What could make morality objective?

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

Peter Holmes
Posts: 3710
Joined: Tue Jul 18, 2017 3:53 pm

Re: What could make morality objective?

Post by Peter Holmes »

Atla wrote: Thu Jun 16, 2022 2:57 pm
FlashDangerpants wrote: Thu Jun 16, 2022 2:44 pm
Atla wrote: Thu Jun 16, 2022 2:34 pm
You are claiming certain knowledge about reality, based on your own definitions and categories. That's crazy. I wonder if you're familiar with the very sensation of the natural "tribal" human morality?
He's not wrong though. Morals are in the categories of beliefs, opinions, customs, norms, expectations and so on. Some other thing that God knows about and only HE can know about wouldn't be the same category. So when we treat what we discuss as morals, which is our set of expectations of our own and other people's behaviour, it is a category mistake to apply universal God-Only-Knows rules to that game.

I've never heard of "tribal" morality, but the name doesn't sound like a winner if objectivity is the objective.
Both of you seem to be only talking about words and opinions, while ignoring morality itself fundamentally. It's the very sensation, "experience" of rightness and wrongness.
Two people watch the killing of a condemned criminal by lethal injection. One experiences the raw sensation of horror and disgust. The other experiences the raw sensation of justifed revenge. So what's the moral fact of the matter?

An appeal to 'the very sensation, 'experience' of rightness and wrongness' is as useless as an appeal to intuition - and certainly no basis for any claim of moral objectivity.
Last edited by Peter Holmes on Fri Jun 17, 2022 8:17 am, edited 1 time in total.
Atla
Posts: 6607
Joined: Fri Dec 15, 2017 8:27 am

Re: What could make morality objective?

Post by Atla »

Peter Holmes wrote: Thu Jun 16, 2022 5:41 pm
Atla wrote: Thu Jun 16, 2022 2:57 pm
FlashDangerpants wrote: Thu Jun 16, 2022 2:44 pm
He's not wrong though. Morals are in the categories of beliefs, opinions, customs, norms, expectations and so on. Some other thing that God knows about and only HE can know about wouldn't be the same category. So when we treat what we discuss as morals, which is our set of expectations of our own and other people's behaviour, it is a category mistake to apply universal God-Only-Knows rules to that game.

I've never heard of "tribal" morality, but the name doesn't sound like a winner if objectivity is the objective.
Both of you seem to be only talking about words and opinions, while ignoring morality itself fundamentally. It's the very sensation, "experience" of rightness and wrongness.
Two people watch the killing of a condemned criminal by lethal injection. One experiences the raw sensation of horror and disgust. The other experiences the raw sensation of justifed revenge. So what's the moral facts of the matter?

An appeal to 'the very sensation, 'experience' of rightness and wrongness' is as useless as an appeal to intuition - and certainly no basis for any claim of moral objectivity.
Irrelevant example, objective morality would be universal. Something wouldn't be right to X or wrong to Y. Something would just be right or wrong.
Iwannaplato
Posts: 6591
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 10:55 pm

Re: What could make morality objective?

Post by Iwannaplato »

Atla wrote: Thu Jun 16, 2022 4:53 pm
FlashDangerpants wrote: Thu Jun 16, 2022 4:27 pm
Atla wrote: Thu Jun 16, 2022 4:17 pm Expeience/sensation isn't subjective by definition.
Erm?
For experiences/sensations to be fully subjective you would have to believe that your mind is separate from reality no?

But my yellow could be the same as your yellow, and yellow could also exist in the inanimate world. Some kind of universal morality could also work like that. My personal take on my yellow can be seen as subjective though.
I don't think experience and sensation are purely subjective or purely objective.
But that's a different horse from morals. As Flesh points out two people or countries of people can have quite opposite INTERPRETATIONS of the morality of an act. Someone can even find it disgusting watching an execution but think it is right. They can vomit and faint and still think it was the right thing to do. While agreeing with their liberal counterpart, who found it excisting and is ashamed of his physical reaction, that someone was killed and how they were killed.
Atla
Posts: 6607
Joined: Fri Dec 15, 2017 8:27 am

Re: What could make morality objective?

