Objective Morality

[Kenny]

Jlay
Ken,
I think a reply can often be better understood by what it fails to respond to than what what it does respond to. What you failed to respond to is telling. Unfortunately you've kind of backed yourself into a corner and now are forced to defend an untenable position. Better to face a minute of embarrassment and humility than to continue trying to defend this nonsense. I have a lot of respect for people who admit such, but little for people who stubbornly refuse to put aside foolishness.
Ken
If there is something I neglected to respond to, let me know and I will be happy to give a response.

Jlay
.
I concur. Are you sincerely saying you cannot demonstrate that murder and rape are wrong?
If so, remind me to stay away from your neighborhood.
Ken
I said I can demonstrate it is wrong using MY moral standards; not his.


Jlay

You argue and prove a point by using universal standards. You are saying they are WRONG. You know they are wrong. All you are saying is you can't prove it. In fact you are arguing for OM here. Well, first that is pretty weak if you can't argue why someone shouldn't steal, for example. As if they only thing you have to go on is your opinion. Imagine teaching a child like this. "Well son, I don't think you should steal. But it's just my opinion. No behavior is objectively right or wrong. But I'd prefer you not steal."
Good grief.
Ken
I said I couldn’t argue why someone shouldn’t steal using THEIR standards, only my own; which they would not respect.

Jlay
Ken, I've already stated that the GR is not itself OM. It is grounded in OM. What you are doing is taking an example of depraved behavior that is in violation of OM to try and prove that the GR doesn't hold. It's actually pretty sad that you can't see what you are doing. It's like saying, "I want you to tell me how much this weighs, in inches."
Ken
So are you changing your mind now? Are you back-tracking? At first you said the Golden Rule is true in all places, and times regardless of opinion; which includes depraved behaviour. Now you are saying the Golden Rule does not work in depraved behaviour. Sounds like you are making my point.

Jlay
Ken, it can absolutely be demonstrated that morality can be measured. You measure it, we all measure it. In fact, you have measured it in this thread. What do you think someone is saying when they state that murder is WRONG? Do you really think they are saying they "prefer" non murder over murder? Or, are they saying it REALLY is wrong?
Ken
I don’t see that as measuring morality. Murder is wrong weather it is labelled subjective or objective. The act doesn’t become less immoral become some lexicographer put it in the category of subjective.

Jlay
This makes absolutely no sense. People who deny OM should be beaten and burned until they agree that to be beaten and burned is not the same as to not be beaten and burned. (that's a joke btw)
Ken
Would you mind responding to what I said?

Jlay
What kind of nonsense is it to lump same sex and interracial marriage?
Ken
There was a time when most Christians in the USA thought interracial marriage was as immoral as they currently believe same sex marriage is today! Are you telling me for 170 years most Christians had this objective morality wrong then in the last 50 years ( around the time the law changed) they finally saw the light and realized interracial marriage was okay after all?

Jlay
Again you are not distinguishing physics and metaphysics. Just like in logic, I can demonstrate a fallacious argument. But there is nothing physical to measure it like you can with a triangle. Again, why should I even listen to you? On what grounds are you trying to say you are right, or that your position is better?
Ken
I gave my definitions of subjective moral claims and objective moral claims as you asked. Would you mind responding to that please?

Jlay
First, you have again blurred ontology and epistemology. Rules are NOT OM. I've never claimed that.
Ken
I believe rules and laws are objective. If the law says to not steal and I tell you it is against the law to steal, I can point to the portion of the law that says don’t steal, and that would be proof that stealing is illegal

Jlay
-Shouldn't? According to what? Ken, like most people who argue your side, you just smuggled in OM. What do mean by wrong? Wrong according to......? You are using these terms (should, shouldn't, right, wrong) as if they actually correspond to a standard.
Ken
Yes! According to my standard. I think what it comes down to is we have different interpretations of subjective morality. You seem to think subjective morality means all opinions should be given equal consideration. I disagree; I believe only my opinion should be considered because all others are wrong.

Jlay
Again, this makes me question whether you really understand the term objective. And yes, you can prove to people that they are wrong. I see it all the time. As a parent I have had my child do bad things and not feel bad about them. But by teaching them and showing them the truth they come to understand and even regret what they've done. I've seen this with addicts, criminals, etc. And all first hand. So, please don't tell me that we can't convince someone that their particular ethic or lack thereof is wrong.

Ken
That’s easy! They have the same standard that you have. It’s easy to demonstrate when they share the same standards as you! I’m talking about those with different standards. From my understanding, the United Methodist Church has a different standard on Gay right than many other denominations. Everybody reads the same bible, everybody worships the same God yet there is inconsistency on the Gay rights issue. How can you call this objective? You have 2 people arguing at each other, pointing to the same bible saying they are right and the other person is wrong.

Jlay
You stated earlier that you can prove that 2+2=4. Agree. Now, imagine if you had someone who insisted that 2+2=5. You repeatedly work thru the equation demonstrating that your position is the objective truth, but they refuse to listen.
Ken
I would assume that person does not know math, because the rules of math are agreed upon by everybody. The rules of morality are not.

Ken

[Lonewolf]

I think that through so much legalistic objective morality we are reducing God to our image.

[1over137]

Jlay
You stated earlier that you can prove that 2+2=4. Agree. Now, imagine if you had someone who insisted that 2+2=5. You repeatedly work thru the equation demonstrating that your position is the objective truth, but they refuse to listen.
Ken
I would assume that person does not know math, because the rules of math are agreed upon by everybody. The rules of morality are not.

