.
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)?
Is there any such thing as 'Objective morality'?
Moderator: Moderators
-
Zzyzx
- Site Supporter
- Posts: 25089
- Joined: Sat Mar 10, 2007 10:38 pm
- Location: Bible Belt USA
- Has thanked: 40 times
- Been thanked: 73 times
Is there any such thing as 'Objective morality'?
Post #1.
Non-Theist
ANY of the thousands of "gods" proposed, imagined, worshiped, loved, feared, and/or fought over by humans MAY exist -- awaiting verifiable evidence
Non-Theist
ANY of the thousands of "gods" proposed, imagined, worshiped, loved, feared, and/or fought over by humans MAY exist -- awaiting verifiable evidence
-
Willum
- Savant
- Posts: 9017
- Joined: Sat Aug 02, 2014 2:14 pm
- Location: Yahweh's Burial Place
- Has thanked: 35 times
- Been thanked: 82 times
Post #101
[Replying to DanieltheDragon]
I can see your point.
I do not agree with it, as I find objective morality could only come from two independent observers - capable of feeling or understanding the concept of morality.
Where they agree, I'd say it was objective, when it is only one, such as man, I would say there was no objectivity.
But like I say - I can see your point, and honor it.
I respectfully agree to disagree.
I can see your point.
I do not agree with it, as I find objective morality could only come from two independent observers - capable of feeling or understanding the concept of morality.
Where they agree, I'd say it was objective, when it is only one, such as man, I would say there was no objectivity.
But like I say - I can see your point, and honor it.
I respectfully agree to disagree.
