Syllogism: Morality is an Objective Fact

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

Iwannaplato
Posts: 6656
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 10:55 pm

Re: Syllogism: Morality is an Objective Fact

Post by Iwannaplato »

Flannel Jesus wrote: Tue Dec 20, 2022 10:39 pm This sounds about right. It sounds like op is trying to sneak in unwarranted conclusions using equivocations.
P1 Human Nature is an objective fact
P2 Morality is part of human nature
C1 Morality is an objective fact
P1 Human Nature is an objective fact
P2 Fantasy is part of human nature
C1 Fantasy is an objective fact
Yup, people fantasize.
P1 Human Nature is an objective fact
P2 Dreaming is part of human nature
C1 Dreaming is an objective fact
Yup, people dream.

And yup, people moralize.

They are processes that exist. No one is denying they exist, not PH.'

And people do them in all sorts of ways. With all sorts of content. All sorts of attitudes and character traits.

Part of the trick in his syllogism is the reification of a process, to moralize, into a noun: morality.

The other is conflating existence of a process with any objective conclusion about the moral merit of any given version of it in that great diverse set of ways we dream, fantasize and moralize.

I dreamt I owned Belize. Yup, that happened.
I fantasized I beat up Tyson Fury. Yup, that was a fantasy.
I moralized about the behavior of one of my teachers in the 8th grade. Yup, I did that.
Veritas Aequitas
Posts: 12357
Joined: Wed Jul 11, 2012 4:41 am

Re: Syllogism: Morality is an Objective Fact

Post by Veritas Aequitas »

Peter Holmes wrote: Tue Dec 20, 2022 9:48 pm
Veritas Aequitas wrote: Tue Dec 20, 2022 12:33 pm
Peter Holmes wrote: Tue Dec 20, 2022 10:22 am So now we have 'the moral faculty within human nature'. Faculty psychology was out-of-date ages ago.

And you're still not getting it. Like all physical facts, the 'physical elements, programs and processes' in our brains have no intrinsic moral entailment. We may be programmed to do X and not do Y. But judgement as to the moral goodness of X and badness or evil of Y is a separate matter, nothing to do with the programming.
Strawman, you keep harping on JUDGEMENT re moral goodness, badness or evil which I have never got involved in.

Just show me where in my statements did I mention about JUDGEMENT re moral rightness and moral wrongness.

"We may be programmed to do X and not do Y" e.g. not to commit evil acts.
If what we are programmed to do X and not to Y is related to morality as defined, then the related physical elements are objective moral facts.

Problem is you are stuck like a broken record that at the sight of 'moral facts' they refer to the typical subjective moral judgments [of theological and other moralists] which I do not subscribe to.

My main point is ALL humans are programmed with a moral potential which on a wider scale would be a faculty i.e. a collective of neuronal connectivity associated with morality [as defined].

faculty: an inherent mental or physical power.
What is wrong with the above?
Unbelievable.

Look at the following assertion: humans are programmed to do X and not to do Y.

Notice - this assertion says nothing about morality defined in any way whatsoever. For example, it doesn't mention promoting good and avoiding evil - which you say is the essence of 'morality proper'.

So, if an assertion says nothing about morality, it isn't a moral assertion, it doesn't assert a moral fact, and it doesn't demonstrate the objectivity of morality. The end.
How come you have become so blurr.

Note I wrote;
"We may be programmed to do X and not do Y" e.g. not to commit evil acts.
If what we are programmed to do X and not to Y is related to morality as defined, then the related physical elements are objective moral facts.

I have defined morality-proper as avoiding evil acts.
For example, "Killing another human" is an evil act.
ALL humans has an inherent "program" not to kill another human.
It is this inherent program and its related physical elements that is an objective fact, since it is related to morality, thus, it is an objective moral fact.

Whatever beliefs, opinions and judgments of rightness & wrongness, rules of oughtness, God's commands and the likes by individuals or groups related to those objective physical moral facts are not of morality proper and are not objective.