Ken

Math is built/derived from few rules/axioms. No axioms chosen by people, no math.
http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_axioms

[Lonewolf]

Objective Morality to me is like Limiting God to our understanding of Him

http://discussions.godandscience.org/vi ... =3&t=39664

[LittleHamster]

Wow! Sounds like somebody on this site actually agrees with me! Maybe I should go out and buy a lottery ticket or something.
(Bold done by Kenny)

Ken

Hehe, No problem Ken.

I am still not 100% sure if I agree with myself though. I will have to keep investigating this subject.

[Kenny]

A few questions for those who believe morality is objective.

1. Do you believe all moral issues are objective? Or do you feel some issues are objective and others are subjective. (example; maybe rape is objectively wrong but sex outside marriage or having more than one wife is subjectively wrong)
2. Do all reasonable people agree on the objective moral issues? (example; if homosexuality is objectively wrong; everybody knows it is wrong even though many pretend it is right because their hearts are wicked and prefer wrong over right)
3. For those who believe some issues are objective and some are subjective; (if you believe all moral issues are objective; disregard this question) does everybody agree on which moral issues are objective and which ones are subjective?

Ken

[Byblos]

Kenny, before we answer these questions I would like you to answer mine first if you don't mind.

Is truth knowable?

[Kenny]

Kenny, before we answer these questions I would like you to answer mine first if you don't mind.

Is truth knowable?

Excellent question!
I would say objective truth (that which can be proven or demonstrated) is knowable. Subjective truth is only believed. What do you think?

Ken

[Byblos]

Kenny, before we answer these questions I would like you to answer mine first if you don't mind.

Is truth knowable?

Excellent question!
I would say objective truth (that which can be proven or demonstrated) is knowable. Subjective truth is only believed. What do you think?

Ken

Can you then give me an example of a subjective truth?

[Kenny]

Kenny, before we answer these questions I would like you to answer mine first if you don't mind.

Is truth knowable?

Excellent question!
I would say objective truth (that which can be proven or demonstrated) is knowable. Subjective truth is only believed. What do you think?

Ken

Can you then give me an example of a subjective truth?

Sure! I will give you the same answer I gave Jlay when he asked me the same question

"An objective truth claim is a claim that is true and that can be demonstrated. If I made the claim that all 3 sides of an equilateral triangle are equal, that claim is true and it can be demonstrated Thus it is objective. If I made the claim that same sex relationship, and interracial relationships are immoral; that is a subjective claim because it can’t be demonstrated."

Do you agree with my definition/example? If not; where am I going wrong?

Ken

[1over137]

An objective truth claim is a claim that is true and that can be demonstrated. If I made the claim that all 3 sides of an equilateral triangle are equal, that claim is true and it can be demonstrated Thus it is objective.

Can you demonstrate that? Please, do not use Math axioms people invented.

[Kenny]

An objective truth claim is a claim that is true and that can be demonstrated. If I made the claim that all 3 sides of an equilateral triangle are equal, that claim is true and it can be demonstrated Thus it is objective.

Can you demonstrate that? Please, do not use Math axioms people invented.

The truth claim is about Geometry. A geometry question requires a geometry answer. I cannot answer the question without using math. What is your point?

Ken

[PaulSacramento]

Kenny, before we answer these questions I would like you to answer mine first if you don't mind.

Is truth knowable?

Excellent question!
I would say objective truth (that which can be proven or demonstrated) is knowable. Subjective truth is only believed. What do you think?

Ken

Can you then give me an example of a subjective truth?

Sure! I will give you the same answer I gave Jlay when he asked me the same question

"An objective truth claim is a claim that is true and that can be demonstrated. If I made the claim that all 3 sides of an equilateral triangle are equal, that claim is true and it can be demonstrated Thus it is objective. If I made the claim that same sex relationship, and interracial relationships are immoral; that is a subjective claim because it can’t be demonstrated."

Do you agree with my definition/example? If not; where am I going wrong?

Ken

Ken,
Objective morality, that there IS such a thing as right and wrong has been proven and is demonstrable.
Every single culture, though out history and TODAY believe that there is such a thing as right and wrong.
It is demonstrable and verifiable by historical evaluation and by direct observation.

[Byblos]

Kenny, before we answer these questions I would like you to answer mine first if you don't mind.

Is truth knowable?

Excellent question!
I would say objective truth (that which can be proven or demonstrated) is knowable. Subjective truth is only believed. What do you think?

Ken

Can you then give me an example of a subjective truth?

Sure! I will give you the same answer I gave Jlay when he asked me the same question

"An objective truth claim is a claim that is true and that can be demonstrated. If I made the claim that all 3 sides of an equilateral triangle are equal, that claim is true and it can be demonstrated Thus it is objective. If I made the claim that same sex relationship, and interracial relationships are immoral; that is a subjective claim because it can’t be demonstrated."

Do you agree with my definition/example? If not; where am I going wrong?

Ken

But I wasn't asking you about objective truth, we're not there yet. You stated there was a difference between objective and subjective truth. I asked you for an example of the latter. Can you please provide an example of a subjective truth?

[RickD]

Byblos wrote:
Can you please provide an example of a subjective truth?

I'd actually like to see this too.