Quote from: Executioner Sigma on September 08, 2015, 10:14:17 PM

Quote from: Batchinator Epsilon on September 08, 2015, 10:13:17 PM

Why do you people make life so complicated

I think if there's one thing people should work out it's probably morality.

It took 3 pages and probably more to explain? I think most of us grasp the concept without the essay.

winy doesn't
starch doesn't
jim doesn't
tblocks doesn't

Quote from: Batchinator Epsilon on September 08, 2015, 10:26:20 PM

Quote from: Executioner Sigma on September 08, 2015, 10:14:17 PM

Quote from: Batchinator Epsilon on September 08, 2015, 10:13:17 PM

Why do you people make life so complicated

I think if there's one thing people should work out it's probably morality.

It took 3 pages and probably more to explain? I think most of us grasp the concept without the essay.

winy doesn't
starch doesn't
jim doesn't
tblocks doesn't

We grasp the capacity to act similarly to you, and for mostly identical reasons. At least in my case, I'm not in any moral disagreement with you; that's not the root of this discussion. I only disagree about a property of morality, not how certain acts fall under its jurisdiction. I believe that's what he's saying.

I understand. i just don't agree with it.

Quote from: Winy on September 08, 2015, 10:33:11 PM

We grasp the capacity to act similarly to you, and for mostly identical reasons. At least in my case, I'm not in any moral disagreement with you; that's not the root of this discussion. I only disagree about a property of morality, not how certain acts fall under its jurisdiction. I believe that's what he's saying.

do you have any moral convictions

Yes, many.

Quote from: Winy on September 08, 2015, 10:39:41 PM

Yes, many.

i don't see how you could, believing morality is subjective

i would consider none of my subjective opinions to be "convictions" of mine--none

i enjoy chocolate ice cream--is that a conviction? no
wind waker is the best game ever--is that a conviction? no

I do, regardless of whether or not I, very deep down, don't view my convictions as inherent truths. That reality doesn't really enter my thoughts when I'm doing something kind or generous. I receive satisfaction from doing good deeds for others, therefore I continue to do them; I enjoy acknowledging my ability to make others feel happy. So I suppose you might make the argument that they aren't, in fact, "convictions," but the difference between the two honest definitions is so negligible to me that I don't bother making a distinction between them.

Quote from: Winy on September 08, 2015, 10:47:03 PM

I do, regardless of whether or not I, very deep down, don't view my convictions as inherent truths. That reality doesn't really enter my thoughts when I'm doing something kind or generous. I receive satisfaction from doing good deeds for others, therefore I continue to do them; I enjoy acknowledging my ability to make others feel happy. So I suppose you might make the argument that they aren't, in fact, "convictions," but the difference between the two honest definitions is so negligible to me that I don't bother making a distinction between them.

okay

so, if morality is just a matter of ice cream flavors, why waste time debating about all these issues

islam isn't evil--that's just their opinion of how people should be treated

why can't we just let them have their opinion?
why try to impose our beliefs on them?

I would actually very much be interested in being convinced that morality is actually an objective set of ideas, rather than a subjective one, as I currently view it. That's why I'm discussing it here. I'm fully capable of arguing about the morality of actions within general human parameters (Don't hurt others, be nice, don't steal, etc.), and am fully capable of making monumental progress without diving into the gritty, depressing topic of moral nihilism.

Quote from: Winy on September 08, 2015, 10:57:11 PM

I would actually very much be interested in being convinced that morality is actually an objective set of ideas, rather than a subjective one, as I currently view it. That's why I'm discussing it here. I'm fully capable of arguing about the morality of actions within general human parameters (Don't hurt others, be nice, don't steal, etc.), and am fully capable of making monumental progress without diving into the gritty, depressing topic of moral nihilism.

good

and now i've lost track of where you're having trouble

I fail to understand how morality has inherent truths to it, no matter how many ways people have spun it for me. That pretty much spans all of my confusion and doubt.

Quote from: Winy on September 08, 2015, 11:02:50 PM

Quote from: Verbatim on September 08, 2015, 11:00:22 PM

Quote from: Winy on September 08, 2015, 10:57:11 PM

I would actually very much be interested in being convinced that morality is actually an objective set of ideas, rather than a subjective one, as I currently view it. That's why I'm discussing it here. I'm fully capable of arguing about the morality of actions within general human parameters (Don't hurt others, be nice, don't steal, etc.), and am fully capable of making monumental progress without diving into the gritty, depressing topic of moral nihilism.

good

and now i've lost track of where you're having trouble

I fail to understand how morality has inherent truths to it, no matter how many ways people have spun it for me. That pretty much spans all of my confusion and doubt.

Truth comes from definition.

The only sane definition of morality has to do with the well-being of conscious creatures.

Ergo, we have truths from this definition.

Why is that the only sane definition?

The repercussions of stabbing someone in the face isn't subject to various different people's opinions. The majority of people, if not everyone sans the mentally ill, agree that there is an objective kernel to the moral behaviour of one's actions.

Why is that the only sane definition?

Because it's literally the only one that makes sense; the only one that is rational. Defining morality by any other standard would be like defining physics as something other than the study of physical phenomena.

Quote from: Executioner Sigma on September 09, 2015, 09:42:34 AM

Quote from: IFUKTMYMOM69 on September 09, 2015, 09:36:06 AM

Quote from: Verbatim on September 08, 2015, 09:17:55 PM

Quote from: IFUKTMYMOM69 on September 08, 2015, 09:13:15 PM

Because we have defined health as "not being ill." We have defined morality as "the difference between right and wrong" but fail to define "right and wrong" with any objectivity.

Wrong: Any state of disutility imposed on sentient life forms that is not offset by its utility, if any at all.

That isn't objective.

. . .

How is it not? Disutility is a measurable, non-arbitrary phenomenon.

How can you define it as objectively "wrong?"

Because nothing good or useful--to anyone--comes from it.

If there is no God

If God commanded you to murder and rape, would it be moral?