Can any moral document be objective?

Ethics, Morality, and Sin

Moderator: Moderators

Post Reply
User avatar
BeHereNow
Site Supporter
Posts: 584
Joined: Sun Nov 21, 2004 6:18 pm
Location: Maryland
Has thanked: 2 times

Can any moral document be objective?

Post #1

Post by BeHereNow »

From another thread:
Wouldn't it be nice to have a nice objective handbook for everyone to have?
First part: Can any moral or religious document be objective in the values it presents? Please explain.
Part two (optional): If you answered yes, you may chose any particular document and defend it as being objective.
If you answered no, you may choose any particular document and use it as an example of why moral documents are subjective.
Part three (optional): If you answered no objective document is possible, but it were magically possible, would you want it?

User avatar
Talishi
Guru
Posts: 1156
Joined: Sun Sep 11, 2016 11:31 pm
Location: Seattle
Been thanked: 2 times
Contact:

Re: Can any moral document be objective?

Post #2

Post by Talishi »

BeHereNow wrote: First part: Can any moral or religious document be objective in the values it presents? Please explain.
No, because values always depend on a point of view. A hunter kills Bambi's mother, puts food on the table. Good for his family, but doesn't do Bambi a whole hell of a lot of good.

User avatar
marco
Savant
Posts: 12314
Joined: Sun Dec 20, 2015 3:15 pm
Location: Scotland
Been thanked: 2 times

Re: Can any moral document be objective?

Post #3

Post by marco »

BeHereNow wrote:
If you answered no, you may choose any particular document and use it as an example of why moral documents are subjective.
Those who oppose the Israelites are invariably evil. Unlike normal humans where you get a mix of bad and good, they are entirely evil and fit for destruction. Subjective!

The people of Sodom and Gomorrah were uniformly bad. Is this even possible. Were children also bad?

And the good and just Lot offered his daughters to be raped. In whose eyes was this action good?

And is it possible that an entire people, the Jews, asked that judgment be placed on the heads of unborn Jewish generations? For centuries Jews have suffered because of this calumny against them. Christian morality relies a lot on lies, it would seem.

Coldfire
Student
Posts: 71
Joined: Wed Jul 07, 2010 11:08 am
Location: Norfolk, VA

Re: Can any moral document be objective?

Post #4

Post by Coldfire »

BeHereNow wrote:Can any moral or religious document be objective in the values it presents? Please explain.
Yes, its possible, but I would say religiosity tends to corrupt any objective approach to ethics in favor of dogma or inherited bigotry.
BeHereNow wrote:Part two (optional): If you answered yes, you may chose any particular document and defend it as being objective.
I would argue that the US judicial system does a decent job at being objective in accordance with upholding laws and the Constitution. We still have a ways to go as a species in general with dismissing personal bias and being fair and just to each other, but I would say we conduct ourselves much more objectively than our ancestors in that regard.

I just got done watching “the Tudors,� where the court system was shown to be primarily controlled by the Church and the King, much more corruption in that system.

Youkilledkenny
Sage
Posts: 819
Joined: Wed Jan 28, 2015 6:51 am

Re: Can any moral document be objective?

Post #5

Post by Youkilledkenny »

[Replying to post 1 by BeHereNow]
First part: Can any moral or religious document be objective in the values it presents? Please explain.
I try to never say YES or NO 100% on things of this nature as stranger things have happened.
I find it highly unlikely that anyone on document can appease everyone's need (as I understand the question) in regards to morality simply because it's highly objective to the individual, time frame, geological region and society in question.

Subjectivity
Newbie
Posts: 6
Joined: Fri Jun 23, 2017 8:13 pm

Post #6

Post by Subjectivity »

I'm of the strong agnostic position that one can never know if one has obtained knowledge of objective reality. In my view, no document could ever be relied on to objectively describe reality.

On an unrelated note, I struggle to think of any moral position that is held across all societies worldwide. Implementing and enforcing a universal code of conduct would not be a pragmatic undertaking due to the differences in moral understanding across societies.

RightReason
Under Probation
Posts: 1569
Joined: Sat May 20, 2017 6:26 pm
Been thanked: 16 times

Re: Can any moral document be objective?

Post #7

Post by RightReason »

[Replying to BeHereNow]
First part: Can any moral or religious document be objective in the values it presents? Please explain.
What do you mean by religious document? Is it a religious document to say same sex relationships are wrong? Is it a religious document to state the immorality of abortion?

