Subjective Morality

For the love of the pursuit of knowledge

Moderator: Moderators

Post Reply
User avatar
The Tanager
Prodigy
Posts: 4977
Joined: Wed May 06, 2015 11:08 am
Has thanked: 45 times
Been thanked: 149 times

Subjective Morality

Post #1

Post by The Tanager »

I started this post out of another discussion with Divine Insight. DI has made some arguments for morality being subjective. I'm still trying to get the terminology straight.
Divine Insight wrote:If morality is not absolute, then it can only be subjective. A matter of opinion.
We need to get our terms straight when talking about our human morality. I agree with you concerning 'subjective' being a matter of opinion. Objective, then, would mean not being a matter of opinion. Just like the shape of the earth is not a matter of opinion. X is good or bad for everyone.

Absolute vs. situational is a sub-issue concerning objectivism. The absolutist would say X is good or bad for everyone (and thus objectivism) no matter the situation. The situationalist would say X is good or bad for everyone but qualified by the situation.

In this phrasing, morality can be objectivist without being absolute. Now, I don't care if these are the terms we agree upon or not, but there must be some term for each concept I've presented. If you want to use "absolute" for "objective" above, that's fine. But you've got to tell me what two terms you want to use for what I termed the "absolute vs. situational" sub-issue.

User avatar
The Tanager
Prodigy
Posts: 4977
Joined: Wed May 06, 2015 11:08 am
Has thanked: 45 times
Been thanked: 149 times

Re: Subjective Morality

Post #791

Post by The Tanager »

Bust Nak wrote: Fri May 14, 2021 10:40 amRecall if you will, my polar bear example. What your reasoning process is processing, is how a particular policy's costs or benefits, as opposed to reason about moral tastes on keeping polar bears alive; that much remains uncontrollable and isn't formed through a reasoning process.
It's also processing why such and such is a cost rather than a benefit, which benefits are more important, etc. It's processing things that we can change our mind on through the reasoning process, unlike food tastes.
Bust Nak wrote: Fri May 14, 2021 10:40 amThat's the point! I keep reminding you over and over again, explaining why I have certain taste re: taste buds, eyeballs and brains, goes beyond philosophy. I kept pushing my original answer: there is not accounting for taste; beauty is in the eye of the beholder; that's how I roll.
That those are the reasons you have a certain moral taste is a philosophical claim.

User avatar
JoeyKnothead
Banned
Banned
Posts: 20879
Joined: Fri Jun 06, 2008 10:59 am
Location: Here
Has thanked: 4093 times
Been thanked: 2572 times

Re: Subjective Morality

Post #792

Post by JoeyKnothead »

From Post 791:
The Tanager wrote: ...
That those are the reasons you have a certain moral taste is a philosophical claim.
[/quote
All morality is subjective. All of it.
That's just a fact, and no other categorizationings will ever change that fact.
I might be Teddy Roosevelt, but I ain't.
-Punkinhead Martin

Bust Nak
Savant
Posts: 9855
Joined: Mon Feb 27, 2012 6:03 am
Location: Planet Earth
Has thanked: 189 times
Been thanked: 266 times

Re: Subjective Morality

Post #793

Post by Bust Nak »

The Tanager wrote: Fri May 14, 2021 4:16 pm It's also processing why such and such is a cost rather than a benefit, which benefits are more important, etc.
These has nothing to do with taste itself, but figuring out what matches your taste best.
It's processing things that we can change our mind on through the reasoning process, unlike food tastes.
That has to do with the immediacy of the things being evaluated, the more complex the issue, the more process required before you can ground it in your raw taste. Food just tend to be less complex on average than environmental issues. Take the most complex tasting food and contrast with the most trivial moral issue and what you said here is reversed, it would take more processing to decide if you like the food and none for the moral issue.
That those are the reasons you have a certain moral taste is a philosophical claim.
Sure. I've never suggested beauty is in the eye of the beholder or that's how I roll are scientific claims. Every time I go beyond these reasons, I highlight it's going off topic from philosophy to science.

User avatar
The Tanager
Prodigy
Posts: 4977
Joined: Wed May 06, 2015 11:08 am
Has thanked: 45 times
Been thanked: 149 times

Re: Subjective Morality

Post #794

Post by The Tanager »

[Replying to Bust Nak in post #794]

Any response I would make here would be repeating myself. Thank you for sharing your thoughts and hearing mine. Let me know if there is anything else you want to discuss.

Post Reply