Hume's sense of morality was confined to the related feeling and thoughts related to these physical moral elements which are the fundamental fact of morality. Hume [due to his time 1700s] admitted his ignorance to the possibility of such matter of fact related to morality.
We are now in the 2020s but YOU still want to be stuck with 1700s thinking on this moral issue.

There are humans who kill other humans but they are deviants from moral norm but such acts do not mean the inherent "program" not to kill another human does not exist. It does factors.

For example, ALL humans are program with the hunger drive to ensure food intake to sustain survival.
If a person has anorexia nervosa, i.e. refuse to take sufficient food and get very thin with the risk of death, it is due to secondary psychological factors. But the inherent hunger impulse mechanism is still embedded in the brain but its impulses are suppressed by the secondary psychological factors.
It is the same with the inherent moral program within ALL humans.
Veritas Aequitas
Posts: 12357
Joined: Wed Jul 11, 2012 4:41 am

Re: Syllogism: Morality is an Objective Fact

Post by Veritas Aequitas »

Harbal wrote: Tue Dec 20, 2022 10:01 pm
Veritas Aequitas wrote: Tue Dec 20, 2022 6:26 am
  • P1 Human Nature is an objective fact
    P2 Morality is part of human nature
    C1 Morality is an objective fact
Human nature is represented by the physical human body, brain, organs, cells, DNA and their functions and workings.
There can no no denial human nature is not an objective fact in terms of the above.
There is a phenomenon that we call human nature. That is an objective fact.
The content of any system of morality is founded in subjectivity.
You missed the critical points following the syllogism.
There are two elements in a system of morality, i.e. the physical [objective] and the arising thoughts [subjective].
You are merely focusing on the arising thoughts, feelings, beliefs, opinions, judgments, rules, etc.

You need to dig deeper into the inner causal factors representing what is moral proper [as defined].


Note this analogy with hunger;
  • P1 Human Nature is an objective fact
    P2 Hunger is part of human nature
    C1 Hunger is an objective fact
Human nature is represented by the physical human body, brain, organs, cells, DNA and their functions and workings.
The hunger drive is represented by physical neurons, DNA and its respective functions, processes and workings.
It is in this sense, hunger is an objective fact.

But the expressions following the impulses of hunger are subjective, e.g. the degrees of being hunger, the associated feelings arising from hunger, the type of food one take to fulfil one's hunger at different times are subjective.

This hunger analogy is applicable for 'morality'.

For morality proper you need to shift paradigm from what is typically associated with morality which is not align with reality of morality within human nature.
Skepdick
Posts: 14364
Joined: Fri Jun 14, 2019 11:16 am

Re: Syllogism: Morality is an Objective Fact

Post by Skepdick »

Iwannaplato wrote: Tue Dec 20, 2022 11:24 pm The other is conflating existence of a process with any objective conclusion about the moral merit of any given version of it in that great diverse set of ways we dream, fantasize and moralize.
This comment reminds me of a post by Dawkins - the tyrranny of the discontinuous mind.

It's not about the existence of a process; or a conclusion; or any individual; discrete things such as dreams, fantasies or morals. It's about the interaction of all those things as part of the whole system.

The system (what the Christians call God) exists. It's overally moral and brings about beneficence and well-being to humans. And then there are the exceptions.
Skepdick
Posts: 14364
Joined: Fri Jun 14, 2019 11:16 am

Re: Syllogism: Morality is an Objective Fact

Post by Skepdick »

Iwannaplato wrote: Tue Dec 20, 2022 11:24 pm The other is conflating existence of a process with any objective conclusion about the moral merit of any given version of it in that great diverse set of ways we dream, fantasize and moralize.
This comment reminds me of a post by Dawkins - the tyrranny of the discontinuous mind.

It's not about the existence of a process; or a conclusion; or any individual; discrete things such as dreams, fantasies or morals. It's about the interaction of all those things as part of the whole system.