If those are the types of things you mean. I would argue that yes they can be objective, but I would also argue they can be objective because they aren’t only religious documents. Those things are not wrong because the Church says they are wrong, rather the Church must declare them wrong because they are wrong. They are objectively immoral. Again, not because the Bible says they are, rather because man in his reason, being an observer of life, acknowledging the way the world works and understanding man’s relationship with this world, can conclude the above behaviors are not right/good/in man’s best interest. This reasoning is based on science, logic, biology, facts etc. IOW, on externals. It is not based on feelings, emotions, rationalizations, etc.
Part two (optional): If you answered yes, you may chose any particular document and defend it as being objective.
I could go into great detail about either of the behaviors/actions mentioned above and show how man can determine the wrongness of it, but I think both the topics I mentioned above have been debated ad nauseam and doubt anyone wants to go down those roads again.

Therefore, I will take something a little more innocent like bulimia. Yes, bulimia. Is there anyone here who thinks bulimia is right or good? I think most people would agree that the act of purposely eating large quantities of food and then purposely making oneself vomit so as not to have to deal with the consequences (calories) of eating said food is wrong. Or as most would like to refer to it – disordered. The person wants the pleasure of eating while forgoing the natural consequences that comes with eating. It simply isn’t the proper order of how things are supposed to work. We can all know how the body is supposed to work by simply observing how it does work. What makes things right or wrong is often if something is being used correctly or for its intended purpose. Most can recognize bulimia is misuse of the body. I think it is fair to say knowing what we know about man, the way the body works, the way the world works, a things form and function and purpose we can conclude bulimia is a disordered act and not in man’s best interest. In fact, most of us think this so much that we offer help and support to anyone who suffers from bulimia. We do not think the bulimic is a bad person, however we do agree their behavior is wrong and therefore not right or good. The compassionate thing to do would be to get help for the bulimic because the bulimic will never reach peace and true human fulfillment while being a slave to such a behavior.

All men can know what is right/good vs. bad/wrong. But it does require us to be honest and acknowledge the natural laws of the world we live in. Making these acknowledgments is far from subjective – and that’s the point. That we all know instantly that something like bulimia is not the proper order shows determining the rightness or wrongness of something is not arbitrary. It is objective and something all men can know.

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: Can any moral document be objective?

Post #8

Post by Bust Nak »

Not a very active part of the forum, is it?
Can any moral or religious document be objective in the values it presents? Please explain.
No, because values are inheritly subjective, there is no value without an evaluation, and no evaluation without an evaluator.
choose any particular document and use it as an example of why moral documents are subjective.
Take the 10 commandments for example, the evaluators are God as the author (if one was to grant such a thing) and the readers deciding if they would follow the rules or not.
If you answered no objective document is possible, but it were magically possible, would you want it?
Only if said magical document command the things that I value.

RightReason
Under Probation
Posts: 1569
Joined: Sat May 20, 2017 6:26 pm
Been thanked: 16 times

Re: Can any moral document be objective?

Post #9

Post by RightReason »

[Replying to Bust Nak]
Quote:
Can any moral or religious document be objective in the values it presents? Please explain.

No, because values are inheritly subjective, there is no value without an evaluation, and no evaluation without an evaluator.



I disagree. The question is can a moral or religious document be objective? Of course, because truth is objective. In fact, it is illogical to not see truth as objective. To declare there is not such thing as objective truth is self contradicting.

Joe: There is no such thing as objective truth.
Sue: Is that true?

Show me a culture that values rape. Also, even if you could find some subculture that engaged in rape, THAT wouldn’t mean rape is right or good. It would simply mean that culture is wrong. All people can know right from wrong, regardless of religion.

The fact that different cultures or people sometimes get it wrong does not mean right and wrong are subjective.

"Men do not differ much about what things they will call evils; they differ enormously about what evils they will call excusable." - G.K. Chesterton
Quote:
choose any particular document and use it as an example of why moral documents are subjective.

Take the 10 commandments for example, the evaluators are God as the author (if one was to grant such a thing) and the readers deciding if they would follow the rules or not.
One of the 10 commandments is do not steal. That is an objective truth. We may get to decide if we will accept the truth, but our acceptance or non acceptance doesn’t change the truth.

User avatar
bluethread
Savant
Posts: 9129
Joined: Wed Dec 14, 2011 1:10 pm

Post #10

Post by bluethread »

When it comes to morality the objective/subjective dichotomy is a false choice. Morality is a social construct. It is contractual, either presumed or explicit. I, therefore, hold that all true morality is constitutional. Those who argue for an intrinsic morality are attempting a cheap cheat, because they do not wish to examine the true basis of their moral standards.

Post Reply