Post by Atla »

Iwannaplato wrote: Thu Jun 16, 2022 6:23 pm
Atla wrote: Thu Jun 16, 2022 4:53 pm
FlashDangerpants wrote: Thu Jun 16, 2022 4:27 pm
Erm?
For experiences/sensations to be fully subjective you would have to believe that your mind is separate from reality no?

But my yellow could be the same as your yellow, and yellow could also exist in the inanimate world. Some kind of universal morality could also work like that. My personal take on my yellow can be seen as subjective though.
I don't think experience and sensation are purely subjective or purely objective.
But that's a different horse from morals. As Flesh points out two people or countries of people can have quite opposite INTERPRETATIONS of the morality of an act. Someone can even find it disgusting watching an execution but think it is right. They can vomit and faint and still think it was the right thing to do. While agreeing with their liberal counterpart, who found it excisting and is ashamed of his physical reaction, that someone was killed and how they were killed.
Yeah but people's interpretations wouldn't matter when it came to objective morality. Those who agree with what is objectively moral, are right. Those who disagree with it, are wrong.
Iwannaplato
Posts: 6591
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 10:55 pm

Re: What could make morality objective?

Post by Iwannaplato »

Atla wrote: Thu Jun 16, 2022 6:36 pm Yeah but people's interpretations wouldn't matter when it came to objective morality. Those who agree with what is objectively moral, are right. Those who disagree with it, are wrong.
And you and those who agree with you and those who you disagree with will go down choking on each other both agreeing with you here.
Atla
Posts: 6607
Joined: Fri Dec 15, 2017 8:27 am

Re: What could make morality objective?

Post by Atla »

Iwannaplato wrote: Thu Jun 16, 2022 6:41 pm And you and those who agree with you and those who you disagree with will go down choking on each other both agreeing with you here.
Ugh that went over my head, could you elaborate?
Iwannaplato
Posts: 6591
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 10:55 pm

Re: What could make morality objective?

Post by Iwannaplato »

Atla wrote: Thu Jun 16, 2022 7:32 pm
Iwannaplato wrote: Thu Jun 16, 2022 6:41 pm And you and those who agree with you and those who you disagree with will go down choking on each other both agreeing with you here.
Ugh that went over my head, could you elaborate?
You're on Team C, who says X, Y and Z are moral and H, J and I are immoral. There will be that team and other teams agreeing with you that there are objective morals and totally disagreeing about which rules, character traits, goals, laws are moral and virtuous. And since you will have no way to demonstrate the other side is wrong, the disagreements will continue. And unfortuntely from my perspective it adds another layer of confusion, since often people have morals with hatred in them, including self-hatred. VA does. So, we have this bunch of concepts that are even further from feelings, sensations, experiences, desires (espcially given how much some, like VA, hate the limbic system and desires.

I dislike the added noise that people's concepts of morals add to things. They are often so disconnected from themselves and then, well, want me to be also.
Atla
Posts: 6607
Joined: Fri Dec 15, 2017 8:27 am

Re: What could make morality objective?

Post by Atla »

Iwannaplato wrote: Thu Jun 16, 2022 7:44 pm
Atla wrote: Thu Jun 16, 2022 7:32 pm
Iwannaplato wrote: Thu Jun 16, 2022 6:41 pm And you and those who agree with you and those who you disagree with will go down choking on each other both agreeing with you here.
Ugh that went over my head, could you elaborate?
You're on Team C, who says X, Y and Z are moral and H, J and I are immoral. There will be that team and other teams agreeing with you that there are objective morals and totally disagreeing about which rules, character traits, goals, laws are moral and virtuous. And since you will have no way to demonstrate the other side is wrong, the disagreements will continue. And unfortuntely from my perspective it adds another layer of confusion, since often people have morals with hatred in them, including self-hatred. VA does. So, we have this bunch of concepts that are even further from feelings, sensations, experiences, desires (espcially given how much some, like VA, hate the limbic system and desires.

I dislike the added noise that people's concepts of morals add to things. They are often so disconnected from themselves and then, well, want me to be also.
Ah okay, but all that is irrelevant when it comes to actual objective morality. Doesn't matter who thinks what. Some things are moral and some things are immoral period, irregardless what anyone thinks about them or whether they even know about them.
Peter Holmes
Posts: 3710
Joined: Tue Jul 18, 2017 3:53 pm

Re: What could make morality objective?

