Is there any such thing as 'Objective morality'?

[Zzyzx]

.
Is there any such thing as 'Objective morality'?

Objective is defined as: Existing independent of or external to the mind; actual or real: Based on observable phenomena; empirical: Uninfluenced by emotions or personal prejudices.

Thus, an 'objective morality' would have to be independent of human minds, emotions, prejudices.

WHERE would such 'morality' be found? In books written, transcribed, translated, edited, modified by humans?

Would 'objective morality' be found in religious organizations, dogma and traditions created by humans?

If it is proposed that one of the thousands of 'gods' provides 'objective morality', how, when, and where was that done (independent of human minds)?

[2Dbunk]

[Replying to post 27 by TheBeardedDude]

Hi 2Dbunk

Can you give an example of an objective morality which is altruistic and free of bias?

Thanks Smile

Willum's answer of "pets" and Children are good. But also consider concern for the environment or civil rights. Of course this runs the gamut of both objective AND subjective (me, myself, and I included) . . . mankind's welfare!

Our Civil Law generally means well but is tainted by personal, institutional and corporate interests -- they are far from being altruistic.

Sorry this answer is late . . . my email notification address has somehow been erased.

[Willum]

Thanks.

On this or another thread, I mentioned that octopi were in many ways more intelligent than we are.

Would it be an interesting experiment to develop some tests to see if octopi had a morality that we could contrast with our own?

[DanieltheDragon]

Thanks.

On this or another thread, I mentioned that octopi were in many ways more intelligent than we are.

Would it be an interesting experiment to develop some tests to see if octopi had a morality that we could contrast with our own?

In what ways are they more intelligent? I am aware they are intelligent animals, the only animal I know to exceed average human intelligence in any particular category is Chimps in a specific study that is awaiting to be repeated(studying strategic logic).

Intelligence does not equal morality though. It could be argued that certain sociopaths lack the basic underpinnings to be moral beings while exhibiting higher levels of intellegence.

Rather I think we should look to social animals that inherently require some sort of moral system(sans insects) to operate effectively.

[Willum]

[Replying to DanieltheDragon]

Just a passing thought. If mankind want some kind of non-objective morality, then he needs to have another reference other than himself, right?

I did agree with the idea that intelligence does not imply morality, though I guess I do mean awareness...

[DanieltheDragon]

[Replying to post 94 by Willum]

Why would we need another species to have morals for non objective morality. The simple existence of two moral beings negates objective morality. Last I checked there was 7 billion people on the planet and that is 7 billion moral perspectives.

[Bust Nak]

Just a passing thought. If mankind want some kind of non-objective morality, then he needs to have another reference other than himself, right?

May I ask why? We don't need to have any reference other ourselves. Perhaps you have a different definition of "objective" to the rest of us.

[Willum]

[Replying to Bust Nak]

It more has to do with a possible way of obtaining objectivity.
Who would have a better objective view than another intelligence?

Just putting it out there for the realm of theoretical philosophy.

[DanieltheDragon]

[Replying to Bust Nak]

It more has to do with a possible way of obtaining objectivity.
Who would have a better objective view than another intelligence?

Just putting it out there for the realm of theoretical philosophy.

Are you talking about

Objective:

1. Not having personal feelings or emotions involved

Or

2. Existing independent of the mind

In either case I don't see how another intelligent species is necessary.

[Willum]

[Replying to DanieltheDragon]

The trick is in the morality bit of it.
If two alien cultures agree on the same morale concept, then, there begins "objective."

If a man eats an octopus, he says "yummy."
If an octopus eats a man, it says "yummy."

Therefore we have a baseline for an objective morality.

[DanieltheDragon]

[Replying to DanieltheDragon]

The trick is in the morality bit of it.
If two alien cultures agree on the same morale concept, then, there begins "objective."

If a man eats an octopus, he says "yummy."
If an octopus eats a man, it says "yummy."

Therefore we have a baseline for an objective morality.

No we don't have a baseline for objective morality you simply have a convergence of moral opinion. Your scenario isn't even the same moral concept.

If we had man eats octopus and says yummy and octopus eats octopus and says yummy then your talking about the same concept. Even though this is about taste not morality.

Objective morality can't exist with two or more conscious entities. Because something will benefit one over the other inevitably leading to subjective morality.