Good answer!RCSaunders wrote: ↑Mon Oct 11, 2021 4:24 pmWhat have you got against masochists?Peter Holmes wrote: ↑Mon Oct 11, 2021 1:18 pm In my opinion, torturing anyone for any reason is morally wrong.
Is morality objective or subjective?
Re: Is morality objective or subjective?
Re: Is morality objective or subjective?
But that is just your opinion.Peter Holmes wrote: ↑Mon Oct 11, 2021 1:18 pm In my opinion, torturing anyone for any reason is morally wrong.
People following the utilitarian philosophy argue that it can be justifed to save lives.
Ask Dick Cheney and Donald Rumsfeld
-
- Posts: 3800
- Joined: Tue Jul 18, 2017 3:53 pm
Re: Is morality objective or subjective?
Agreed. It is just my opinion. And, in my opinion, Cheney and Rumsfeld were wicked.Sculptor wrote: ↑Mon Oct 11, 2021 4:31 pmBut that is just your opinion.Peter Holmes wrote: ↑Mon Oct 11, 2021 1:18 pm In my opinion, torturing anyone for any reason is morally wrong.
People following the utilitarian philosophy argue that it can be justifed to save lives.
Ask Dick Cheney and Donald Rumsfeld
And as for masochists, I think it morally wrong to torture them, even if they want to be tortured. And that's also just my opinion.
Re: Is morality objective or subjective?
If a masocist wants to be tortured then that is perfectly fine.Peter Holmes wrote: ↑Mon Oct 11, 2021 5:09 pmAgreed. It is just my opinion. And, in my opinion, Cheney and Rumsfeld were wicked.Sculptor wrote: ↑Mon Oct 11, 2021 4:31 pmBut that is just your opinion.Peter Holmes wrote: ↑Mon Oct 11, 2021 1:18 pm In my opinion, torturing anyone for any reason is morally wrong.
People following the utilitarian philosophy argue that it can be justifed to save lives.
Ask Dick Cheney and Donald Rumsfeld
And as for masochists, I think it morally wrong to torture them, even if they want to be tortured. And that's also just my opinion.
If a person wants to be eaten then that too is fine.
The thing about what other people want is that its generally fuck all to do with you unless they want to harm you.
So you might be adviced to mind your business unless someone comes along and starts telling you what you can an cannot do.
-
- Posts: 3800
- Joined: Tue Jul 18, 2017 3:53 pm
Re: Is morality objective or subjective?
You seem confused. Having an opinion as to the moral rightness or wrongness of an action is one thing. Telling people what they can and cannot do is another, quite different thing, about which I've said nothing at all.Sculptor wrote: ↑Mon Oct 11, 2021 8:15 pmIf a masocist wants to be tortured then that is perfectly fine.Peter Holmes wrote: ↑Mon Oct 11, 2021 5:09 pmAgreed. It is just my opinion. And, in my opinion, Cheney and Rumsfeld were wicked.
And as for masochists, I think it morally wrong to torture them, even if they want to be tortured. And that's also just my opinion.
If a person wants to be eaten then that too is fine.
The thing about what other people want is that its generally fuck all to do with you unless they want to harm you.
So you might be adviced to mind your business unless someone comes along and starts telling you what you can an cannot do.
We disagree as to the morality of torturing a masochist. And there's no moral fact of the matter that can settle our disagreement - which is what this discussion is about.
Re: Is morality objective or subjective?
Rubbish. You have taken a moral stand against people, that is the same as telling them how they ought to live.Peter Holmes wrote: ↑Tue Oct 12, 2021 1:39 amYou seem confused. Having an opinion as to the moral rightness or wrongness of an action is one thing. Telling people what they can and cannot do is another, quite different thing, about which I've said nothing at all.Sculptor wrote: ↑Mon Oct 11, 2021 8:15 pmIf a masocist wants to be tortured then that is perfectly fine.Peter Holmes wrote: ↑Mon Oct 11, 2021 5:09 pm
Agreed. It is just my opinion. And, in my opinion, Cheney and Rumsfeld were wicked.
And as for masochists, I think it morally wrong to torture them, even if they want to be tortured. And that's also just my opinion.
If a person wants to be eaten then that too is fine.
The thing about what other people want is that its generally fuck all to do with you unless they want to harm you.
So you might be adviced to mind your business unless someone comes along and starts telling you what you can an cannot do.
We disagree as to the morality of torturing a masochist. And there's no moral fact of the matter that can settle our disagreement - which is what this discussion is about.
It is aggression, but passive aggression.
