Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 84 (8914 total)
Current session began: 
Page Loaded: 06-17-2019 12:41 AM
19 online now:
PaulK (1 member, 18 visitors)
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: 4petdinos
Post Volume:
Total: 853,883 Year: 8,919/19,786 Month: 1,341/2,119 Week: 101/576 Day: 2/99 Hour: 2/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
1
2Next
Author Topic:   A personal morality
Chiroptera
Member
Posts: 6617
From: Oklahoma
Joined: 09-28-2003
Member Rating: 4.9


Message 2 of 196 (392910)
04-02-2007 9:01 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by Neutralmind
04-02-2007 8:57 PM


quote:
So, should I hold onto my illusionary belief of absolute morality or will someone here help me find ways to deal with knowing the truth and still not turning "immoral"?

I don't get it. If you know that your belief is "illusionary", then you don't really believe it, do you?

I think that you have to be very clear. What do you believe. Not what do you want to believe, but what is it that you do believe.


Actually, if their god makes better pancakes, I'm totally switching sides. -- Charley the Australopithecine
This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by Neutralmind, posted 04-02-2007 8:57 PM Neutralmind has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 96 by Neutralmind, posted 04-05-2007 7:31 PM Chiroptera has responded

  
Chiroptera
Member
Posts: 6617
From: Oklahoma
Joined: 09-28-2003
Member Rating: 4.9


Message 46 of 196 (393133)
04-03-2007 4:29 PM
Reply to: Message 43 by joshua221
04-03-2007 4:10 PM


Re: Dear Sir,
Hey, Ignatius, you might want to actually read the opening post and some of the responses before you blunder in. I just checked each page, and no one has been speaking about whether or not there are "absolutes" (whatever that means). It would be very helpful if you were to address the points that people are actually raising, not make up some argument that no one is trying to establish.


Actually, if their god makes better pancakes, I'm totally switching sides. -- Charley the Australopithecine
This message is a reply to:
 Message 43 by joshua221, posted 04-03-2007 4:10 PM joshua221 has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 74 by Rob, posted 04-04-2007 12:48 AM Chiroptera has responded

  
Chiroptera
Member
Posts: 6617
From: Oklahoma
Joined: 09-28-2003
Member Rating: 4.9


Message 52 of 196 (393145)
04-03-2007 4:57 PM
Reply to: Message 50 by joshua221
04-03-2007 4:43 PM


Re: Good question...
Ignatius, you might want to add some substance to your posts. Actually address the points being raised with counter points instead of irrelevant asides and humorous one-liners. Otherwise, you are going to end up being banned by one of our moderators with a low level of patience.


Actually, if their god makes better pancakes, I'm totally switching sides. -- Charley the Australopithecine
This message is a reply to:
 Message 50 by joshua221, posted 04-03-2007 4:43 PM joshua221 has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 54 by joshua221, posted 04-03-2007 5:01 PM Chiroptera has responded

  
Chiroptera
Member
Posts: 6617
From: Oklahoma
Joined: 09-28-2003
Member Rating: 4.9


Message 55 of 196 (393152)
04-03-2007 5:20 PM
Reply to: Message 54 by joshua221
04-03-2007 5:01 PM


I imagine they would have to be pretty poor souls indeed.


Actually, if their god makes better pancakes, I'm totally switching sides. -- Charley the Australopithecine
This message is a reply to:
 Message 54 by joshua221, posted 04-03-2007 5:01 PM joshua221 has not yet responded

  
Chiroptera
Member
Posts: 6617
From: Oklahoma
Joined: 09-28-2003
Member Rating: 4.9


Message 62 of 196 (393172)
04-03-2007 6:39 PM
Reply to: Message 61 by joshua221
04-03-2007 6:35 PM


Re: This is what relativism is:
quote:
How can relativism be defended so staunchly?

One does not need to defend "moral relativism". All one has to do is point out that an absolute standard for morality does not exist. In fact, an absolute standard is impossible to determine.

-

quote:
Can one among you truly reason?

Well, you certainly haven't shown any ability in this regard.


Actually, if their god makes better pancakes, I'm totally switching sides. -- Charley the Australopithecine
This message is a reply to:
 Message 61 by joshua221, posted 04-03-2007 6:35 PM joshua221 has not yet responded

  
Chiroptera
Member
Posts: 6617
From: Oklahoma
Joined: 09-28-2003
Member Rating: 4.9


Message 68 of 196 (393184)
04-03-2007 7:37 PM
Reply to: Message 65 by joshua221
04-03-2007 6:46 PM


Here is my prediction.
Ugh. I suspect that you will be plagiarizing copying a lot of material that you don't really understand yourself.

I hope that I am wrong, and that you will be posting arguments in your own words.


Actually, if their god makes better pancakes, I'm totally switching sides. -- Charley the Australopithecine
This message is a reply to:
 Message 65 by joshua221, posted 04-03-2007 6:46 PM joshua221 has not yet responded

  
Chiroptera
Member
Posts: 6617
From: Oklahoma
Joined: 09-28-2003
Member Rating: 4.9


Message 79 of 196 (393306)
04-04-2007 10:21 AM
Reply to: Message 74 by Rob
04-04-2007 12:48 AM


Read the darn thread!
quote:
Can we please discuss this with some civility and good sense?

