Objective morality finally established

qz.com/1562585/the-seven-moral- … -humanity/

K: as I see it, several problems occur with this list. For example, divide resources
fairly is not simply not a factor here in the U.S… for that would be communism.
No, the numbers are quite clear that the upper 1% has increased their wealth
to the point where 8 people in the world has more wealth then over half
the population of the planet earth. That is not dividing resources equally, in
fact, it is quite the opposite. Capitalism demands, demands that the resources
are not divided up equally… for if the resources were divided up equally,
the minium wage would be over $25 dollars an hour, instead of the California the
minium wage which is one of the highest in the country and that is $11.00 dollars an hour.

and one of my problems is with the word, objective.

Objective. according to the dictionary:
Objective: having real existence outside of a person’s mind, not subjective. Not
influenced by personal feelings or opinions.

the list is the very definition of the influence of personal feelings or opinions.
for example, being brave. Ask ten people what it means to be brave and you will
get ten different answers and the list doesn’t take into account examples as in
the ancient Greek culture in which the real goal was Arete and bravery was simply
a part of having Arete. Arete, by the way means excellence. For the proper goal
or objective of a person in ancient Greece was achieving excellence and being brave
was simply a part of Arete…and another problem is how do we know that
the study wasn’t just a test to confirm an already held bias… in other words,
by the questions one ask, you can get answers which you already believe in. The questions
simply confirms your bias. we cannot know if that is what happened.

to reach another point, is this idea of defering to one’s superiors.
In America as well as most western countries, the greatest crime one
can commit in society is also the greatest crime to commit in the bible,
which is disobedence to authority. That is one of only two things that can get me
fired, disobedience and stealing. I cannot be fired for anything else. One of the
perks of working in a union. Anyway, if you don’t defer to your superior in modern
western society, you get fired…deferment is built into our modern economic
system. Defer or get fired… does that mean that it is an “objective”
standard? I don’t think so. I don’t see how this list gets one outside of or
beyond a person’s feeling or opinion… it is feelings or opinions writ large
and that is certainly not objective. In fact, you could ask people, do
you like to get beaten up and you will get a pretty firm opinion or feeling
that people don’t like to get beaten up, but is that an “objective” morality
or simply people’s feeling about the matter… the entire list is really just
how people feel or have an opinion about a certain matter and having
an opinion or feeling about something is not an “objective” viewpoint, even
if every single person on earth feels the exact same way… because the
very word “objective” means outside of a person’s mind and every single
answer is given from a person’s mind… objective must mean outside of
someone’s mind, not from a person mind.

this list has some real problems……


This would hold also for all your sense that right wing people are immoral or wrong. That’s just subjective judgments on your part. And on their part of left wing and liberal people.

K: and at no point have I claimed that my “bias” is objective…
I am solidly in the camp of the subjective, the relative…in my book,
there is no objective.


Cool, that puts you in Iamb’s camp. This means that you just don’t like how the Republicans want things, you don’t think it’s wrong how they want them.

And when you post something like this:

What you mean is that the people you are arguing with do things not wrong or bad, but just not to your taste.

K: as I have suggested on many occasions, I believe that the GOP is the most dangerous
terrorist organization in the world, bar none…I have laid out my arguments for
such a belief many times and in many ways, however that doesn’t mean I think my
arguments are “objective”. They are my beliefs and my opinions surrounded by
as many facts as I can find to support my position. It is not the beliefs or opinions
that should pursuade you, but the facts… I believe the GOP has done more to
damage America than the Taliban AND Al qaeda put together or for that matter
combine any and all terrorist groups and the GOP has done more to harm
and destroy America then all of them put together…that is opinion but
supported by facts.


It’s a value judgment of the effects. You are positing objective values, while, yes, admitting that your evidence that what they do is bad might be fallible.

You are conflating two issues.

To say that someone has objective morality means that they think they know what is good. Like that ‘damaging’ america is bad. Your language in what I cited in the previous post is saturated with objective values speak.

Saying you might be wrong about whether the GOP is bad does not remove you from the category of people who have objective morals. It just means you realize you might be in error about the effects.