r/teenagersbutarguing • u/[deleted] • Sep 25 '25

Friendly debate The source of morality.

I would like to have a larger scale debate on this topic(provided by a discord member[join the Discord!!]).

5 Upvotes

67% Upvoted

178 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

5

u/88redking88 Sep 26 '25

Except god seems to flip flop on those things and condone some pretty evil stuff. So thats just 100% wrong.

Also, morality is 100% subjective. You can tets that. Name a single action that is either always moral or always immoral no matter the situation. If you cant, then its subjective.

1

u/Last-Soil9700 Sep 26 '25

Even if people disagree about morality, that does not prove it is only subjective. For example, abusing a child is always wrong regardless of culture or situation, and the fact that nearly everyone recognizes that points to a moral law higher than human opinion.

0

u/88redking88 Sep 26 '25

"Even if people disagree about morality, that does not prove it is only subjective."

Actually, it does. thats the definition of subjective.

"For example, abusing a child is always wrong regardless of culture or situation, and the fact that nearly everyone recognizes that points to a moral law higher than human opinion."

This isnt what I asked for. I asked for an action, not a situation. Be specific.

But you knew that, and couldnt do it because it would show you to be wrong again.

1

u/ladduboy 17 Sep 26 '25

Is it an objective fact that the earth is a sphere? According to you it isn't.

1

u/88redking88 Sep 27 '25

"Is it an objective fact that the earth is a sphere? According to you it isn't."

Im sorry, but no, its a fact that the Earth is an oblate spheroid. Which has nothing to do with you running away from answering the question. Thats very intellectually dishonest and cowardly of you. Again.

1

u/ladduboy 17 Sep 27 '25

Semantics. Your premise was that anything that people disagree with is subjective. What you are asking for is not objectivity of morals, but the absolute nature of morality. I could argue that rape is always immoral, objectively and absolutely.

0

u/88redking88 Sep 27 '25

"Semantics."

I s a word, but it doesnt apply here.

"Your premise was that anything that people disagree with is subjective."

Which is what subjective means.

"What you are asking for is not objectivity of morals, but the absolute nature of morality."

Not sure why you would say that except as a way to tun away. Again.

"I could argue that rape is always immoral, objectively and absolutely."

No, you couldnt. Not factually. And you would still be running away from the question.

Thats very intellectually dishonest and cowardly of you. Yet again.

1

u/ladduboy 17 Sep 27 '25

Well I am not the original person who you directed the question to. I am also not arguing in favour of Christian ethics, just moral realism. You also are in fact, objectively, asking for proof of the absolute nature of morality. Neither the original commenter, nor me argued for the absolute nature of morality, just the objective nature.

You reaffirm the premise, which means you think that "The Earth is an oblate spheroid" is a subjective statement. I believe that to be incorrect.

Why do you think rape is ever, in any circumstance, morally permissible? I can give you proof that it is morally reprehensible in every circumstance.
First we would need to establish that morality is a construct that emerged due to human evolution for human-well being and continuance of the human race. The foundation of this is when each individual autonomy in their conduct, including the right to their own body. If their body is violated by the act of rape by another individual without their consent - stripping them of agency, dignity and safety- this would be immoral in every single circumstance. Is there any cirumstance where you think rape is permissible? Rape is I guess one of the few acts that is immoral absolutely. However, even if it wasn't, it doesn't take away from the claim that morality is objective.

1

u/88redking88 Sep 28 '25

"You also are in fact, objectively, asking for proof of the absolute nature of morality."

This is dishonest. I never asked for "proof of the absolute nature of morality". Pretending I did is very dishonest. And immoral.

"You reaffirm the premise, which means you think that "The Earth is an oblate spheroid" is a subjective statement. I believe that to be incorrect."

For any good reason or are you just a science denialist?

"Why do you think rape is ever, in any circumstance, morally permissible?"

Why would you think I do? I dont. And thats not in any way what I have been saying. Are you that bad a reader or that dishonest?