The system (what the Christians call God) exists. It's overally moral and brings about beneficence and well-being to humans. And then there are the exceptions.
Iwannaplato
Posts: 6656
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 10:55 pm

Re: Syllogism: Morality is an Objective Fact

Post by Iwannaplato »

Skepdick...arguments like this...
Note this analogy with hunger;
P1 Human Nature is an objective fact
P2 Hunger is part of human nature
C1 Hunger is an objective fact
Human nature is represented by the physical human body, brain, organs, cells, DNA and their functions and workings.
The hunger drive is represented by physical neurons, DNA and its respective functions, processes and workings.
It is in this sense, hunger is an objective fact.

But the expressions following the impulses of hunger are subjective, e.g. the degrees of being hunger, the associated feelings arising from hunger, the type of food one take to fulfil one's hunger at different times are subjective.
are silly and do not in any way support what you think morality is about. You've given examples of deontological wrongs as examples of morality. Once VA realized, a few years back, that he had a problem with defending that position, he shifted to something like moral character or virtues as what we need to develop. He's not remotely on your team. So, when you join threads and have a go at people critical of him, but don't challenge his argument which now disagree with your position, it doesn't looke good.
Skepdick
Posts: 14364
Joined: Fri Jun 14, 2019 11:16 am

Re: Syllogism: Morality is an Objective Fact

Post by Skepdick »

Iwannaplato wrote: Wed Dec 21, 2022 8:26 am Skepdick...arguments like this...
Note this analogy with hunger;
P1 Human Nature is an objective fact
P2 Hunger is part of human nature
C1 Hunger is an objective fact
Human nature is represented by the physical human body, brain, organs, cells, DNA and their functions and workings.
The hunger drive is represented by physical neurons, DNA and its respective functions, processes and workings.
It is in this sense, hunger is an objective fact.

But the expressions following the impulses of hunger are subjective, e.g. the degrees of being hunger, the associated feelings arising from hunger, the type of food one take to fulfil one's hunger at different times are subjective.
are silly and do not in any way support what you think morality is about. You've given examples of deontological wrongs as examples of morality. Once VA realized, a few years back, that he had a problem with defending that position, he shifted to something like moral character or virtues as what we need to develop. He's not remotely on your team. So, when you join threads and have a go at people critical of him, but don't challenge his argument which now disagree with your position, it doesn't looke good.
All arguments are silly in a continuous reality (which is why I never engage in argumentation - only mockery of people who do), but the tyranny of the discontinuous mind has gone over your discontinuous mind.

The subjective/objective discontinuity is just another failing of discontinuous minds.
popeye1945
Posts: 2130
Joined: Sun Sep 12, 2021 2:12 am

Re: Syllogism: Morality is an Objective Fact

Post by popeye1945 »

Veritas Aequitas wrote: Tue Dec 20, 2022 6:26 am
  • P1 Human Nature is an objective fact
    P2 Morality is part of human nature
    C1 Morality is an objective fact
Human nature is represented by the physical human body, brain, organs, cells, DNA and their functions and workings.
There can no no denial human nature is not an objective fact in terms of the above.


Above syllogism abstracted from the following discussion;
Veritas Aequitas wrote: Mon Dec 19, 2022 3:59 am
Sculptor wrote: Thu Dec 15, 2022 11:11 am
There is no doubt that our moral nature is an important part of our success as a species; but there is nothing to mandate specific rules in morality, according to the theory. There is nothing objective about morality except that fact that we are moralistic beings. But the existence of psychopathy is evidence that traits have variability, as do all features of humanity. Can we call a psychopath a human, yes. Would everyone say they were moral, no. Their idea of moral good seems to be directed at themselves. and who they can manipulate.
Your
"there is no doubt that our moral nature is an important part of our success as a species"
implied that our 'moral nature' is something universal within human nature, i.e. independent of any individual beliefs, opinions or judgments, thus it is objective subject to verification and justification.
In this sense our moral nature, i.e. morality is objective.

Morality-proper as inherent within human nature is not about rules, obligations or laws of 'right' or 'wrong' enforceable upon individuals from external authorities, customs nor social conventions.

