- Joined
- May 1, 2013
- Messages
- 119,842
- Reaction score
- 75,822
- Location
- Outside Seattle
- Gender
- Female
- Political Leaning
- Independent
I've already disabused you of your misunderstanding of my statement. What are you about here anyway?
The principle of morality is objective, grounded in biology.
Moral judgment is subjective.
Moral intuition is a form of moral judgment.
"The moon is made of green cheese"
Oy! Moral intuitions are a form of moral judgment, which is subjective. The principle of morality is objective, grounded in biology. Please stop repeating your canard.
Really? How do you know this?
Oy! Moral intuitions are a form of moral judgment, which is subjective. The principle of morality is objective, grounded in biology. Please stop repeating your canard.
Is a "moral judgment" and it is based on your moral intuitionAnd kill women have!
To the tune of 50 million and still counting....
A moral catastrophe of the first order.
Explain exactly how you van prove that morality is objective. You have not done so yet.
Morality and Moral Judgmentt
Morality is Objective
Moral Judgment is Subjective
Morality is biologically grounded in the survival instinct
Life is the fundamental value of morality
The value of Life informs the emotions of Fear and Disgust, Sympathy and Empathy
Emotions are objective measurable states of being
Feeling is the consciousness of emotion
With feeling subjectivity enters moral dynamics
Moral judgment (subjective) derives from Feeling (subjective),
Feeling from Emotion (objective),
Emotion from the Survival Instinct (objective)
The Survival Instinct from the Value of Life (hardwired)
PostScript
Moral Intuition is a form of Moral Judgment
If morality is grounded in the survival instinct, then it is moral for me to kill if I perceive that he or she threatens my life.
The perception of my life being threatened is subjective.
Morality is grounded in the survival instinct, yes. Perceptions are both subjective and objective; absent an object, perceptions are imaginary or hallucinatory. A threat to life is in the first instance a physical reaction of fear to a perceived threatening object -- this is the objective principle of morality at work. In the second instance, when fear becomes a self-conscious feeling, the threat to life calls for a moral judgment. The principle of morality calls for reaction; moral judgment calls for a reflective valuation of that action.If morality is grounded in the survival instinct, then it is moral for me to kill if I perceive that he or she threatens my life.
The perception of my life being threatened is subjective.
Morality is grounded in the survival instinct, yes. Perceptions are both subjective and objective; absent an object, perceptions are imaginary or hallucinatory. A threat to life is in the first instance a physical reaction of fear to a perceived threatening object -- this is the objective principle of morality at work. In the second instance, when fear becomes a self-conscious feeling, the threat to life calls for a moral judgment. The principle of morality calls for reaction; moral judgment calls for a reflective valuation of that action.
But if all you mean is that it's your moral call, you're right. Every human being is a free moral agent.
I don't know what work your "very" is supposed to do, but if one person observes a bear lumbering toward her yard and perceives in its approach a cause for alarm and a possible threat to her life, and another person observes a bear lumbering toward his yard but does not perceive in its approach a cause for alarm and a possible threat to his life, then, since they are observing the same objective set of circumstances, their different perceptions must have an explanation. Maybe the man is an animal trainer and the approaching bear belongs to him. Maybe the man is a fool and hasn't sense enough to recognize a dangerous situation. Maybe the man is an animal rights activist and truly believes that wild animals do not pose a threat unless provoked. Maybe the man is a fur trapper and is luring the bear toward a trap. If we all agree that the approach of a bear is cause for alarm and a possible threat to life, then the differing perceptions in our hypothetical must have an explanation.What one person calls a threat to life may not be perceived as such by another. Very subjective.
I don't know what work your "very" is supposed to do, but if one person observes a bear lumbering toward her yard and perceives in its approach a cause for alarm and a possible threat to her life, and another person observes a bear lumbering toward his yard but does not perceive in its approach a cause for alarm and a possible threat to his life, then, since they are observing the same objective set of circumstances, their different perceptions must have an explanation. Maybe the man is an animal trainer and the approaching bear belongs to him. Maybe the man is a fool and hasn't sense enough to recognize a dangerous situation. Maybe the man is an animal rights activist and truly believes that wild animals do not pose a threat unless provoked. Maybe the man is a fur trapper and is luring the bear toward a trap. If we all agree that the approach of a bear is cause for alarm and a possible threat to life, then the differing perceptions in our hypothetical must have an explanation.
That explanation, whatever it is, accounts for their different perceptions.
To bring this hypothetical back to our topic: if two people observe the taking of a human life, and one perceives it as immoral while the other does not perceive it as immoral, or perceives it as moral or a-moral, then, since they both observe the same act, there must be an explanation for their different moral perceptions.
Morality and Moral Judgmentt
Morality is Objective
Moral Judgment is Subjective
Morality is biologically grounded in the survival instinct
Life is the fundamental value of morality
The value of Life informs the emotions of Fear and Disgust, Sympathy and Empathy
Emotions are objective measurable states of being
Feeling is the consciousness of emotion
With feeling subjectivity enters moral dynamics
Moral judgment (subjective) derives from Feeling (subjective),
Feeling from Emotion (objective),
Emotion from the Survival Instinct (objective)
The Survival Instinct from the Value of Life (hardwired)
What it was, sir, was an attempt to clarify terms and conditions for those who have shown in their posts a persistent misunderstanding of the argument.This is is not an argument against abortion or against the women who choose abortion. It is not an argument for or against the morality of abortion.
This is is not an argument against abortion or against the women who choose abortion...
Correct. The argument from morality is a separate argument, also posted. Perhaps I'll find it for you if you need it.It is not an argument for or against the morality of abortion.
The OP Argument
2. Killing 50 million human beings with impunity constitutes a license to kill.
3. Therefore, abortion law constitutes a license to kill.
"This is is not an argument against abortion or against the women who choose abortion." Correct. But it is the argument of this thread.
Correct. The argument from morality is a separate argument, also posted. Perhaps I'll find it for you if you need it.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?