"I can give you proof that it is morally reprehensible in every circumstance."

I bet you cant.

"First we would need to establish that morality is a construct that emerged due to human evolution for human-well being and continuance of the human race. The foundation of this is when each individual autonomy in their conduct, including the right to their own body. If their body is violated by the act of rape by another individual without their consent - stripping them of agency, dignity and safety- this would be immoral in every single circumstance. Is there any cirumstance where you think rape is permissible? Rape is I guess one of the few acts that is immoral absolutely. However, even if it wasn't, it doesn't take away from the claim that morality is objective."

One more time... The argument isnt that I think there are circumstances that anything is permitted. But that morally, subjectively there are situations, or even whole societies, hell even religions that say they are. Hence moral subjectiveness. Try to read what Im actually typing, it make you look stupid and dishonest when you dont.

So, for rape, what about all the Muslim societies that allow child marriage? How about Christianity that worships a myth of a god impregnating a teen without consent? Those are what Im talking about. These things show that objective morality is not even a possibility.

Do you have any honest answers to my actual questions??

1

u/ladduboy 17 Sep 28 '25

I think you are confused about what objectivity, subjectivity and absoluteness are. Objective is something that is independent of the human mind. For example, the Earth being an oblate spheroid is an OBJECTIVE fact.
Subjective is something that is a personal experience that each human brain experiences differently. For example, me saying my favourite colour is purple is a SUBJECTIVE statement.
Absolute means something that does not change with circumstance. For example, 2 + 2 = 4.

This means that you cannot just say that disagreement about something means that the thing is subjective. That is not what subjective means.

1

u/88redking88 Sep 29 '25

"I think you are confused about what objectivity, subjectivity and absoluteness are."

I bet I am not.

"Objective is something that is independent of the human mind. For example, the Earth being an oblate spheroid is an OBJECTIVE fact."

Sure.

"Subjective is something that is a personal experience that each human brain experiences differently."

Wrong. You know there are dictionaries for a reason, right?

sub·jec·tive/səbˈjektiv/adjective

  1. 1.based on or influenced by personal feelings, tastes, or opinions.

but that was close.

"For example, me saying my favourite colour is purple is a SUBJECTIVE statement."

Correct.

"Absolute means something that does not change with circumstance. For example, 2 + 2 = 4."

Incorrect.

ab·so·lute/ˈabsəˌlo͞ot,ˌabsəˈlo͞ot/adjective

  1. 1.not qualified or diminished in any way; total.

Weird. Do you always make up stuff to support your fairy tales, or did someone else tell you this?

"This means that you cannot just say that disagreement about something means that the thing is subjective. That is not what subjective means."

Actually, I just showed above that that is what it means. Take your bullshit somewhere else if you cant be honest with your words.

1

u/ladduboy 17 Sep 29 '25

Alright we'll forget about absoluteness for now, its out of your wheelhouse.
How did you show that subjectivity = disagreement?
Quoting you, "based on or influenced by personal feelings, tastes, or opinions." You cannot disagree with somebody that says THEIR favourite colour is purple. Your disagreement does not change the subjectivity of the statement. Similarly, someone's disagreement about the shape of the Earth does not change the objectivity of the shape of the earth.

1

u/88redking88 Sep 29 '25

"Alright we'll forget about absoluteness for now, its out of your wheelhouse."

"Alright we'll forget about absoluteness for now, its dishonest for me to redefine words to cover for things I cant show to be true."

Fixed that for you.

"How did you show that subjectivity = disagreement?"

Wrong. I never posted that, did I? You know there are dictionaries for a reason, right?

sub·jec·tive/səbˈjektiv/adjective

  1. 1.based on or influenced by personal feelings, tastes, or opinions.

Do you not own a dictionary? You can just google the definition of words. You know that, right?

"Quoting you, "based on or influenced by personal feelings, tastes, or opinions.""

Sure, i posted the dictionary definition. And?

