popeye1945 wrote: ↑Sat Jun 25, 2022 7:10 am
Veritas Aequitas wrote: ↑Sat Jun 25, 2022 6:54 am
popeye1945 wrote: ↑Sat Jun 25, 2022 6:41 am
There are no objective moral facts, there are
sentiments then made into rules and laws or societal norms.
The clue is the term "sentiments".
Where did they arise from?
I have argued these moral sentiments [not the arbitrary ones] are represented as
inherent moral potentiality supported by physical neural networks as a matter of fact in the brain/mind of the individual[s].
These potentialities can be verified and justified by science and when inputted into a credible moral FSK, they are objective moral facts.
Morality is thus confined to the individual[s]' brain and mind, where these potentialities are the internal moral laws to guide the individual towards moral progress on a spontaneous and based on freedom.
When these sentiments are interpreted from an external basis and make into rules [religious with threats] and laws with penalties, these are not related to morality-per-se at all but rather they relate to religions and politics respectively enforced by fears, threat of hell and penalties for criminality.
Morality-proper's objective is confined to the individual[s] own self-development and moral progress such that the individual[s] will act in alignment with the inherent moral principles spontaneously with freedom [without external coercion].
The big question is how can be achieved the above objective which is in total contrast to the current perverted understanding of 'what is morality' like what Peter et. al. believe with ignorance and arrogance.
Veritas,
All is cognitive. The institutions you speak of are but humanities biological extensions, manifestation of human nature.
All is cognitive?
Cognition refers to "the mental action or process of acquiring knowledge and understanding through thought, experience, and the senses".[2] It encompasses all aspects of intellectual functions and processes such as: perception, attention, thought, intelligence, the formation of knowledge, memory and working memory, judgment and evaluation, reasoning and computation, problem solving and decision making, comprehension and production of language. Cognitive processes use existing knowledge and discover new knowledge.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cognition
That "all is cognitive" as defined above is ubiquitous and do not say much about 'what is morality' nor objective moral facts.
I am not referring to the arbitrary moral opinions and beliefs by individuals.
What I am referring to is to
the physical elements and processes in the brain with their moral potentialities that is related to what is morality; they are the objective moral facts.
Note the
analogy to the the inherent '
metabolism and nutrition' potentiality within the brain and body of all human beings.
Surely each individual will have opinions and beliefs [& sentiments] to what they like to eat and how they produce and prepare the various types of food.
But underlying all these are the physical elements and processes in the brain and body that potentiality that drive humans to eat the essential nutrients within the variety of food and the manner they eat it.
It is this potentiality, the physical elements and processes in the brain & body and the "oughtness" to eat essential food that is categorized as metabolic and nutritional
facts.
These facts can be verified and justified [thus conditioned] within the scientific framework and the nutritional framework.
I have applied the above analogy to the physical elements and processes in the brain with their moral potentialities that are associated with "what is morality."
Why is this not an epistemological possibility?
The institutions you speak of are but humanities biological extensions, manifestation of human nature.
You meant the 'religious' and 'legal' institutions?
If so, yes they are humanities biological extensions, manifestation of human nature but they are driven by the inherent moral potentialities.
That is why there are religions and secular laws that prohibit killing of humans and other evil acts, but as I had claimed they are of pseudo-morality based on fears, threats and coercions thus not morality proper.
Morality proper promotes the natural unfoldment of the moral potentialities within the individual[s] to act morally with spontaneity and freedom.
Given the current psychological states of the majority such natural unfoldment is not yet feasible but possible in the future provided if we take effective steps NOW to promote and expedite it.