Moral Relativism

[jonfawkes]

Unfortunately the comment “It is not objective because it is a value statement” is the result of the normal CAF confusion about the meaning of objective; thus it is not accurate.

I am of the mindset of “you can’t have a light without a dark to stick it in” - could you lend some insight to the proper understanding of “objective”

Therefore, the human person is worthy of profound respect from all humans.

Good- We’ve narrowed it down to humans. (who) - still seems like a value statement. We as humans should respect other humans profoundly because they are worthy of said respect. Profoundly is definitely a (quantitative) value judgment. Worthy as well, if something is worthy, something else is not, we humans have make the cut. I’m unclear what does not, but by pointing out that we do makes it significant, which is also a value judgment.

How about the “why”?

 

[davidv]

I am of the mindset of “you can’t have a light without a dark to stick it in” - could you lend some insight to the proper understanding of “objective”

Good- We’ve narrowed it down to humans. (who) - still seems like a value statement. We as humans should respect other humans profoundly because they are worthy of said respect. Profoundly is definitely a (quantitative) value judgment. Worthy as well, if something is worthy, something else is not, we humans have make the cut. I’m unclear what does not, but by pointing out that we do makes it significant, which is also a value judgment.

How about the “why”?

What “why”?

Who established the value?

 

[jonfawkes]

What “why”?

Who established the value?

the human person is worthy of profound respect from all humans

why? (that one )

 

[davidv]

why? (that one )

The answer is in the answer to the question, who established the value?

 

[jonfawkes]

The answer is in the answer to the question, who established the value?

I don’t know - I didn’t make the statement.

So your saying “because we are human we should respect other humans” - again why?

 

[davidv]

I don’t know - I didn’t make the statement.

So your saying “because we are human we should respect other humans” - again why?

God gave us our value.

God created man in his image; in the divine image he created him; (Genesis (NAB) 1:27)

This is why.

 

[jonfawkes]

God gave us our value.

This is why.

As with the hypothetical head hunter - What if I deny your god in favor of my own, or perhaps none at all? My god says take heads.

 

[davidv]

As with the hypothetical head hunter - What if I deny your god in favor of my own, or perhaps none at all? My god says take heads.

Since your god is a false god your denial is meaningless.

 

[jonfawkes]

Since your god is a false god your denial is meaningless.

I deny the existence of your god. My god wants heads. There is no compelling reason why I should believe that your god is real. I already have my own.

 

[sidbrown]

“It is not true that whatever a society deems moral is thereby moral. Moral means right or wrong. Moral does not mean deemed right or wrong by some society.”

Unless you can tell us what is right and what is wrong in a few simple cases, then a lot of people are not going to buy your argument.

 

[John21652]

I deny the existence of your god. My god wants heads. There is no compelling reason why I should believe that your god is real. I already have my own.

May I ask a question?

Is your God, the one who wants heads, the only God?

 

[davidv]

Unless you can tell us what is right and what is wrong in a few simple cases, then a lot of people are not going to buy your argument.

Here is a simple case, killing of an innocent human person. It is wrong because the life of that person is sacred, having been specifically created by God for their own sake.

The three cases you presented previously are not “simple” cases.

 

[grannymh]

I am of the mindset of “you can’t have a light without a dark to stick it in” - could you lend some insight to the proper understanding of “objective”

True story. I was in a panic last night because it was getting harder and harder to maneuver on CAF. Then a scan showed I had a security threat and finally the internet caved in. I have local service so I had to wait for the morning,when they would be open. Finally, I was able to call. The gentleman on the phone asked if I turned off the modem. My reply was what is a modem. When I finally found the modem, he said I should reboot it. My reply was how do I do that. Find the power switch. Where?

And you are now looking for a proper understanding of “objective”

This is what was in the original post 1028

You are making a value statement and presenting it as fact. It is not objective because it is a value statement. There is an observer making a value judgment

Usually when explaining objective and objective reasoning, I google objective and subjective thinking or something similar and and choose the wording which fits the tone of the thread.

But your post 1028 is one of the best demonstrations regarding objective truth that I have seen. I would like to use its elements in another similar demonstration. Unfortunately, my lack of knowledge about computers has put me way behind in normal activities which have to be done. Being snowbound due to the blizzard has added its own difficulties.