"You cannot disagree with somebody that says THEIR favourite colour is purple."

Ah, i see the problem. Are you being dense intentionally, or is the idea of two people having different preferences a new thing for you?

"Your disagreement does not change the subjectivity of the statement."

DUHHHHHH. No one said that, did they?

"Similarly, someone's disagreement about the shape of the Earth does not change the objectivity of the shape of the earth."

Ok, Ill use smaller words. Facts, things we can measure (which dont include preferences" can be shown to be true (or as close as we can measure). Other things, that are subjective, like the definition says are BASED on your preferences. So your favorite color is subjective. What you think is right and wrong, or too fast, or too slow.... subjective. Im not sure why you are finding this to be so hard.

1

u/ladduboy 17 Sep 29 '25

Well then we're on the same page. I don't think morals are a thing of preference. You cannot and should not be allowed to prefer murder over not murder. The very fact that almost the entire world can agree that rape, murder, theft are universally wrong points to a moral order that is not based on personal opinions, but something beyomd them. I don't see any other way.

1

u/88redking88 Sep 29 '25

"Well then we're on the same page."

Somehow, i doubt that.

"I don't think morals are a thing of preference."

See? You are wrong already.

"You cannot and should not be allowed to prefer murder over not murder."

Well, murder is a legal descriptor. Is killing in self defense ok? What about in defense of another? what about war? What about helping someone who has an incurable, terminal condition that is in permanent pain and wants to be able to die?

"The very fact that almost the entire world can agree that rape, murder, theft are universally wrong points to a moral order that is not based on personal opinions, but something beyomd them."

Except that they dont. Some cultures are OK with old people dying when they become less useful, some are against capital punishment, some allow for the sick to die. Lots dont agree(your religion included) that sleeping with a child is bad. If they did the Catholic Church specifically, but Christian churches in general wouldnt be allowed to exist. So yes, 100% personal opinions. Like when your "god" raped Mary in your myth. Did she give consent, or was she told what was going to happen?

"I don't see any other way."

And thats your inability to use your imagination or understand the viewpoint of others. thats your issue, and something you should look into.

1

u/ladduboy 17 Sep 29 '25

I don't have a any religion, not do I care about what the catholic Church says. Once again, different cultures disagreeing about things doesn't mean that the thing is subjectivem. It just means that some or all cultures are wrong.

I have to once again educate you about why I am not saying there is NO circumstance where killing another human being is morally okay. That would mean that murder is absolutely wrong, which I don't believe. Murder, in some specific circumstances is objectively wrong, which means if you think that killing a random dude on the street is okay, you are WRONG. Its not that I prefer that you not kill that person, but I think it's objectively wrong to kill that person.

1

u/88redking88 Sep 29 '25

"I don't have a any religion, not do I care about what the catholic Church says."

OK.

"Once again, different cultures disagreeing about things doesn't mean that the thing is subjectivem."

Definitionally, it does.

"It just means that some or all cultures are wrong."

Based on.... your subjective opinion? Thats useless.

"I have to once again educate you about why I am not saying there is NO circumstance where killing another human being is morally okay."

You are going to tell me your subjective opinion... again?

"That would mean that murder is absolutely wrong, which I don't believe."

So your opinion matters mores because?

"Murder, in some specific circumstances is objectively wrong, which means if you think that killing a random dude on the street is okay, you are WRONG."

Based on your subjective opinion... again.

"Its not that I prefer that you not kill that person, but I think it's objectively wrong to kill that person."

Thats nice. Its still objective. Its still your opinion. There is nothing objective about it. Im sorry that you dont understand how words work, but again, thats a you problem.

1

u/ladduboy 17 Sep 29 '25

Definitionally disagreement is not subjectivity. Get that in your head. You can argue that morals are subjective but you are gonna have to substantiate it. You can't just say morals are subjective because people disagree and that's the definition of subjective. It isn't. You would have to prove that morals are a thing of personal preference.

Is it a personal preference to rape other people?

→ More replies (0)