I think I was civil enough when I replied to Ignatius' post. Certainly more civil than his tone deserved.

And it is true, there was no discussion of "absolutes" in this thread until Ignatius brought it up. If you look at the "Edit" menu on your browser, there is a feature called "Find in this page". I used it to search for the word "absolute". It is true, no one on this thread was claiming that there are no absolutes, in fact, no one was saying anything about "absolutes" at all. So Ignatius' comment was irrelevant to the discussion.


Actually, if their god makes better pancakes, I'm totally switching sides. -- Charley the Australopithecine
This message is a reply to:
 Message 74 by Rob, posted 04-04-2007 12:48 AM Rob has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 85 by Rob, posted 04-04-2007 11:01 PM Chiroptera has responded

  
Chiroptera
Member
Posts: 6617
From: Oklahoma
Joined: 09-28-2003
Member Rating: 4.9


Message 90 of 196 (393470)
04-05-2007 10:32 AM
Reply to: Message 85 by Rob
04-04-2007 11:01 PM


Re: Read the darn thread!
No, "absolutes" were never part of the conversation. Thinking otherwise is, I guess, consistent with your general tendency to avoid discussing the topic that everyone else is discussing and going off on your own tangents. This is from Neutralmind's OP:

-

Okay, just recently I realised that with evolution comes a presumption of relative morality...

Okay, right off, this is incorrect.

-

...and I've always thought about morality being objective.

Neutralmind's previous assumption was incorrect as well, so he is on the verge of coming to a correct conclusion but for the wrong reason.

-

...the proof can be seen around the world with different cultures ascribing different things as moral and immoral. And even individuals in the same culture.

Now this part is correct, but it has nothing to do with evolution.

-

I've never really believed in a god, but I've always believed in an objective morality.

Again, we are talking about whether or not there is an objective standard for morality.

-

I have a fear, no... I know that if I KNEW for sure, that there was absolutely no doubt that relative morality is correct I'd become one of the most immoral guys in this planet.... I KNOW I would become like that and I have no idea why I wouldn't want to be like that, now that I know (not KNOW) that relative morality is in fact correct.

Now Neutralmind is claiming that if there is no objective standard for morality, he would do things that he would not want to do. As crashfrog points out, this makes no sense. What would he do things that he doesn't want to do depending on whether there is or is not an objective standard?

-

So, should I hold onto my illusionary belief of absolute morality or will someone here help me find ways to deal with knowing the truth and still not turning "immoral"?

Again, this makes no sense. Neutralmind is asking whether he should continue "believing" in something that he knows is not true, just to avoid doing stuff he doesn't want to do.

Hell, the question here isn't even whether or not there is an objective standard for morality. The question here concerns some sloppy thinking on Neutralmind's part. (Not that this is meant to be a criticism -- when one begins to think about a deep topic for the first time, the initial thought processes are bound to be "sloppy" -- it takes time and effort (and further discussion) to clarify what one believes about it.


Actually, if their god makes better pancakes, I'm totally switching sides. -- Charley the Australopithecine
This message is a reply to:
 Message 85 by Rob, posted 04-04-2007 11:01 PM Rob has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 94 by Neutralmind, posted 04-05-2007 6:13 PM Chiroptera has not yet responded

  
Chiroptera
Member
Posts: 6617
From: Oklahoma
Joined: 09-28-2003
Member Rating: 4.9


Message 98 of 196 (393575)
04-05-2007 7:55 PM
Reply to: Message 96 by Neutralmind
04-05-2007 7:31 PM


Re: Even more confused
quote:
Because if there actually was an objective standard of morality, it would be pretty bad if I had done some things believing in making my own morality instead of "obeying" the objective moral code.

But how does an objective standard help you? You still have to try and figure out just what it is, and so you end up "making it up" as you go along anyway. So you're still in the same boat.

quote:
How would I ever know I'm doing something "objectively" good and not just something I think is objectively good

Oops...you already figured this out.

-

But there is a more serious error in logic here.

To wit:

quote:
I know evidence highly points towards relative morality but I still can't be certain.

Why aren't you certain?

quote:
Because if there actually was an objective standard of morality, it would be pretty bad if I had done some things believing in making my own morality instead of "obeying" the objective moral code.

But this has nothing to do with whether there is or is not an objective standard. What you seem to be saying is (in syllogistic form):

If there are objective standards of morality, then there will be consequences for not obeying them.
If there are objective standards and I disobey them, then I will suffer consequences.
Therefore, there might be objective standards of morality.

If this is what you are saying, then I hope that you see where it fails.


