Subjective Morality

[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.

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.

[Bust Nak]

I don't see how you have the power to obligate him. You have the power to want him to follow your desire and he can't stop that, sure.

Again, why not both? Here is a google definition of obligate: "require or compel (someone) to undertake a legal or moral duty." Wanting Johnny to follow my desire to not abuse children seem to fit the bill as an example of requiring Johnny to undertake a moral duty.

You can want the economic policy to not be passed. The lawmakers have the authority to decide, though. A police officer has authority to do certain actions that non-police officers do not.

Sure, but we weren't talking about enacting an economic policy, nor enforcing certain actions. These would be the compelling and legal side of obligation.

[The Tanager]

[Replying to Bust Nak in post #611]

In post 601 you said the authority was something beyond your subjective desire for your wishes to be fulfilled. Here, obligation and authority is just another way to say "I desire X."

[Bust Nak]

[Replying to The Tanager in post #612]

Doesn't sound like the same thing to me when I want X doesn't necessarily mean someone is required to do X.

[The Tanager]

So, what's the extra bit that gets you from "Bust Nak desires Johnny to follow his desire on the treatment of children" to "Johnny is obligated to follow Bust Nak's desire on the treatment of children"? If you think you have given it, then please do so again, because I don't think you have. I think you have said both are true and, at times, acted as though your explanation for your desire is good enough an explanation for Johnny's obligation but if they are different concepts, then they require different explanations.

[Bust Nak]

[Replying to The Tanager in post #614]

The extra bit is my insistence that he does it.

[The Tanager]

[Replying to The Tanager in post #614]

The extra bit is my insistence that he does it.

So, one's insistence that X is true proves it is objectively true?

[Bust Nak]

So, one's insistence that X is true proves it is objectively true?

No? I don't really understand where this question came from. Does "one's insistence that X is true proves it is objectively true that one has insisted on X being true" help?

[The Tanager]

No? I don't really understand where this question came from. Does "one's insistence that X is true proves it is objectively true that one has insisted on X being true" help?

We are talking about two things: (1) your desire that Johnny do what you want and (2) having this desire obligates Johnny to do it. I asked you to support (2) being true (i.e., what's the extra bit that gets 2?). You said "the extra bit is my insistence that he does it."

If all you mean by obligation/authority, is that you insist X is true, then that is just another way to say (1), that you desire Johnny to do what you want. But you said obligation went beyond this into (2). What is your support for (2)?

[Bust Nak]

[Replying to The Tanager in post #618]

Okay, I think I see what you are getting at. "I desire that Johnny to do what I want" is not the same as "I insist that Johnny to do what I want;" but "I insist that Johnny to do what I want" is another way of saying "Johnny is obligated to do what I want." The truth of "I insist that Johnny to do what I want" can be easily demonstrated by my testimony.

[The Tanager]

[Replying to Bust Nak in post #619]

How is 'insist' different than 'desire' for you? That's what I'm not seeing.