Objective morality?

Discussion in 'Philosophy' started by Verts, Oct 7, 2014.

  1. Seems kind of like an oxy-moron, but simply entertaining the possibility raises some thought-provoking questions. What is morality? Can it truly exist outside of an interpersonal definition? Is there such a thing as true objectivity? Are all social constructs automatically subjective? Can objectivity and morality exist as one?
    Just something I was discussing recently and thought I'd pick your collective brains.

  2. Morality was created by human society and therefore cannot be objective.
  3. Ah finally something interesting.

    The fact is that morality can never be objective. Morality is the idea of a thing being good or bad, whether an action or a goal. For there to be a good or bad, there must be a desire, and end or goal. The universe has no desires or goals, nothing to reach or not reach. Therefore no good or bad, no form of perfection or imperfection.

    Any idea of morality is entirely derived from the subjective and relative experience. What is good and bad to us, is a direct product of our constitution and the interesting concept of the ego. The ego is a state of being that distinguishes self either consciously or unconsciously and thus creates a self preserving system. There is no right and wrong in the systems dissolution, but if it is the ego of a conscious entity, it will establish the idea of right and wrong in accordance with maintaining it's equilibrium and existence. It's equilibrium can be peculiar, it might contain ideas about the while world around it. The ego seeks to control entirely, that is its very nature.

    In the end, what can be objectively moral? Does existence have an ego? Ego itself is an illusion. I obviously made reference to another type of ego, the unconscious ego, but we could ignore that, I find no reason to explain it's relevance. The relevance of morality pertains to the conscious ego. No ego, no right and wrong. Ego is separation and control.
  4. I agree with this for the most part and there's alot of truth to this, however there is this inner guidance that's evolved in us that we can't deny.  When you give yourself to someone in need, there's a sense of love, beauty, and accomplishment that overcomes us or washes over us.  There's something deep inside that just feels 'right' in us when we give ourselves to another, like a wholeness of being so to speak...  This inner guidance naturally evolved in us over time.  It evolved in us for a reason, it's not a mistake.  The natural way of 'what is' doesn't make mistakes. 
    Our inner guidance to love, share, feel loved, give/receive appreciation, caring for a sibling, ect... shouldn't be overlooked.  It's our feeling to be whole again.  Our desire to be 'one'.  This desire is the reason people are prayed upon via advertising.  Marketing geniuses know the game, they spend billions on getting the human race to chase this wholeness by buying their products to make you feel better.  They aren't selling you a coke, they're selling you your desire to love and feel loved, just observe the commercials and see for yourself.  They're selling you an artificial wholeness.. this is the cruel game thats been manipulating humanity since the beginning of time.
  5. So you agreed morality isn't objective.. and then go on to say what you feel is objective? Sounds like you're trying to say your subjective belief is objective while agreeing that its not objective.. doesn't make much sense.
  6. #7 freethinker, Oct 8, 2014
    Last edited by a moderator: Oct 8, 2014
    Not everything is black and white.  Morality is subjective to a point, however there are moral compasses that guide us in our lives that resides within all of us.  You don't murder people who piss you off or find pleasure in a child's misery... but why?  When you hear of a child being repeatedly raped or see an animal being tortured, you cringe internally... why? 
    Some cultures are evolved more than others, some brains have evolved and advanced more than others in different parts of the world.  A tribe in Africa will have different morals than Buddhist monks in China, but there still exists that moral compass internally that's evolving at different rates in all of humanity.  This is why I say that there are levels of subjectivity while still having this moral compass that resides in all beings...depending on what level a particular culture has advanced to. 
    Sorry for the confusion or what may seem as double speak, like I said, there isn't a black and white answer and your desire for a concrete answer is impossible to produce.  We're all unique beings experiencing this reality subjectively, that's what makes life so beautiful.  We don't see each others conscious awareness that we are, however, we're all part of the same reality for which we experience and share our different parts of the same wakefulness that resides in all of us.  Life is unique, there is no concreteness to it, there never was.  ...I hope that explains it a little better. 
  7. So this moral compass is aimed subjectively depending on the culture.. which would circle back to morals being subjective.
  8. The moral compass is shaped by the level of evolution in our brains with culture being a heavy influence on what we're taught to perceive and how to perceive it, however what I'm saying is that we ALL have this SAME inner guidance or moral compass that cringes at specific horrors that lye's before us if presented in our realities (torture, rape, ect..) .
  9. No.. no we don't. That is just your belief that you're trying to say is objective to humanity. Not every single person cringes at rape and torture.. cause news flash, there would be no rape and torture if everyone did.
  10. Just to add to that... 
    If we're guided by ego (the false self) which is the majority of people walking this earth, then our moral compass can be misguided and manipulated to actually take pleasure in sadistic behaviors.  It's hard for me to speak from how others perceive reality as most perceive from the illusion of the ego.  If we perceive from the true self where all illusions have subsided, then you would never want to hurt another human being.. because they are you. 
  11. Yes I answered that as you were typing your response.. look above.  You are right in a sense..
    Good discussion man, I appreciate it.  :)
  12. I'll agree that we are all born with a moral compass, but its a compass with no cardinal points on it.. a blank slate if you will. We have to be taught how to point their compass, and the majority try pointing it in the right direction.. but doesn't always work like that. Lol, my moral compass is.. well, not like most peoples'. I have a moral compass that's like that of a sociopath's.. but also aligns with a good bit of humanism. A good example is 9/11.. I was in class in high school when it happened, first plane hit and everyone was geeking out, then the second hit and more geeking out.. except me, just minding my own and doing my work. Didn't phase me one bit.. and if I felt anything, it was curiosity. It was peaked even more when the people were jumping off the building to avoid being burnt up.. not a single cringe given.

    That's what happens when you're raised by United Methodists sharing child rearing with someone who let you watch Faces of Death as an autistic child.. lol
  13. You're fucked up mannn
  14. Don't be jealous.
  15. Dw I'm fucked up too.
  16. #17 Account_Banned283, Oct 8, 2014
    Last edited: Oct 8, 2014
    Since morality consists in doing what one thinks is objectively better for another, and/or for the greater good, then it is objective, in that each and every person has the faculty of choosing between doing what they think is objectively better for another, and/or for the greater good, and not doing what they think is objectively better for another, and/or the greater good. However the choice of what is morally best, is not objective, but the choice of what is morally best is not morality itself, which people here have seemed to misunderstand.
  17. Yeah, I didn't really give a shit about 9/11 either, but that's probable because I'm Australian so it didn't affect me as much.
    I used to be "humanist" but now I really don't give a shit about us as a species because if history has taught me anything, it's that we're a lost cause.
    Morality cannot be objective because it is constructed by humans. There is no absolute good or bad, only what society defines as good or bad. We are born with "instinct" not a "moral compass."
  18. What about the golden rule?
    You can avoid harming others because you don't like being harmed.
    Seems logical to me.
  19. Better? Better for what? Human beings? Even the idea of better stems from our relative nature, our ingrained drive to maintain homeostasis and fulfill our instinctual desires. All a product of our temporary existence as closed systems that operate with ego awareness. The idea of self is illusory, it is a product of our body's and mind.

Share This Page