There are Objective Moral Facts

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

User avatar
Sculptor
Posts: 8477
Joined: Wed Jun 26, 2019 11:32 pm

Re: There are Objective Moral Facts

Post by Sculptor »

Peter Holmes wrote: Sun Jan 29, 2023 12:54 pm
Sculptor wrote: Sun Jan 29, 2023 11:15 am
popeye1945 wrote: Sun Jan 29, 2023 7:22 am

Veritas,
Knowing that all meaning is the property of a conscious subject and never the property of the object or the world as an object, how does your system of objectivity deal with this Truism? The concepts you're playing with are all the property of a conscious subject and meaning can only be bestowed upon an in-and-of-itself meaningless world. There is only meaning for biology, the measure and meaning of all things
He cannot answer your question because he thinks that his own thought are necessarily objective, like any tinpot tyrant.
These are the people who are the most danger to the human race.
He'll be telling you next that a raped woman has no right to her own body.
Yep. People who claim there are moral facts always, funnily enough, claim to know what those moral facts are - and are often happy - or plan - to impose the consequences of those invented facts on everyone else.

VA is quick to deny wanting to impose anything - but wants to manipulate the human brain to make us inclined to 'behave morally' - which is even more sinister.
He's persistent too.
But he has no substance.
I'm not sure why he can't see it when all around are telling him he is wrong.
I'm sure there is a name for that sort of psychological failing.
Veritas Aequitas
Posts: 12235
Joined: Wed Jul 11, 2012 4:41 am

Re: There are Objective Moral Facts

Post by Veritas Aequitas »

Sculptor wrote: Sun Jan 29, 2023 11:13 am
Veritas Aequitas wrote: Sun Jan 29, 2023 6:42 am
Sculptor wrote: Sat Jan 28, 2023 11:10 am You keep saying the same thing.
Any example of an "objective moral fact" includes a range of exceptions.
All you seem to want to say here is that some people do not want to kill whilst others do. that is laughable
Exceptions disqualify them from being objective.
And still you cannot bring yourself to actually commit to a single unimpeachable moral objective fact.
The longer you avoid this key issue the more ridiculous you appear.
It's not looking good for you, is it?

Some psychopaths like to kill, others do not.
Some who are not psychopaths like to kill, whilst others do not..
Strawman as usual. You should condemn your own ignorance.

I stated the oughtness to kill and the ought-not-ness-to-kill-humans exists physically as a fact in ALL humans without exceptions.
Yes. As predicted you face a challenge and respond with a childish attack because deep down you know you have nothing to offer here.
Everyone here tells you that, yet you persist with your insane dogma, rejecting anyone who objects to the slightest thing.
You are not an objectivist you are a megalomaniac. ANyone you feel is outside your personally defined norm is an exception to be rejected out of hand.

This completely disqualifies you to say anything about morality.
The usual blabbering when you are cornered and have nothing else to counter.

I answered,
I stated the oughtness to kill and the ought-not-ness-to-kill-humans exists physically as a fact in ALL humans without exceptions.
which is a direct counter to your 'ignorant' premise.
Veritas Aequitas
Posts: 12235
Joined: Wed Jul 11, 2012 4:41 am

Re: There are Objective Moral Facts

Post by Veritas Aequitas »

Peter Holmes wrote: Sun Jan 29, 2023 10:20 am No. The whole point of facts - and therefore objectivity - is independence from opinion, individual or collective. The fact that water is H2O has nothing to do with the intersubjective consensus opinion - expert or otherwise - that water is H2O. Not to recognise this is not to recognise the distinction between objectivity and subjectivity. And it's to mistake what we say about things for the way things are - an ancient but obviously persistent philosophical delusion.

So, if there are moral facts, they would have nothing to do with anyone's opinion on the matter.
You are talking about kindergarten stuff, like 1 + 1 = 3 is wrong.
I am not that stupid in NOT understanding that anyone's opinion or beliefs is different from the related matter-of-fact.

Strawman again!! the "intersubjective consensus" that I referred to is not any individual's 'opinion' nor beliefs.
The fact that 'water is H20' or any other scientific fact can only be true when qualified to the scientific Framework and System of Knowledge [FSK].
Thus that 'water is H20' is factual or true is because 'Science said so' not because this or that scientist said so.

