Can science answer moral questions?

[rikules]

No as morals are completely subjective and a matter of personal opinion/preference.

then conservatives should STOP trying to enact MORAL LAWS based upon THEIR own opinions

LIBERALS too

if neither liberals nor conservatives are allowed to enact moral laws then I will be happy


because there will be no laws against divorce, sex before marriage, polygamy, homosexuality

if neither side is allowed to enact moral laws then liberals win!

I can accept that

 

[manifold]

I DO use my conscience

but I disagree t hat EVERYONE ELSE does.


far too many people merely quote some part of their religious texts and present it as "their morals"

that is HARDLY the same as using their conscience

Point taken.

 

[Newby]

then conservatives should STOP trying to enact MORAL LAWS based upon THEIR own opinions

LIBERALS too

if neither liberals nor conservatives are allowed to enact moral laws then I will be happy


because there will be no laws against divorce, sex before marriage, polygamy, homosexuality

if neither side is allowed to enact moral laws then liberals win!

I can accept that

No taxes to pay for poor people, unempolyed people, healthcare for other people... no regulations on pollution, my toilet can flush as much water as I want it too, my furnace can run as much as I want it too... no taxes or 'credits' for 'global warming', etc... Sounds good to me...

 

[Newby]

then whose purview is it?


if not science....
(and logic and reason)

then what should we use to determine morality?

certainly not primitive religious superstitions.....

Morality is in the purview of philosophy.

Do you really want morality taught in science class?

That's no better than bible thumpers wanting ID taught along side evolution.

And I suggest you use your conscience to determine morality, just like everyone else.

"Do you really want morality taught in science class? "


of course not

but I also don't want religion to be the only source of morality

especially since I strongly disagree with so many religious morals and consider them to be...IMMORAL

"And I suggest you use your conscience to determine morality, just like everyone else."

I DO use my conscience

but I disagree t hat EVERYONE ELSE does.


far too many people merely quote some part of their religious texts and present it as "their morals"

that is HARDLY the same as using their conscience

Where does your 'conscience' come from?

 

[Lyte]

Fine, I'll make it really simple for you. Science is about explaining the physical world. Morality is a philosophical construct and does not reside in the physical world, thereby making the question resoundingly retarded. Honestly, that should be obvious.

Math is an abstract idea, it does not reside in the physical world yet it is objective. Therefore to prove that morality cannot be objective because it doesn't reside in the physical world is retarded.

 

[manifold]

Fine, I'll make it really simple for you. Science is about explaining the physical world. Morality is a philosophical construct and does not reside in the physical world, thereby making the question resoundingly retarded. Honestly, that should be obvious.

Math is an abstract idea, it does not reside in the physical world yet it is objective. Therefore to prove that morality cannot be objective because it doesn't reside in the physical world is retarded.

You just compared mathematics to morality and you call me retarded.


bwahahahahahahahahahaha

 

[rikules]

Morality is in the purview of philosophy.

Do you really want morality taught in science class?

That's no better than bible thumpers wanting ID taught along side evolution.

And I suggest you use your conscience to determine morality, just like everyone else.

"Do you really want morality taught in science class? "


of course not

but I also don't want religion to be the only source of morality

especially since I strongly disagree with so many religious morals and consider them to be...IMMORAL

"And I suggest you use your conscience to determine morality, just like everyone else."

I DO use my conscience

but I disagree t hat EVERYONE ELSE does.


far too many people merely quote some part of their religious texts and present it as "their morals"

that is HARDLY the same as using their conscience

Where does your 'conscience' come from?

ya got me

tiffanys?

bergdorf and goodman?

having thought about this not at all I am unprepared to give you an answer

so my current response is;

my conscience is the result of years of thinking, being taught, disagreeing, reading, studying, engaging with other people, experience....

at one time, when I was but a child, I believed (like most people) that divorce was BAD

but with maturity, reasoning, experience, thinking I came to believe that divorce was not bad for everyone. That divorce, in most cases, could be a beneficial and maturing/growing experience


at one time, like so many people, I believed homosexuality was...immoral?bad?

