[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/lit/ - Literature

View post   
File: 79 KB, 514x737, 0C4C2AB8-5572-43E3-915D-8B43DDC66CAD.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
15581603 No.15581603[DELETED]  [Reply] [Original]

Does objective morality exist?

>> No.15581611

>>15581603
Nope

>> No.15581617

>>15581603
Yes

>> No.15581626

>>15581603
Maybe

>> No.15581629

>>15581603
Gee I dunno

>> No.15581631

>>15581603
Yeah

>> No.15581650

>>15581603
The golden rule is nice.

>> No.15581656

>>15581650
Are you calling tigers immoral?
If not, how can you claim to be arguing for objective morality?

>> No.15581666

No. That's why I'm a moral nihilist.

>> No.15581667

>>15581656
Tigers are carnivores, they have no choice but to eat meat. Humans are omnivores.

>> No.15581675

>>15581603
The type of person that believes in objective morality is the same type of person that complains about scientism

>> No.15581694

>>15581603
no. it is like objective justice. morality, justice is social construct. take into account that CIA and those behind them unseen are very important part of "social".

there's a difference between not doing something "bad" because you understand cause and effect and understand that it is harmful to your goal and not doing something because someone said so (larping). civilization is larping.

>> No.15581701

>>15581603
The type of person that believes in objective morality is the same type of person that complains about Christianity

>> No.15581707

>>15581603
Do objective larping rules exist?

>> No.15581720

>>15581707
SCA is objectively better than Mind's Eye

>> No.15581723

>>15581650
The Golden Rule is dog shit. And I can prove it. Different people have different values, different gold.

>> No.15581732

>>15581723
I said it’s nice.
Learn to subtlety

>> No.15581738

>>15581667
but that life is inherently valuable cannot be proven, therefore, eating an animal is the same as harming a rock: both things do not have value other than its utility, its exchangebility in a market, and its beauty

>> No.15581761 [SPOILER] 
File: 871 KB, 878x1240, 1591894990370.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
15581761

>>15581694
Pretty much. The most "real" type of morality is things that you feel are wrong on an emotional level even if you can't explain, and those are very subjective.
For example, there are people that are deeply haunted by images of any kind of pain being done to another human, but don't care about harm coming to animals. I personally can't stand animal cruelty, but I can tolerate looking at cruelty done to humans even if I know it's morally (in the cultural sense) wrong.
Some people feel strongly about all animals. Some feel strongly just about dogs or cats. Some feel strongly about humans. Some feel strongly only about people like them. Some feel strongly only about kids (regardless of where they come from).
Of course, there's nothing stopping you from having a broad stance - like, say, all suffering is bad - but sooner or later you're going to have to make a choice as to whom you're more likely to let suffer as you focus on saving others.
It's like choosing between tits and ass. There's clearly no goo-- oh wait, it's ass. Yeah. It's always ass. ASS.

>> No.15581777

What is objective morality? I can’t say it’s more or less real than any other idea people have thought of. Which is to say, it’s made up.

>> No.15581783

>>15581650
>>15581732
I can't tell anymore if this is the real butterfly or if everyone is just larping as butterfly now. Maybe anonymous on /lit/ should just be changed to a butterfly so we can call it a day.

>> No.15581785

>>15581650
Butterfly would be behind rule-based morality given her choice to neglect religious writings ^^

>> No.15581786

>>15581603
It does for me but not for thee.

>> No.15581793

>>15581786
You're getting confused that would be subjective morality

>> No.15581807

>>15581603
No as you can just say a certain 5 letter word anytime tells you something is wrong. HUWHY

>> No.15581811

>>15581793
Yes, that's the joke.

>> No.15581820

>>15581603
Yes, op suck my dick is objective morality

>> No.15581825

>>15581738
But can you prove that life doesn't have value?

>> No.15581834

>>15581650
What's the golden rule?

>> No.15581835

>>15581738
Rocks have no sentience therefore "harming" a rock is nowhere near eating an animal.
Can they be used for exchangebility in a market? Sure, so are Humans. And I doubt you would like being sold as merchandise.