Since all humans has a moral nature [morality properly defined] the point is human need to allow this moral potential to unfold naturally for its intended evolutionary purpose. But such expectation of greater morality is too late for the current or next few to achieve due to our current psychological state which need time to change neuronally. But moral change for the better is possible for future generations provided we take the right steps now.
Morality is a sentiment, a subjective cognitive feeling, biology being the mark and measure of all things. All perceptions/experiences/meanings are biologically and thus subjectively dependent. Human nature is a subjective fact in that it is the subject, only the subject's physical body is an object to the subjective experience. Human nature is not experienced, it just is, a subjective consciousness, the entire body being subjective consciousness.
Veritas Aequitas
Posts: 12357
Joined: Wed Jul 11, 2012 4:41 am

Re: Syllogism: Morality is an Objective Fact

Post by Veritas Aequitas »

popeye1945 wrote: Fri Dec 23, 2022 9:55 am
Veritas Aequitas wrote: Tue Dec 20, 2022 6:26 am
  • P1 Human Nature is an objective fact
    P2 Morality is part of human nature
    C1 Morality is an objective fact
Human nature is represented by the physical human body, brain, organs, cells, DNA and their functions and workings.
There can no no denial human nature is not an objective fact in terms of the above.


Above syllogism abstracted from the following discussion;
Veritas Aequitas wrote: Mon Dec 19, 2022 3:59 am
Your
"there is no doubt that our moral nature is an important part of our success as a species"
implied that our 'moral nature' is something universal within human nature, i.e. independent of any individual beliefs, opinions or judgments, thus it is objective subject to verification and justification.
In this sense our moral nature, i.e. morality is objective.

Morality-proper as inherent within human nature is not about rules, obligations or laws of 'right' or 'wrong' enforceable upon individuals from external authorities, customs nor social conventions.

Since all humans has a moral nature [morality properly defined] the point is human need to allow this moral potential to unfold naturally for its intended evolutionary purpose. But such expectation of greater morality is too late for the current or next few to achieve due to our current psychological state which need time to change neuronally. But moral change for the better is possible for future generations provided we take the right steps now.
Morality is a sentiment, a subjective cognitive feeling, biology being the mark and measure of all things. All perceptions/experiences/meanings are biologically and thus subjectively dependent. Human nature is a subjective fact in that it is the subject, only the subject's physical body is an object to the subjective experience. Human nature is not experienced, it just is, a subjective consciousness, the entire body being subjective consciousness.
You missed my point?

The scientific knowledge of knowing say 'dog' nature, is to study as many dogs as possible and find out what is common among all the dogs in terms of their physical [from outer to the inner genes & DNA] and basic behavioral and mental features.

As such, the scientific knowledge of human nature is to study as many 'humans' [all possible all humans] as possible and find out what is common among all humans in terms of their physical [from outer to the inner genes & DNA] and basic behavioral and mental features.

It is this aspect that human nature is a physical objective fact.

One very evident features of human nature is the subject of morality which is noticeably subjective comprising of opinions, beliefs, judgments related to the subject of morality.
As Sculptor stated;
"there is no doubt that our moral nature is an important part of our success as a species"
which I believe is agreed by all observant humans.
This moral nature is obviously subjective, but the question to be raised now is, is there an objective aspect to these supposed moral matters within human nature?

I am arguing that whilst the subjective moral matter are very obvious in human nature, what really matter are the physical objective moral facts underlying these subjective moral issues within the physical aspects of human nature.

I have used various analogies to demonstrate there are possible physical moral facts underlying all subjective matters of morality raised by mankind.
As such, all moral issues related to evil acts within human nature has its physical moral facts correlates within the brain, neurons, genes, DNA, etc.

So, Morality is an Objective fact.
popeye1945
Posts: 2130
Joined: Sun Sep 12, 2021 2:12 am

Re: Syllogism: Morality is an Objective Fact

Post by popeye1945 »

There is nothing in the world that has an objective existence in and of itself, for all meanings are of subjective experience. I do not think we are at opposite ends of the pole here; you just want to get into the inner biology of the function of a conscious subject which I take for granted. Anything which is not an object in the physical world and the inner working of the conscious subject is not experienced as an object or objects. We have little experience of our inner workings; we experience the totality of those inner workings as what we are, an embodied consciousness. It is proper to say that our own bodies are objects to be experienced in our physical reality, our apparent reality. Anyone claiming the physical world is utterly objective would be hard-pressed to prove it, we can only know the world through our subject experience and subject experience depends upon the state of a given biology.
Flannel Jesus
Posts: 2574
Joined: Mon Mar 28, 2022 7:09 pm