Post by Peter Holmes »

Atla wrote: Thu Jun 16, 2022 5:45 pm
Peter Holmes wrote: Thu Jun 16, 2022 5:41 pm
Atla wrote: Thu Jun 16, 2022 2:57 pm
Both of you seem to be only talking about words and opinions, while ignoring morality itself fundamentally. It's the very sensation, "experience" of rightness and wrongness.
Two people watch the killing of a condemned criminal by lethal injection. One experiences the raw sensation of horror and disgust. The other experiences the raw sensation of justifed revenge. So what's the moral facts of the matter?

An appeal to 'the very sensation, 'experience' of rightness and wrongness' is as useless as an appeal to intuition - and certainly no basis for any claim of moral objectivity.
Irrelevant example, objective morality would be universal. Something wouldn't be right to X or wrong to Y. Something would just be right or wrong.
Agreed, and it's the very possibility of such moral facts - of moral objectivity - that we're arguing about. You claim there's an 'experience' that shows us what's objectively right and wrong. And my example gives the lie to that idea. So it's strictly relevant. And there are many other examples. Your claim is patently false.
Iwannaplato
Posts: 6591
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 10:55 pm

Re: What could make morality objective?

Post by Iwannaplato »

Atla wrote: Thu Jun 16, 2022 8:02 pm Ah okay, but all that is irrelevant when it comes to actual objective morality. Doesn't matter who thinks what. Some things are moral and some things are immoral period, irregardless what anyone thinks about them or whether they even know about them.
There are certainly things I can't stand, but I actually have no idea what people think they are talking about when they say the KNOW something is wrong. I don't know what part of experience they are talking about. I'll happily join people fighting against the sexual abuse of children. I certainly have my preferences and these are guided in part by empathy. But I actually think people are hallucinating when they refer to morals (in the sense of them being real objective sort of neoplatonic things. I don't know what they are referring to. It just seems like a power move to me, which I can sympathize with. No, it's not what I prefer, it is objective. And, of course, not believing in objective morals does not inhibit me in the least from trying to get the world the way I would prefer it.
Last edited by Iwannaplato on Thu Jun 16, 2022 8:17 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Atla
Posts: 6607
Joined: Fri Dec 15, 2017 8:27 am

Re: What could make morality objective?

Post by Atla »

Peter Holmes wrote: Thu Jun 16, 2022 8:07 pm
Atla wrote: Thu Jun 16, 2022 5:45 pm
Peter Holmes wrote: Thu Jun 16, 2022 5:41 pm

Two people watch the killing of a condemned criminal by lethal injection. One experiences the raw sensation of horror and disgust. The other experiences the raw sensation of justifed revenge. So what's the moral facts of the matter?

An appeal to 'the very sensation, 'experience' of rightness and wrongness' is as useless as an appeal to intuition - and certainly no basis for any claim of moral objectivity.
Irrelevant example, objective morality would be universal. Something wouldn't be right to X or wrong to Y. Something would just be right or wrong.
Agreed, and it's the very possibility of such moral facts - of moral objectivity - that we're arguing about. You claim there's an 'experience' that shows us what's objectively right and wrong. And my example gives the lie to that idea. So it's strictly relevant. And there are many other examples. Your claim is patently false.
No, I didn't claim that there's such an experience. What the hell are you talking about.
Atla
Posts: 6607
Joined: Fri Dec 15, 2017 8:27 am

Re: What could make morality objective?

Post by Atla »

Iwannaplato wrote: Thu Jun 16, 2022 8:13 pm
Atla wrote: Thu Jun 16, 2022 8:02 pm Ah okay, but all that is irrelevant when it comes to actual objective morality. Doesn't matter who thinks what. Some things are moral and some things are immoral period, irregardless what anyone thinks about them or whether they even know about them.
There are certainly things I can't stand, but I actually have no idea what people think they are talking about when they say the KNOW something is wrong. I don't know what part of experience they are talking about. I'll happily join people fighting against the sexual abuse of children. I certainly have my preferences and these are guided in part by empathy. But I actually think people are hallucinating when they refer to morals (in the sense of them being real objective sort of neoplatonic things. I don't know what they are referring to.
Certainty, the lower the IQ, the more often people are 100% certain about things.
Iwannaplato
Posts: 6591
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 10:55 pm

Re: What could make morality objective?