Scientific knowledge is 'Collective Subjective Knowledge' [Popeye's term] not any 'individual's subjective opinion'.
Thus 'Collective Subjective Knowledge' which is grounded on intersubjective consensus is Objective because it is independent from any individual's opinions or beliefs.

'Water is H20' is an objective scientific fact which is conditioned to the credible scientific FSK, i.e. with its whole Framework and System that generate reliability.

The Principle is; Whatever is fact is conditioned upon a FSK.
Scientific facts are conditioned upon the scientific FSK.
The scientific FSK is the most credible and reliable FSK at present.

My proposed Moral FSK will have credibility near to the scientific FSK and the majority of inputs into the moral FSK are scientific facts.
Just like how the scientific FSK enables scientific facts, the moral FSK will enable the emergence of objective moral facts.
Veritas Aequitas
Posts: 12235
Joined: Wed Jul 11, 2012 4:41 am

Re: There are Objective Moral Facts

Post by Veritas Aequitas »

Peter Holmes wrote: Sun Jan 29, 2023 12:54 pm
Sculptor wrote: Sun Jan 29, 2023 11:15 am
popeye1945 wrote: Sun Jan 29, 2023 7:22 am

Veritas,
Knowing that all meaning is the property of a conscious subject and never the property of the object or the world as an object, how does your system of objectivity deal with this Truism? The concepts you're playing with are all the property of a conscious subject and meaning can only be bestowed upon an in-and-of-itself meaningless world. There is only meaning for biology, the measure and meaning of all things
He cannot answer your question because he thinks that his own thought are necessarily objective, like any tinpot tyrant.
These are the people who are the most danger to the human race.
He'll be telling you next that a raped woman has no right to her own body.
Yep. People who claim there are moral facts always, funnily enough, claim to know what those moral facts are - and are often happy - or plan - to impose the consequences of those invented facts on everyone else.

VA is quick to deny wanting to impose anything - but wants to manipulate the human brain to make us inclined to 'behave morally' - which is even more sinister.
As I had stated you are in a silo stuck with narrow, shallow and dogmatic ideologies.

At present, scientists already have the ability [albeit not efficient and super safe] to manipulate the human genes and brain but fortunately there is a collective consensus on ethics worldwide that restraint these GMOs on humans without foolproof measures.

I have posted this many times;

Chinese scientist who produced genetically altered babies sentenced to 3 years in jail:
https://www.science.org/content/article ... years-jail#:

Strawmaning again!!
I qualified whatever improvements to the brain in the said directions must be foolproof and this is not possible at present, but very possible within the next 75, 100 or 150 years time.
Unfortunately, people like you are doomed immorally with no vision for our future generations, it is too late to improve your moral stance and practices at present.
Iwannaplato
Posts: 6591
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 10:55 pm

Re: There are Objective Moral Facts

Post by Iwannaplato »

Skepdick wrote: Sun Jan 29, 2023 5:28 pm
Iwannaplato wrote: Sun Jan 29, 2023 4:38 pm Precisely. We are surrounded by moral realists, some problematic, from my perspective and preferences, some not. Likewise the moral anti-realists or don't give a S people include some that are problematic, some not.
What or where is a "problem" and what makes it a "problem"?
Well, my answer's in there: my perspective and preferences. So, it could be, for example, related to goals of mine or likes and dislikes.
The judgment of "problemacy" with respect to anything is the same kind of linguistic expression as the judgment of "wrongness" with respect to murder. A judgment is a judgment is a judgment is a moral judgment.
It is the same for me: I prefer less murders.
The double standards of Philosophers together with their apologetics are simply tiresome. Burn the entire "tradition" to tge ground!
Do you want me or us to do it? Is that why you're using the imperative?
To use Rorty's words on pragmatism: there is no epistemological difference between truth about what ought to be and truth about what is, nor any metaphysical difference between facts and values, nor any methodological difference between morality and science.
Well, if he said it. I guess I'll take his opinion on that as I do my wife's about butterscotch ice cream.
Skepdick
Posts: 14347
Joined: Fri Jun 14, 2019 11:16 am

Re: There are Objective Moral Facts

Post by Skepdick »

Iwannaplato wrote: Mon Jan 30, 2023 6:05 am Well, my answer's in there: my perspective and preferences. So, it could be, for example, related to goals of mine or likes and dislikes.
So, no desire - no problem? That sounds like a trivial problem-solving strategy...