Re: Syllogism: Morality is an Objective Fact

Post by Flannel Jesus »

popeye1945 wrote: Fri Dec 23, 2022 11:25 am There is nothing in the world that has an objective existence in and of itself
How do you know that?
Basil Ransom
Posts: 4
Joined: Mon Dec 26, 2022 1:15 am

Re: Syllogism: Morality is an Objective Fact

Post by Basil Ransom »

Flannel Jesus wrote: Sun Dec 25, 2022 10:08 pm
popeye1945 wrote: Fri Dec 23, 2022 11:25 am There is nothing in the world that has an objective existence in and of itself
How do you know that?
Yeah, just because nothing has objective experience in itself as humans experience it, that doesn't mean those things--admittedly defined to us through that experience--don't have objective experience in themselves as noumenae as opposed to phenomenae
Basil Ransom
Posts: 4
Joined: Mon Dec 26, 2022 1:15 am

Re: Syllogism: Morality is an Objective Fact

Post by Basil Ransom »

Veritas Aequitas wrote: Tue Dec 20, 2022 7:53 am
Strawman again!
I have stated a "million times" my version of morality is not leveraged on 'rightness' or 'wrongness' of human acts.

It is very evident and generally accepted as Sculptor stated;
"There is no doubt that our moral nature is an important part of our success as a species; "

Since morality is about avoiding evil to promote good,
then improving the inherent moral program effective will lead to lesser evil, i.e. increasing morality index.
There is no need to cling to 'rightness' or 'wrongness'.
Evil and good are not objective substances but human concepts with no final definition or dominant consensus. They are not only just as subjective as "rightness" or "wrongess;" they are synonyms for the terms
Veritas Aequitas
Posts: 12357
Joined: Wed Jul 11, 2012 4:41 am

Re: Syllogism: Morality is an Objective Fact

Post by Veritas Aequitas »

popeye1945 wrote: Fri Dec 23, 2022 11:25 am There is nothing in the world that has an objective existence in and of itself, for all meanings are of subjective experience.
I agree with the above, i.e. "there is nothing in the world that has an objective-existence-in-and-of-itself.
Actually, there is nothing and there is no thing-in-itself, i.e. there are no things that exist in, of, or by themselves.

All things and of reality are ultimately subjective; there are two main types of subjectivity, i.e.
  • 1. Personal subjectivity re a single subject in terms of opinions and beliefs.

    2. Interpersonal subjectivity, i.e. intersubjectivity consensus re subjects that support objectivity where a Framework and System of Reality is taken into account.
I believe there are objective moral facts that are supported physical elements within the human brain and body BUT whatever are facts are ultimately subjective i.e. intersubjective.
Basil Ransom
Posts: 4
Joined: Mon Dec 26, 2022 1:15 am

Re: Syllogism: Morality is an Objective Fact

Post by Basil Ransom »

Veritas Aequitas wrote: Mon Dec 26, 2022 2:55 am
popeye1945 wrote: Fri Dec 23, 2022 11:25 am There is nothing in the world that has an objective existence in and of itself, for all meanings are of subjective experience.
I agree with the above, i.e. "there is nothing in the world that has an objective-existence-in-and-of-itself.
Actually, there is nothing and there is no thing-in-itself, i.e. there are no things that exist in, of, or by themselves.

All things and of reality are ultimately subjective; there are two main types of subjectivity, i.e.
  • 1. Personal subjectivity re a single subject in terms of opinions and beliefs.

    2. Interpersonal subjectivity, i.e. intersubjectivity consensus re subjects that support objectivity where a Framework and System of Reality is taken into account.
I believe there are objective moral facts that are supported physical elements within the human brain and body BUT whatever are facts are ultimately subjective i.e. intersubjective.
If everything is ultimately subjective, then nothing is objective....particularly morality
Post Reply