Post by Iwannaplato »

Atla wrote: Thu Jun 16, 2022 8:14 pm
Peter Holmes wrote: Thu Jun 16, 2022 8:07 pm
Atla wrote: Thu Jun 16, 2022 5:45 pm
Irrelevant example, objective morality would be universal. Something wouldn't be right to X or wrong to Y. Something would just be right or wrong.
Agreed, and it's the very possibility of such moral facts - of moral objectivity - that we're arguing about. You claim there's an 'experience' that shows us what's objectively right and wrong. And my example gives the lie to that idea. So it's strictly relevant. And there are many other examples. Your claim is patently false.
No, I didn't claim that there's such an experience. What the hell are you talking about.
So, if it isn't an experience, what is it that makes you so sure you know what is moral and what is not?
Atla
Posts: 6607
Joined: Fri Dec 15, 2017 8:27 am

Re: What could make morality objective?

Post by Atla »

Iwannaplato wrote: Thu Jun 16, 2022 8:17 pm
Atla wrote: Thu Jun 16, 2022 8:14 pm
Peter Holmes wrote: Thu Jun 16, 2022 8:07 pm

Agreed, and it's the very possibility of such moral facts - of moral objectivity - that we're arguing about. You claim there's an 'experience' that shows us what's objectively right and wrong. And my example gives the lie to that idea. So it's strictly relevant. And there are many other examples. Your claim is patently false.
No, I didn't claim that there's such an experience. What the hell are you talking about.
So, if it isn't an experience, what is it that makes you so sure you know what is moral and what is not?
I don't understand the question, I'm a moral subjectivist.
Veritas Aequitas
Posts: 12231
Joined: Wed Jul 11, 2012 4:41 am

Re: What could make morality objective?

Post by Veritas Aequitas »

Peter Holmes wrote: Thu Jun 16, 2022 5:41 pm
Both of you seem to be only talking about words and opinions, while ignoring morality itself fundamentally. It's the very sensation, "experience" of rightness and wrongness.
Two people watch the killing of a condemned criminal by lethal injection. One experiences the raw sensation of horror and disgust. The other experiences the raw sensation of justifed revenge. So what's the moral facts of the matter?

An appeal to 'the very sensation, 'experience' of rightness and wrongness' is as useless as an appeal to intuition - and certainly no basis for any claim of moral objectivity.
Yes, 'morality' must be what is morality fundamentally which is fundamentally 'avoiding evil to promote good' for the sake of the human species.

Morality is fundamentally driven by an inherent moral potential which when processed via the moral FSK is represented by the physical neural states of moral facts, for example the "ought-not-ness to kill humans".
BUT this moral fact "ought-not-ness to kill humans" is not enforceable on individuals but merely be used as a moral guide for moral improvements in the future.

Given the present situation of the psychological states of the majority, a condemned criminal who had murdered another human is to be killed by lethal injection. This obviously is executed in accordance to enacted laws democratically accept or even via dictatorship.

The law is the law and the sensations and feelings of observers are independent of the laws.

However where there is an effective Moral FSK in place, the actual killings of the murderer and his victims generate a moral gap between what has happened [humans killed] and the moral standard [the moral fact - no humans ought to be killed].

The moral gap of the moral FSK will then drive humanity [morally competent humans] to close the moral gap by reducing and prevent humans from initiating any killings of humans.

At present, the majority of humans are inherently beastly thus very likely SOME will kill humans instinctively and quite easily.
The task of humanity is to find ways to inhibit this natural instincts to kill humans.
I am optimistic this can be achieved to a high degree in the future given the trend of the current exponential expansion of knowledge.

This is the proactiveness of a moral FSK relying on objective moral facts as standards for improvements in the future.

Without the identification of objective moral facts, one's moral system will be very subjective and anything goes, including the possibility of genocides and the extinction of the human species.
Post Reply