Actually, if their god makes better pancakes, I'm totally switching sides. -- Charley the Australopithecine
This message is a reply to:
 Message 96 by Neutralmind, posted 04-05-2007 7:31 PM Neutralmind has not yet responded

  
Chiroptera
Member
Posts: 6617
From: Oklahoma
Joined: 09-28-2003
Member Rating: 4.9


Message 101 of 196 (393583)
04-05-2007 8:14 PM
Reply to: Message 99 by Neutralmind
04-05-2007 8:00 PM


quote:
But that's just one thing, I think there's something I'd want to do but won't because I think it's wrong in my view of morality.

As you have already asked yourself, how would you know whether this would be against some alleged "absolute moral code" to begin with?


Actually, if their god makes better pancakes, I'm totally switching sides. -- Charley the Australopithecine
This message is a reply to:
 Message 99 by Neutralmind, posted 04-05-2007 8:00 PM Neutralmind has not yet responded

  
Chiroptera
Member
Posts: 6617
From: Oklahoma
Joined: 09-28-2003
Member Rating: 4.9


Message 125 of 196 (393768)
04-06-2007 9:28 PM
Reply to: Message 124 by Trae
04-06-2007 9:22 PM


Re: Talkin' 'bout my morality...
It also avoids the point that with no god, there are no actions that affect a god, and so these actions are no longer immoral.


Actually, if their god makes better pancakes, I'm totally switching sides. -- Charley the Australopithecine
This message is a reply to:
 Message 124 by Trae, posted 04-06-2007 9:22 PM Trae has acknowledged this reply

  
Chiroptera
Member
Posts: 6617
From: Oklahoma
Joined: 09-28-2003
Member Rating: 4.9


Message 131 of 196 (393911)
04-08-2007 11:48 AM
Reply to: Message 129 by Neutralmind
04-08-2007 11:15 AM


An excellent question.
quote:
If I knew that morality was subjective and so I wouldn't be any worse of a human for behaving immorally, I would behave more immorally.

crashfrog asked such a great question that I really think that it cannot be overemphasized.

If morality is subjective and you wouldn't be any worse of a human for behaving in some manner, then what is the problem with behaving in that manner?


Actually, if their god makes better pancakes, I'm totally switching sides. -- Charley the Australopithecine
This message is a reply to:
 Message 129 by Neutralmind, posted 04-08-2007 11:15 AM Neutralmind has not yet responded

  
Chiroptera
Member
Posts: 6617
From: Oklahoma
Joined: 09-28-2003
Member Rating: 4.9


Message 134 of 196 (393914)
04-08-2007 11:57 AM
Reply to: Message 132 by Neutralmind
04-08-2007 11:52 AM


Now this is getting confusing.

I thought your problem in accepting that morality is subjective is that you would then behave immorally.

Your answer in this posts assumes that there is an objective morality. We already know what the problem would be if you behaved immorally while there were an objective morality. I thought your original question was that you were on the verge of accepting that morality is not objective, and you were distressed about the implications if morality was subjective.

Edited by Chiroptera, : possibility -> implication

Edited by Chiroptera, : No reason given.


Actually, if their god makes better pancakes, I'm totally switching sides. -- Charley the Australopithecine
This message is a reply to:
 Message 132 by Neutralmind, posted 04-08-2007 11:52 AM Neutralmind has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 135 by Neutralmind, posted 04-08-2007 1:02 PM Chiroptera has responded

  
Chiroptera
Member
Posts: 6617
From: Oklahoma
Joined: 09-28-2003
Member Rating: 4.9


Message 136 of 196 (393926)
04-08-2007 1:13 PM
Reply to: Message 135 by Neutralmind
04-08-2007 1:02 PM


quote:
That I don't want to act immorally because my inner morality is telling me something I want to do is immoral and so I won't do it.

Sure. Then what does it matter whether there is or is not an absolute standard for morality? In fact, as far as I can see, you would be in a bigger quandry if there were an absolute standard since this absolute standard might compel you to do something that your inner voice is trying to tell you is wrong.

-

quote:
But knowing morality is subjective I'm never really doing anything morally "wrong", so I should just ignore that voice inside me ?

Well, that is what you are claiming, isn't it? That if there were no absolute standard, then you would quit listening to this inner voice of yours? At least, that is how I have been intepreting the quandry you have been presenting since the OP.


Actually, if their god makes better pancakes, I'm totally switching sides. -- Charley the Australopithecine
This message is a reply to:
 Message 135 by Neutralmind, posted 04-08-2007 1:02 PM Neutralmind has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 137 by Neutralmind, posted 04-08-2007 1:26 PM Chiroptera has responded

  
Chiroptera
Member
Posts: 6617
From: Oklahoma
Joined: 09-28-2003
Member Rating: 4.9


Message 139 of 196 (393933)
04-08-2007 1:33 PM
Reply to: Message 137 by Neutralmind
04-08-2007 1:26 PM


quote:
So, I've been believing in a subjective morality all along? But is that the same as relative?

Ugh. I really don't want to play semantic games. If I did, I would have invited Rob to join in.


Actually, if their god makes better pancakes, I'm totally switching sides. -- Charley the Australopithecine
This message is a reply to:
 Message 137 by Neutralmind, posted 04-08-2007 1:26 PM Neutralmind has not yet responded

  
1
2Next
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2019