Just demoralize yourself.
Iwannaplato wrote: Mon Jan 30, 2023 6:05 am It is the same for me: I prefer less murders.
If you undefine "murder" - problem solved.
Iwannaplato wrote: Mon Jan 30, 2023 6:05 am Do you want me or us to do it? Is that why you're using the imperative?
It's a free for all - grab a torch.
Iwannaplato wrote: Mon Jan 30, 2023 6:05 am Well, if he said it. I guess I'll take his opinion on that as I do my wife's about butterscotch ice cream.
Moralizing. Impriving. What's the difference?
Iwannaplato
Posts: 6591
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 10:55 pm

Re: There are Objective Moral Facts

Post by Iwannaplato »

Skepdick wrote: Mon Jan 30, 2023 9:12 am So, no desire, no problem? That sounds like a trivial problem-solving strategy...

Just demoralize yourself.
Unfortunately, or fortunately from my perspective, I don't want to.
If you undefine "murder" - problem solved.
Again, desire, mine in this case, doesn't lead that way.
Iwannaplato wrote: Mon Jan 30, 2023 6:05 am Well, if he said it. I guess I'll take his opinion on that as I do my wife's about butterscotch ice cream.
Moralizing. Impriving. What's the difference?
Precisely. Regardless of what 'impriving' means.
Iwannaplato
Posts: 6591
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 10:55 pm

Re: There are Objective Moral Facts

Post by Iwannaplato »

Veritas Aequitas wrote: Mon Jan 30, 2023 2:53 am Strawmaning again!!
I qualified whatever improvements to the brain in the said directions must be foolproof and this is not possible at present, but very possible within the next 75, 100 or 150 years time.
You seem to be assuming that PH's concern is with the fallibility of the technology, rather than horror at the idea of people controlling everyone's brains with technology.
Unfortunately, people like you are doomed immorally with no vision for our future generations, it is too late to improve your moral stance and practices at present.
As long as it is only too late at present. We can check in again tomorrow.
User avatar
Sculptor
Posts: 8477
Joined: Wed Jun 26, 2019 11:32 pm

Re: There are Objective Moral Facts

Post by Sculptor »

Veritas Aequitas wrote: Mon Jan 30, 2023 2:13 am
Sculptor wrote: Sun Jan 29, 2023 11:13 am
Veritas Aequitas wrote: Sun Jan 29, 2023 6:42 am
Strawman as usual. You should condemn your own ignorance.

I stated the oughtness to kill and the ought-not-ness-to-kill-humans exists physically as a fact in ALL humans without exceptions.
Yes. As predicted you face a challenge and respond with a childish attack because deep down you know you have nothing to offer here.
Everyone here tells you that, yet you persist with your insane dogma, rejecting anyone who objects to the slightest thing.
You are not an objectivist you are a megalomaniac. ANyone you feel is outside your personally defined norm is an exception to be rejected out of hand.

This completely disqualifies you to say anything about morality.

I answered,
I stated the oughtness to kill and the ought-not-ness-to-kill-humans exists physically as a fact in ALL humans without exceptions.
Haha.Priceless!! :D :D
This is what you are saying.
Yes some people like to kill and other do not..
What a joke!!!
Iwannaplato
Posts: 6591
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 10:55 pm

Re: There are Objective Moral Facts

Post by Iwannaplato »

Veritas Aequitas wrote: Mon Jan 30, 2023 2:13 am I stated the oughtness to kill and the ought-not-ness-to-kill-humans exists physically as a fact in ALL humans without exceptions.
which is a direct counter to your 'ignorant' premise.
So, why enhance one and not the other?
Veritas Aequitas
Posts: 12235
Joined: Wed Jul 11, 2012 4:41 am

Re: There are Objective Moral Facts

Post by Veritas Aequitas »

Sculptor wrote: Mon Jan 30, 2023 2:36 pm
Veritas Aequitas wrote: Mon Jan 30, 2023 2:13 am
Sculptor wrote: Sun Jan 29, 2023 11:13 am

Yes. As predicted you face a challenge and respond with a childish attack because deep down you know you have nothing to offer here.
Everyone here tells you that, yet you persist with your insane dogma, rejecting anyone who objects to the slightest thing.
You are not an objectivist you are a megalomaniac. ANyone you feel is outside your personally defined norm is an exception to be rejected out of hand.

This completely disqualifies you to say anything about morality.