I need to put off composing a reasonable demonstration. It this thread is closed, there are always threads about morality. Pick one and PM me and I will join you.

In the meantime, here are some ideas of where I am coming from.

A basic concept of objective truth is that it exists in the external world independently of any kind of value judgments. This does not deny the fact that there will always be observers who will make value judgments based on what they perceive according to their own knowledge, memory of previous experiences, what their family and society have told them and so on. The key is that a personal value system may affirm the objective truth or deny the objective truth. In either case, the nature or meaning of the objective truth remains.

Blessings,
granny

:snowing:

 

[jonfawkes]

True story. I was in a panic last night because it was getting harder and harder to maneuver on CAF. Then a scan showed I had a security threat and finally the internet caved in. I have local service so I had to wait for the morning,when they would be open. Finally, I was able to call. The gentleman on the phone asked if I turned off the modem. My reply was what is a modem. When I finally found the modem, he said I should reboot it. My reply was how do I do that. Find the power switch. Where?

And you are now looking for a proper understanding of “objective”

This is what was in the original post 1028

Usually when explaining objective and objective reasoning, I google objective and subjective thinking or something similar and and choose the wording which fits the tone of the thread.

But your post 1028 is one of the best demonstrations regarding objective truth that I have seen. I would like to use its elements in another similar demonstration. Unfortunately, my lack of knowledge about computers has put me way behind in normal activities which have to be done. Being snowbound due to the blizzard has added its own difficulties.

I need to put off composing a reasonable demonstration. It this thread is closed, there are always threads about morality. Pick one and PM me and I will join you.

In the meantime, here are some ideas of where I am coming from.

A basic concept of objective truth is that it exists in the external world independently of any kind of value judgments. This does not deny the fact that there will always be observers who will make value judgments based on what they perceive according to their own knowledge, memory of previous experiences, what their family and society have told them and so on. The key is that a personal value system may affirm the objective truth or deny the objective truth. In either case, the nature or meaning of the objective truth remains.

Blessings,
granny

:snowing:

Whenever you can get to it.

Stay warm

 

[jonfawkes]

May I ask a question?

Is your God, the one who wants heads, the only God?

Not sure why it’s relevant (Are you attempting a hypothetical conversion for our hypothetical headhunter ?) but…

He is the god of my people, we are the people of our god. Just as their are many bodies that walk the earth but only one is yours, such is the relationship of my people to our god. He is the face of the infinite for us.

 

[davidv]

Not sure why it’s relevant (Are you attempting a hypothetical conversion for our hypothetical headhunter ?) but…

He is the god of my people, we are the people of our god. Just as their are many bodies that walk the earth but only one is yours, such is the relationship of my people to our god. He is the face of the infinite for us.

Unless this god is this one:

Exod.20:2-3
"I am the LORD your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage. You shall have no other gods before me.”

Its command are not divine, only manmade and of questionable source. It is not a valid source of the determination of right or wrong. Leaving “moral relativism” built on a foundation of sand.

 

[inocente]

Being snowbound due to the blizzard has added its own difficulties.

Happens to us every year, we’re at the end of a dirt track, except with this global warming business the sun’s shining, the almonds are in blossom, the bees are out and God’s got his hat on. Really cold at night though with no cloud cover. Keep toasty.

Modem - the gizmo that transforms signals to pass over your network. From Modulator demodulator.

Boot – causes a device to run a small hardwired program (the firmware) which may then load a bigger program which loads a bigger one still like Russian dolls until everything is fully working (online). From pulling yourself up by your own bootstraps.

Objective – based on real facts uninfluenced by personal beliefs or feelings, as in “people disagree about morality so there’s no evidence it is objective”.

 

[grannymh]

Hi Jonfawkes,

For now, my demonstration of something objective will be a chair in a furniture store. But I need to have some calm time…

I’ll work on the rest of your post as a way of pre-testing my ideas.

Good- We’ve narrowed it down to humans. (who) - still seems like a value statement.

. Once humans leave the womb, theoretically they are an objectively independent being because of their human nature. Obviously, baby humans do depend on others just as a granny human depends on tech support for computer panics. Even so, a baby or a granny is not the same being as surrounding humans.
Each human has her or his own nature for better or worse.

