Believing that morality isn't subjective

>Believing that morality isn't subjective

Other urls found in this thread:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argumentation_ethics
twitter.com/AnonBabble

>having to tell everyone your morality may or may not be edgy compared to theirs.

>he thinks he can refute the principles of universally preferable behavior

how is morality subjective retard

>Believing I wouldn't want to bury my hands in that rain-soaked cleavage

Religions are the cause of morality. Atheists are potential nihilistic savages. Prove me wrong.

Why do some people consider gambling wrong? I'm just paying for fun.

Because there's a lot different moral codes and you can never tell which one is "right". There's also a lot of difficult edge cases.
Even if you don't bother with that, there's tons of social rules of very minor moral importance that change across culture. Saying goodmorning to someone vs simply nodding silently vs ignoring entirely. Don't make eye contact on the subway in this city, but it's fine in that city. Saying things are "fine" vs actually saying what's on your mind (even if it's minor... even if it's big). Those kinds of social rules are still part of the moral code, but much more grey.
To me it's pretty obvious that these moral values exist (you'll feel like you did something wrong if you don't follow the code) but they're different even going family to family. Holding doors open for everyone, or just women, or just people that are nearby. Do you actually hold the door open from the outside, or do you go through halfway and wait for them to have a hand on the door before continuing? Does the toilet paper go over or under? Tons of shit man, what's the universally preferable behavior?

There's plenty of moral panics over "rock and roll is the devil's music" and "D&D is Satanic" which seem completely retarded. Atheists are potential nihilistic savages, but the law and social pressure should probably take care of most of that.

did you just read nietzsche or something, cmon lol

>there are a lot of codes and you can never tell which one is right

yeah, morality is an objective phenomenon and the *type* of morality is subjective, and the biggest influence on morality is ideology, and every persons development is different, which leads to minute differences in perceived morality. that doesn't make morality subjective. what you're describing in the sentences beyond that is just socialization and ideology and how they interact.

That's a cute girl, can't find the sauce though

If morality isn't objective, then it isn't morality.

Sorry to go off topic but what manga is that from? No results from image searching and can't tell if the name is relevant or not.

See en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argumentation_ethics
>Hoppe states that because honest argumentation aimed at resolving a conflict over scarce resources must presuppose various norms including non-violence to be meaningful, then it follows that propositions propounded during such argumentation cannot contradict these norms, from which, he claims, the non aggression principle can be logically derived. So Hoppe claims that to deny the non aggression principle during such argumentation is a performative contradiction between one's actions and one's words. For example, to argue that violence should be used to resolve conflicts is an obvious performative contradiction if one is to engage in a meaningful argument to resolve such a conflict.[3]

ogrosman on twitter.
I've been downloading a shitload of these to make them all say that.

Sounds like you believe there's an objective morality, but nobody can have any idea what it is. Slavery was a thing people thought was a moral good for the enslaved race at some point. Maybe we're the ones that are wrong right now.

I mean, what's moral changes through the years. At one point homosexuality was fine, then it was immoral now it's becoming fine again. What's the objective morality of homosexuality, and how do you know it?

i didn't say there was an objective morality. i clearly said something else. in fact, your example points out and proves my exact point. ideology is the prime influence in morality in class society.

I'm not sure what you're saying. Are you saying that each person has a morality that can be measured and described objectively, and that person's morality is compared subjectively to other people's morality?

yea, kind of lol
desu, the terms "objective" and "subjective" in this case are kinda wonky, because different moralities constitute different origin in class society, and all are part of a specific group of peoples interest that manifest independently of their will.
i mean ideology in the althusserian sense, i.e ideology acts as the "imaginary relations to the real conditions of existence"

Thank you, I really like the art style, are there any translations of it?

Not that I know of. I also didn't see any compete work of his on sadpanda, though there is a compilation of hundreds of random drawings on there.
I don't know pretty much anything about this guy except that I like his art style and his tastes in what makes a woman attractive.

>Not that I know of. I also didn't see any compete work of his on sadpanda, though there is a compilation of hundreds of random drawings on there.

Ofc morality is subjective. E.g muslims strongly oppose adultery, theft, drinking, gambling etc. but at the same time they have no problem with cutting off ''infidels''' heads, stoning women to death or performing GM on toddlers. This is something western society ( and any sane person) doesn't perceive as moral at all.

>here are a bunch of things that aren't moral issues so morality isn't real

Fuck off.

sauce for preferably non moon rune version?

Those aren't just "different morals" those are wrong.
Intent matters.

but you just proved that what "any sane person" think is right is just subjective and not objective good, opinions vs opinion, neither is better or worse

It's literally how western society used to function until very recently. Aside from the genital mutilation.

What a person thinks is right or wrong is subjective. What is actually right or wrong doesn't change that. Right is right even if everybody is wrong, wrong is wrong even if everyone thinks it's right.

>giving a shit whether it's subjective or objective as though it has actual consequence

Morality is a human delusion but so are things like beauty and pleasure. Humans (some races more than others) have a biological aversion to certain behaviors just as we have a biological aversion to certain tastes or smells. Most soldiers in the military cry after they have gotten their first kill because naturally humans do not want to kill other humans. It is easier to kill a Iraqi because they do not look exactly like White Americans but it still will cause a release of neurotransmitters because we are hard wired to find certain things repulsive. Similarly if you have killed many people you can get used to it and not cry, but the same thing can be said about seeing two men kissing.

It's called Natural Law, and it is a universal morality that exists whether you believe in it or not, whether governments work in agreement with it in a given age or not; it has been since the beginning, it will be to the end.
Sort yourself out, pleb. You're just a pussy who can't form an opinion without a herd to follow.

Of course it is OP, how else can antifa justify their violent behavior without the moral high ground?
Everything happening now is a battle for the moral high ground because once you have it you can do anything you want to your enemy and still be considered the hero. You stupid nigger

Wouldn't the morality code of the most industrious and creative nation be objectively the best?

You can say it's subjective but the morality of western nations produce the best populace.

How many cannibalistic tribes produced trains?

Morality is not subjective. Human understanding subjective. Morality is very real and arises out of social orders. You can observe morality in the animal kingdom. Rats have morality.

Nobody has any more experience above another in determining what is actually right and what is merely a reflection of their value system. Humans do not practice objective morality, though some of their practices may be morally right, they merely act in moral accordance with their values, which are subjective. But imho, I feel morality is simply invented by men to make themselves feel more distanced from animals, who niether do right nor wrong themselves due to lack of conciousness.The natural law cannot be removed from man, since he was created by it, therefore he has no true morality, only excuses for why he does what he does.

But you can make the argument that they did it upon the back of slaves and indentured servitude, and in ways just as immoral as backwards ass African societies, just in a superficially different way. The trains may have ran, but they ran on blood as much as they ran on rails.
How? Im extremely interested this.

Morality is subjective in that there's always a better morality to develop, thus what anyone considers the current best morality has created a dead end for humanity. Slavery is actually less economically viable than paying workers by the hour.

I guess there's a question between morality and economics. "Should you have that retarded kid when you could abort it?". Economics will work around morality ("I'm not aborting my kid no matter what" vs "Well the doctor prescribed him with retardation in the womb" (and will require a magnitude more resources to take care of and at best will be a greeter at Walmart).