I'll answer for Ken.PaulSacramento wrote:Ken, if, as you say : The morality of the act is not determined by the label objective or subjective, then WHAT is it that determines an act to be good or evil ?Kenny wrote:I disagree! If good is subjective, that doesn't mean rape can be good if something positive results from it, it means somebody will perceive rape as good if something positive results from it. But that person is going to have this opinion of rape weather it is labeled subjective or objective. The morality of the act is not determined by the label objective or subjective.PaulSacramento wrote:Ken, good and evil, if subjective, will always be in the "it depends" category.No. What does not make sense to me is the claim that only if good and evil are subjective, that makes them interchangeable according to the situation or POV
Ken
If they are not objective ( and all it takes is for ONE of them to be so) then there IS a Good and as such then there are things that are wrong REGARDLESS of anything else.
Rape, if good is subjective, can be good is something good comes out of it ( subjective to end result) or if it is in the best interest of an individual ( subjective to personal happiness).
If its wrong REGARDLESS of any possible positive outcome or reason then it will ALWAYS be wrong and if it is ALWAYS wrong then doing what is wrong knowing it is wrong is evil and as such, evil is objective.
Ken
Good and evil only exist in one's imagination. I don't believe in God, so I can't believe in something that can't be known by the 5 senses. Materialism is all that exists. My thoughts don't exist. My mind is a figment of my imagination. Blah blah blah...