>> No.15581838

>>15581811
Hard to tell with a lot of people. Christcucks will tell you with a straight face that doing what God says is objectively moral and not God's subjective morality

>> No.15581849

>>15581603
Universals don't exist, so if by "objective morality" you mean a universal morality, then no.

t. nominalist

>> No.15581867

>>15581761
Based

>> No.15581875

>>15581834
https://lmgtfy.com/?q=golden+rule

>> No.15581886

>>15581603
no

>> No.15581890

>>15581603
Yes. It says you should suck my dick. Not so clever now, are you? hahahah

>> No.15581898

>>15581667
Beside the value of life cannot be proven objectively (nor the opposite, which is why it's a dilemma at all), an objective moral would've to be applicable not only to humans but also tigers.

>> No.15581901

>>15581838
How is it God's subjective morality if what is moral is what brings you closer to God? It's like saying to a doctor, "well, that's just your subjective opinion. What if I don't want to be healed? You probably can't even heal me." You get the idea.
Either way, who better to give a powerful "subjective" argument than the omniscient being that created us and knows everything about us? Kek

>> No.15581913

>>15581898
what is the value of Universe?

>> No.15581918

>>15581761
/thread

>> No.15581926

>>15581890
incredibly based

>> No.15581937

>>15581901
But the point is God's opinion of morality is just as subjective as mine. Christcucks will tell you it's objective and totally misunderstand the definition of objective and subjective

>> No.15581959

>>15581656

Animals aren't receptacles of human morality. Which is why it's permissible to hunt and eat them.

>> No.15581966

>>15581825
if the value of life cannot be proven, this does not lead to a dillema. This is a very biased bullshit argument. if something cannot be proven to exist objectively, it simply does not exist objectively, it can only exist as a subjective abstraction, which does exist. In this case, objective value of life cannot be proven, however, the subjective value projected onto it by someone or a group does exist, however, that means that the object of the projection itself does not have value

>> No.15581967

>>15581603
I don't think so OP. It's all just a gray area. You have to be aware of the Dunning Krueger effect as well when thinking of objective morality.

>> No.15581969

>>15581875
Reddit

>> No.15581977

>>15581937
Yeah, there's a difference between objective and subjective. Since we are assuming the Christian God exists for the purpose of the argument, what is moral is what brings you closer to your divine nature, or rather to God. God tells you how to do this in the Bible, therefore it is not his opinion. It's more of a prescription than an opinion

>> No.15581979

>>15581959
that applies to humans too

>> No.15581985

>>15581913
Objectively? Nothing.
Subjectively? You shouldn't care about my opinion on that!

>> No.15581989

>>15581738
I guess cannibalism is ok as well

>> No.15581991

>>15581977
But this is just defining morality to be what brings you closer to your divine nature, or rather to God. I don't accept that definition and God telling me to accept it a subjective opinion. Christianity doesn't provide an objective morality

>> No.15581999

>>15581989
depends on what you want to achieve there

>> No.15582001

>>>leddit.com/r/badphilosophy

>> No.15582015

>>15581898
>an objective moral would've to be applicable not only to humans but also tigers
True, but again, tigers do have to eat flesh to survive otherwise they would go extinct, humans do not.

>> No.15582019
File: 66 KB, 1024x958, ceo based.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
15582019

>>15581603
>You can't prove objective things exist
>Therefore everything is subjective
>Therefore even the term "objective" is subjective
>Therefore my subjective morality is objective
>Therefore you must all abide by my morality in order to be considered good human beings

Checkmate

>> No.15582023
File: 559 KB, 940x788, 6AC42128-9A39-4795-B54F-964B88A9BF9F.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
15582023

>>15581785
Mutually agreed upon codes of conduct based on the golden rule. Though all is subjective, it is best to listen to your mother’s advice

>>15581834
Treat those as you would have them treat you.

>> No.15582029

>>15582019
That's what moral relativism does, eventually it becomes impossible to condemn any action be it "wrong" or "good" at all.