NationStates Jolt Archive

Morality is subjective.

Your missing the point.

Morality is based on what random people of NS believe in and applies to everyone else by their own standards

Your missing the point.

Morality is based on what random people of NS believe in and applies to everyone else by their own standards
Colodia is obviously right. Look how many posts he has.

Morality isn't subjective, at least unless you don't have a problem with being killed.

Morality isn't subjective, at least unless you don't have a problem with being killed.

What? :cool:

arent there SOME morals that arent subjective?

like "its bad to kill people who arent doing anything bad to you"?

arent there SOME morals that arent subjective?

like "its bad to kill people who arent doing anything bad to you"?

Yes, but most morals are. The morals discussed on messageboards aren't. Nobody has made a thread: "Random Killings, are they moral?"

Morality isn't subjective, at least unless you don't have a problem with being killed.
Let them try. I’d just mow them down with my FADBAGS.
:mp5:

Everyone has different morals. Some believe imposing one's morals on others is right, some believe it's wrong, which makes for a very complicated issue.

I think a good starting point is "do unto others as you would have them do unto you".

Additionally, some people think that something as important as morals cannot be argued, disputed or discussed in a form so restrictive and limiting as written/spoken language.

Morality is objective, and I just happen to possess total knowledge of that objective morality. Everyone else is just in varying degrees of ignorance. :P

arent there SOME morals that arent subjective?

like "its bad to kill people who arent doing anything bad to you"?
That’s a specific moral. Those are less likely to be disagreed with than a general moral. However somebody somewhere will feel it’s within their rights to do such. Therefore still making it subjective.

Morality is objective, and I just happen to possess total knowledge of that objective morality. Everyone else is just in varying degrees of ignorance. :P

That must come in very handy at dinner parties.

"Is this a salad fork or a shrimp fork?"
"Salad fork."
"What if there's shrimp in the salad?"
"Pick around them."
"Whoops, I just speared a shrimp."
"INFIDEL!!!"

Morality is a choice society tries to push off as being defined by the majority when really it's not.

Morality is subjective.

"Yes, but subjectivity is objective."

That must come in very handy at dinner parties.

"Is this a salad fork or a shrimp fork?"
"Salad fork."
"What if there's shrimp in the salad?"
"Pick around them."
"Whoops, I just speared a shrimp."
"INFIDEL!!!"
tee hee...
On an unrelated note, I know someone that that happened to :eek:

:cool:

Morality is subjective.

A very easy statement to make, a much harder one to prove.

So, what's your philosophical argument for adopting this position and rejecting the very idea of objective morality?

Or are you just making reckless claims about the nature of reality without being able to back them up?

How about this.

Morality, is it moral?
Is it moral to have any prejudice towards any subject? Or should we just weight things based in an individual basis? Morality to me seems like a lazy approach to solving problems. Instead of looking at things individually, people immediately assume they think they know what the problem is and how to solve it. When in reality they probably know nothing about how things happen and assume that everything is all just the same. Is it moral to just say that something is right or wrong without examining every aspect of each individual situation? Is it wrong to just say that something is wrong?

Morality is subjective.

You seem to be under the false misapprehension that people on this board are actually interested in what other people think.

This place is really just the electronic equivilant of a soapbox in Hyde Park.

You seem to be under the false misapprehension that people on this board are actually interested in what other people think.

A "false misapprehension"? A tautology, surely, or do there also exist "true misapprehensions"?

Morality is subjective.

I was wondering if someone had reminded people of that.

I believe this simply because of the fact that any number of people can't get along because they can't agree on what's right or what's not. Different societies have different ideas on what is right and what is wrong based on their own experiences and laws. The fact that some of those morals are acceptable to others lets most people coexist reasonably peacefully (i.e. murder).

arent there SOME morals that arent subjective?

like "its bad to kill people who arent doing anything bad to you"?

nope, that's subjective. ALL MORALS ARE SUBJECTIVE.

yes, most of us can agree on some morals, because nobody like being killed or robbed, but that's more a sense of shared vested interest than it is proof that there is any objective morality. there isn't, there can't be, and i will never understand how anybody could claim there is an objective morality...we create morality, and therefore it is purely subjective and accessable to the whim of any human mind.

Your missing the point.

Morality is based on what random people of NS believe in and applies to everyone else by their own standards

So true.

Even "Killing is bad" is subjective.

What about the extenuating circumstances?

A man breaks into my house, tries to kill me, I kill him first. Did I do something bad?

Me.