainly True

Post by DPMartin »

Terrapin Station wrote: Thu Apr 22, 2021 5:57 pm
DPMartin wrote: Thu Apr 22, 2021 5:43 pm and where does one get that moral stance from, if one even have the courage to do so?
Your brain.
nope, you know human nature just as anyone, and no such thing comes from the brain. also a stance doesn't have to be moral it can be self interest and or survival.
User avatar
Terrapin Station
Posts: 3840
Joined: Wed Aug 03, 2016 7:18 pm
Location: NYC Man

Re: Why Moral Realism Is Almost Certainly True

Post by Terrapin Station »

DPMartin wrote: Mon Apr 26, 2021 5:25 pm
Terrapin Station wrote: Thu Apr 22, 2021 5:57 pm
DPMartin wrote: Thu Apr 22, 2021 5:43 pm and where does one get that moral stance from, if one even have the courage to do so?
Your brain.
nope, you know human nature just as anyone, and no such thing comes from the brain. also a stance doesn't have to be moral it can be self interest and or survival.
All mental phenomena, including all knowing, is brain phenomena.
DPMartin
Posts: 339
Joined: Tue Jan 10, 2017 12:11 am

Re: Why Moral Realism Is Almost Certainly True

Post by DPMartin »

Terrapin Station wrote: Mon Apr 26, 2021 6:20 pm
DPMartin wrote: Mon Apr 26, 2021 5:25 pm
Terrapin Station wrote: Thu Apr 22, 2021 5:57 pm

Your brain.
nope, you know human nature just as anyone, and no such thing comes from the brain. also a stance doesn't have to be moral it can be self interest and or survival.
All mental phenomena, including all knowing, is brain phenomena.
that may be what you believe, but man is heart mind body and soul and that's not new information
User avatar
Terrapin Station
Posts: 3840
Joined: Wed Aug 03, 2016 7:18 pm
Location: NYC Man

Re: Why Moral Realism Is Almost Certainly True

Post by Terrapin Station »

DPMartin wrote: Wed Apr 28, 2021 11:44 pm
Terrapin Station wrote: Mon Apr 26, 2021 6:20 pm
DPMartin wrote: Mon Apr 26, 2021 5:25 pm

nope, you know human nature just as anyone, and no such thing comes from the brain. also a stance doesn't have to be moral it can be self interest and or survival.
All mental phenomena, including all knowing, is brain phenomena.
that may be what you believe, but man is heart mind body and soul and that's not new information
I don't buy that there are "souls," but sure, humans are more than just their mental phenomena. Nevertheless, all mental phenomena, including all knowing, is brain phenomena.
DPMartin
Posts: 339
Joined: Tue Jan 10, 2017 12:11 am

Re: Why Moral Realism Is Almost Certainly True

Post by DPMartin »

Terrapin Station wrote: Thu Apr 29, 2021 12:12 am
DPMartin wrote: Wed Apr 28, 2021 11:44 pm
Terrapin Station wrote: Mon Apr 26, 2021 6:20 pm
All mental phenomena, including all knowing, is brain phenomena.
that may be what you believe, but man is heart mind body and soul and that's not new information
I don't buy that there are "souls," but sure, humans are more than just their mental phenomena. Nevertheless, all mental phenomena, including all knowing, is brain phenomena.
nope, knowing is experience. the brain merely retains the information and can be used to process information to seek solutions. granted information as in reading and or being taught can help anticipate what to expect, but to know is to experience. follow the correct instructions gets correct results but to know is to experience the result, correct or not.
Post Reply