We as humans should respect other humans profoundly because they are worthy of said respect. Profoundly is definitely a (quantitative) value judgment

.

I see your point about profoundly being quantitative since I do use it as an adjective–profound respect. Profoundly can also be an adverb since being quantitative, it can refer to our actions of respect. I have no doubt that the kind gentleman on the phone considered me profoundly ignorant in computer skills. Being in a panic, I profoundly begged for help. At least I didn’t have to cry.

The point is that adjectives and adverbs can be considered value statements but they do not invalidate the objective human nature of a person. The fact is that I remain in existence regardless of what anyone thinks or regardless of how they explain me or my actions.

Granted, I may be unfortunate because in the society where I live, computer skills are of such great value that all others are sent off to the glue factory. (Glue factory is an old term from my childhood neighborhood meaning I would serve society better if I were dead.) Even then, I am still a human person.

Worthy as well, if something is worthy, something else is not, we humans have make the cut. I’m unclear what does not, but by pointing out that we do makes it significant, which is also a value judgment.

The same principles regarding adjectives and adverbs above can be applied to worthy. There is no problem, from my view point, in assigning a decree system to worthy. I believe that animals deserve respect. The environment deserves respect.
What I have done by using “worthy of profound respect” is to insist that the human person is the pinnacle of creation even if some of us have other talents besides computer skills. My begging skills are top notch.

How about the “why”?

That question causes a lot of trouble because people attribute the “why” to a supreme, supernatural, transcendent spiritual being while other people deny the spiritual realm.

In my humble opinion, the “why” can be discerned on the human level. But first we have to see human nature objectively as well as accepting the objective truth that the human person is worthy of profound respect. The next difficult, but necessary, step is to view the objective truth of human nature as an universal truth which includes non-theists and theists of any kind.

Blessings,
granny:winter:

 

[grannymh]

Happens to us every year, we’re at the end of a dirt track, except with this global warming business the sun’s shining, the almonds are in blossom, the bees are out and God’s got his hat on. Really cold at night though with no cloud cover. Keep toasty.

Modem - the gizmo that transforms signals to pass over your network. From Modulator demodulator.

Boot – causes a device to run a small hardwired program (the firmware) which may then load a bigger program which loads a bigger one still like Russian dolls until everything is fully working (online). From pulling yourself up by your own bootstraps.

Objective – based on real facts uninfluenced by personal beliefs or feelings, as in “people disagree about morality so there’s no evidence it is objective”.

I’m doing my best with computers (thanks for explaining) and keeping warm. Russian dolls bring back memories of Alaska. Toasty? Notice how I dressed in my last post.

One thing before I find boots to go outside … Morality should be based on an objective truth which exists beyond disagreements between people. The evidence in something objective is usually that it exists independently – as you say uninfluenced by personal beliefs or feelings. As far as history goes, the fact that human nature is worthy of profound respect has not changed even though people have treated humans in terrible unworthy ways. The human nature of the next baby is still worthy of profound respect.

Blessings,
granny

 

[inocente]

One thing before I find boots to go outside … Morality should be based on an objective truth which exists beyond disagreements between people. The evidence in something objective is usually that it exists independently – as you say uninfluenced by personal beliefs or feelings. As far as history goes, the fact that human nature is worthy of profound respect has not changed even though people have treated humans in terrible unworthy ways. The human nature of the next baby is still worthy of profound respect.

This goes back to the difference between deeply held principles and objective facts. Many would say that someone who commits crimes against humanity isn’t worthy of the same respect as the victims, and so objectivity in the normal sense isn’t demonstrated.

I was reading a little feminist ethics yesterday. One idea is that males tend to favor rules, known as the justice perspective, while females tend towards negotiation, known as the care perspective. There is some science behind it, based on how people respond to moral dilemmas, but whether it’s good science I couldn’t find out (it predated the Internet).

It isn’t a black and white case, just a matter of which strategy is most likely to be employed. Some favor a set of rules to judge by, another takes each case as it comes. One sees universal principles as righteous, the other wants to care for the individuals in each specific case.

Leaving aside the feminist bit I’m still trying to decide whether there’s anything in it, but it’s an interesting slant, although I can feel some size ten boots approaching for even mentioning feminists.