I answered,
I stated the oughtness to kill and the ought-not-ness-to-kill-humans exists physically as a fact in ALL humans without exceptions.
Haha.Priceless!! :D :D
This is what you are saying.
Yes some people like to kill and other do not..
What a joke!!!
1. You asked for examples of objective moral facts.

I answered,
I stated the oughtness-to-kill and the ought-not-ness-to-kill-humans exists physically as a fact in ALL humans without exceptions.
These facts are represented by their respective physical referent.

Sculptor: "Yes some people like to kill and other do not.."
You are changing the subject from your original question [1].

Your 'like' to kill is very misleading.
The majority are driven to kill without liking it whilst there only some extreme perverts who drive pleasure from it.

The point is the oughtness-to-kill and the ought-not-ness-to-kill-humans exist as objective moral facts emerging the moral FSK.
Why "some people 'like' to kill and others do not" is because of the fact that their ought-ness-to-kill impulse is much stronger than their ought-not-ness-to-kill-humans inhibitors.
It is the same with,
Why "some people like to rape and others do not" is because of the fact that their natural ought-ness-to-fuck impulse is much stronger than their ought-not-ness-to-rape-humans inhibitors.

This is where morality-proper is critical to humanity, i.e. to develop and strengthen the ought-not-ness-to-kill-humans inhibitors to control and modulate the primal-proto ought-ness-to-kill impulse directed at humans.

Your next berserk response?
User avatar
Sculptor
Posts: 8477
Joined: Wed Jun 26, 2019 11:32 pm

Re: There are Objective Moral Facts

Post by Sculptor »

Veritas Aequitas wrote: Tue Jan 31, 2023 4:30 am
Sculptor wrote: Mon Jan 30, 2023 2:36 pm
Veritas Aequitas wrote: Mon Jan 30, 2023 2:13 am


I answered,
I stated the oughtness to kill and the ought-not-ness-to-kill-humans exists physically as a fact in ALL humans without exceptions.
Haha.Priceless!! :D :D
This is what you are saying.
Yes some people like to kill and other do not..
What a joke!!!
1. You asked for examples of objective moral facts.

I answered,
I stated the oughtness-to-kill and the ought-not-ness-to-kill-humans exists physically as a fact in ALL humans without exceptions.
These facts are represented by their respective physical referent.

Sculptor: "Yes some people like to kill and other do not.."
You are changing the subject from your original question [1].

Your 'like' to kill is very misleading.
The majority are driven to kill without liking it whilst there only some extreme perverts who drive pleasure from it.

The point is the oughtness-to-kill and the ought-not-ness-to-kill-humans exist as objective moral facts emerging the moral FSK.
Why "some people 'like' to kill and others do not" is because of the fact that their ought-ness-to-kill impulse is much stronger than their ought-not-ness-to-kill-humans inhibitors.
It is the same with,
Why "some people like to rape and others do not" is because of the fact that their natural ought-ness-to-fuck impulse is much stronger than their ought-not-ness-to-rape-humans inhibitors.

This is where morality-proper is critical to humanity, i.e. to develop and strengthen the ought-not-ness-to-kill-humans inhibitors to control and modulate the primal-proto ought-ness-to-kill impulse directed at humans.

Your next berserk response?
Do you need someone to throw you a life-saver, or do you prefer to go down the spiral of despair, drowning and floundering like a quadriplegic puppy is a sack?
Iwannaplato
Posts: 6591
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 10:55 pm

Re: There are Objective Moral Facts

Post by Iwannaplato »

Veritas Aequitas wrote: Tue Jan 31, 2023 4:30 am I stated the oughtness-to-kill and the ought-not-ness-to-kill-humans exists physically as a fact in ALL humans without exceptions.[/color]
These facts are represented by their respective physical referent.
Not moral facts, but rather behavior/attitudinal tendencies. Without the ought. Desires, preferences. Yes, people do go on and create morals and/or receive morals and moral interpretations of these behavior/attitudinal tendencies. That's also a tendency of humans - to justify their behavior/attitudinal tendencies and try to convince others they are the right ones.

And notice his strange assertion. The ought-not-ness-to kill exists physically. What part of the physical things ADD in oughtness. They don't. The physical things, at best, lead to preferences and occam's razor should cut out this 'oughtness', unless he can tell us what it is about the physical things that include oughtness beyond those things.
Post Reply