-
- Posts: 3800
- Joined: Tue Jul 18, 2017 3:53 pm
Re: Is morality objective or subjective?
Rubbish. Put your thinking hat on. I have nothing against masochists. I just think that torturing anyone, even if they want to be tortured, is morally wrong. For example, if someone wants me to pull their fingernails out, I'd think it morally wrong to do so - unless there were a sound reason to do so, in which case it wouldn't be what I call torture.Sculptor wrote: ↑Tue Oct 12, 2021 10:04 amRubbish. You have taken a moral stand against people, that is the same as telling them how they ought to live.Peter Holmes wrote: ↑Tue Oct 12, 2021 1:39 amYou seem confused. Having an opinion as to the moral rightness or wrongness of an action is one thing. Telling people what they can and cannot do is another, quite different thing, about which I've said nothing at all.Sculptor wrote: ↑Mon Oct 11, 2021 8:15 pm
If a masocist wants to be tortured then that is perfectly fine.
If a person wants to be eaten then that too is fine.
The thing about what other people want is that its generally fuck all to do with you unless they want to harm you.
So you might be adviced to mind your business unless someone comes along and starts telling you what you can an cannot do.
We disagree as to the morality of torturing a masochist. And there's no moral fact of the matter that can settle our disagreement - which is what this discussion is about.
It is aggression, but passive aggression.
Now, you disagree with my moral opinion. You'd pull out those fingernails. You have your reasons, and I have mine. I suggest we leave it there.
Re: Is morality objective or subjective?
I agree.Sculptor wrote: ↑Mon Oct 11, 2021 8:15 pmIf a masocist wants to be tortured then that is perfectly fine.Peter Holmes wrote: ↑Mon Oct 11, 2021 5:09 pmAgreed. It is just my opinion. And, in my opinion, Cheney and Rumsfeld were wicked.
And as for masochists, I think it morally wrong to torture them, even if they want to be tortured. And that's also just my opinion.
If a person wants to be eaten then that too is fine.
The thing about what other people want is that its generally fuck all to do with you unless they want to harm you.
So you might be adviced to mind your business unless someone comes along and starts telling you what you can an cannot do.
Re: Is morality objective or subjective?
You are just being ridiculous.Peter Holmes wrote: ↑Tue Oct 12, 2021 10:23 amRubbish. Put your thinking hat on. I have nothing against masochists. I just think that torturing anyone, even if they want to be tortured, is morally wrong. For example, if someone wants me to pull their fingernails out, I'd think it morally wrong to do so - unless there were a sound reason to do so, in which case it wouldn't be what I call torture.Sculptor wrote: ↑Tue Oct 12, 2021 10:04 amRubbish. You have taken a moral stand against people, that is the same as telling them how they ought to live.Peter Holmes wrote: ↑Tue Oct 12, 2021 1:39 am
You seem confused. Having an opinion as to the moral rightness or wrongness of an action is one thing. Telling people what they can and cannot do is another, quite different thing, about which I've said nothing at all.
We disagree as to the morality of torturing a masochist. And there's no moral fact of the matter that can settle our disagreement - which is what this discussion is about.
It is aggression, but passive aggression.
Now, you disagree with my moral opinion. You'd pull out those fingernails. You have your reasons, and I have mine. I suggest we leave it there.
Some people like to take it up the anus. I imagine you think that is morally wrong too.
SOme people enjoy the game of torture. Others, like you, love to sit on what they think is their moral high horse and point the finger at those they disapprove of. I say fuck you.
If a person wants to get pleasure with pain, and another loves to provide the pain, then they are free do do so. I'd recommend they have a safe word, but as far as I am concerned it has fuck all to do with you or anyone else.
Your moral opinion is worth less than infected pus.
Re: Is morality objective or subjective?
It would be immoral for Peter Holmes to insult his own soul by himself doing what he in his soul finds to be evil, morally repugnant, or disgusting. The same principle applies to anyone whose soul is not brutalised or deadened.Sculptor wrote: ↑Tue Oct 12, 2021 12:27 pmYou are just being ridiculous.Peter Holmes wrote: ↑Tue Oct 12, 2021 10:23 amRubbish. Put your thinking hat on. I have nothing against masochists. I just think that torturing anyone, even if they want to be tortured, is morally wrong. For example, if someone wants me to pull their fingernails out, I'd think it morally wrong to do so - unless there were a sound reason to do so, in which case it wouldn't be what I call torture.
Now, you disagree with my moral opinion. You'd pull out those fingernails. You have your reasons, and I have mine. I suggest we leave it there.
Some people like to take it up the anus. I imagine you think that is morally wrong too.
SOme people enjoy the game of torture. Others, like you, love to sit on what they think is their moral high horse and point the finger at those they disapprove of. I say fuck you.
If a person wants to get pleasure with pain, and another loves to provide the pain, then they are free do do so. I'd recommend they have a safe word, but as far as I am concerned it has fuck all to do with you or anyone else.
Your moral opinion is worth less than infected pus.
What is universally evil, immoral, and repugnant is to brutalise or deaden others' souls.
-
- Posts: 3800
- Joined: Tue Jul 18, 2017 3:53 pm
Re: Is morality objective or subjective?
Thanks, Belinda. I wasn't going to dignify that ignorant bile with an answer. But I appreciate what you say.Belinda wrote: ↑Tue Oct 12, 2021 2:27 pm
It would be immoral for Peter Holmes to insult his own soul by himself doing what he in his soul finds to be evil, morally repugnant, or disgusting. The same principle applies to anyone whose soul is not brutalised or deadened.
What is universally evil, immoral, and repugnant is to brutalise or deaden others' souls.
- henry quirk
- Posts: 14706
- Joined: Fri May 09, 2008 8:07 pm
- Location: Right here, a little less busy.
Re: Is morality objective or subjective?
This is rich...
One anti-realist resurrects a dead thread, baitin' realists. Only one who bites is another anti-realist. Instead of embracin' as brothers, the anti-realists go at it like two girls fightin' over who has the prettiest dress. Then, a third anti-realist steps in talkin' about souls and universals (properly the bailiwick of moral realists) and the first anti-realist feels better.
It's a regular soap opera: please, continue.
One anti-realist resurrects a dead thread, baitin' realists. Only one who bites is another anti-realist. Instead of embracin' as brothers, the anti-realists go at it like two girls fightin' over who has the prettiest dress. Then, a third anti-realist steps in talkin' about souls and universals (properly the bailiwick of moral realists) and the first anti-realist feels better.
It's a regular soap opera: please, continue.
-
- Posts: 3800
- Joined: Tue Jul 18, 2017 3:53 pm
Re: Is morality objective or subjective?
Smile emojee.henry quirk wrote: ↑Wed Oct 13, 2021 7:04 pm This is rich...
One anti-realist resurrects a dead thread, baitin' realists. Only one who bites is another anti-realist. Instead of embracin' as brothers, the anti-realists go at it like two girls fightin' over who has the prettiest dress. Then, a third anti-realist steps in talkin' about souls and universals (properly the bailiwick of moral realists) and the first anti-realist feels better.
It's a regular soap opera: please, continue.
Talking about entertainment, Henry, what's your take on ripping off a self-owning masochist's finger nails? Is there a difference between torture games, with safe words, and real torture?
Genuine questions, but no worries.
Btw, I think the label 'moral anti-realist' is misleading, like the label 'anti-theist'. In different ways, they misrepresent in order to miss the point. The burden of proof is always with the claimant.
- henry quirk
- Posts: 14706
- Joined: Fri May 09, 2008 8:07 pm
- Location: Right here, a little less busy.
Re: Is morality objective or subjective?
what's your take on ripping off a self-owning masochist's finger nails?
Sane folks don't enjoy pain, the masochist therefore is not sane. It's immoral (in a real way) to abuse the insane (just as it's immoral [in a real way] to abuse the sane). In other words: it doesn't matter if Joes wants it, abusin' him is wrong.
Sane folks don't enjoy pain, the masochist therefore is not sane. It's immoral (in a real way) to abuse the insane (just as it's immoral [in a real way] to abuse the sane). In other words: it doesn't matter if Joes wants it, abusin' him is wrong.
-
- Posts: 3800
- Joined: Tue Jul 18, 2017 3:53 pm
Re: Is morality objective or subjective?
Okay. Well, I disagree that masochists, or sadists, are insane - and they're never medically classified as such just for their sexual predilection. So I think your premise is false.henry quirk wrote: ↑Thu Oct 14, 2021 4:04 am what's your take on ripping off a self-owning masochist's finger nails?
Sane folks don't enjoy pain, the masochist therefore is not sane. It's immoral (in a real way) to abuse the insane (just as it's immoral [in a real way] to abuse the sane). In other words: it doesn't matter if Joes wants it, abusin' him is wrong.
Try this. Would it be right to cut a self-owning person who asks you to, because of the relief it gives them?
Perhaps to generalise. Could it be right to prevent sane, self-owning persons from harming themselves?