but through friendships and maturity I came to understand that most gays were no different than the average person and , at some point, discarded my notion that homosexuality was BAD and immoral

when I was 17 I believed (because of indoctrination) that smoking pot was BAD
but through friendships and experience and maturity I learned that pot was NOT evil and, for me, was much more fun than drinking

 

[jwil59]

No as morals are completely subjective and a matter of personal opinion/preference.

then conservatives should STOP trying to enact MORAL LAWS based upon THEIR own opinions

LIBERALS too

Yeah no kiddin

Both sides try to impose their own morality on the populace.

Hypocrites to the left, hypocrites to the right
It's the only game in town

 

[Lyte]

Fine, I'll make it really simple for you. Science is about explaining the physical world. Morality is a philosophical construct and does not reside in the physical world, thereby making the question resoundingly retarded. Honestly, that should be obvious.

Math is an abstract idea, it does not reside in the physical world yet it is objective. Therefore to prove that morality cannot be objective because it doesn't reside in the physical world is retarded.

You just compared mathematics to morality and you call me retarded.


bwahahahahahahahahahaha

Don't dodge, disprove.

 

[manifold]

Math is an abstract idea, it does not reside in the physical world yet it is objective. Therefore to prove that morality cannot be objective because it doesn't reside in the physical world is retarded.

You just compared mathematics to morality and you call me retarded.


bwahahahahahahahahahaha

Don't dodge, disprove.

Disprove what?

Your silly thesis that somehow 'subjective' = 'objective'

That kind of disproves itself with no help from me required.

 

[rikules]

LIBERALS too

if neither liberals nor conservatives are allowed to enact moral laws then I will be happy


because there will be no laws against divorce, sex before marriage, polygamy, homosexuality

if neither side is allowed to enact moral laws then liberals win!

I can accept that

No taxes to pay for poor people, unempolyed people, healthcare for other people... no regulations on pollution, my toilet can flush as much water as I want it too, my furnace can run as much as I want it too... no taxes or 'credits' for 'global warming', etc... Sounds good to me...

"No taxes to pay for poor people, unempolyed people, healthcare for other people... no regulations on pollution, my toilet can flush as much water as I want it too, my furnace can run as much as I want it too... no taxes or 'credits' for 'global warming', etc... Sounds good to me"


these are NOT morals


at least not to me.

morals = sex, divorce, polygamy, cheating, lying, homosexuality, alcohol, drugs, theft, slavery, killing, abortion

as a civilized society we can come to an agreement (more or less) on how much taxes we should pay and what they should be used for

as rational people we can understand that burning all our fuel or wasting water is not a good thing for the future

I suppose we can discuss the MORALITY of bankrupting our children......
or leaving them to live in a wasteland.....

 

[Lyte]

Your silly thesis that somehow 'subjective' = 'objective'

Isn't this what you claim: Morality cannot be objective because it is an abstract construct and it doesn't reside in the physical world.

I gave you an example of something which is an abstract construct and doesn't reside in the physical world and is objective.

Therefore your proof that there isn't an universal objective morality (one that rules them all) because philosophies are abstract constructs and therefore subjective - isn't proven.

 

[manifold]

Nope.

My claim is that morality is subjective... subjective and objective are mutually exclusive... therefore morality cannot be objective.

I eagerly await your next pathetic attempt to construct a strawman by misconstruing my words.

 

[manifold]

PS: Mathematics does not reside outside the physical world either.

For example: If I have 5 bananas and I eat one, I'm left with 4. Nothing abstract about that mutley.

 

[JBeukema]

If you accept "well-being" as a main goal of morality

Morality is conscious entity with goals?

"any action which increases human well being is always right - unless it results to something which reduces the well-being in a larger context"

That is your moral belief. You cannot prove it scientifically.

 

[JBeukema]

No as morals are completely subjective and a matter of personal opinion/preference.

then conservatives should STOP trying to enact MORAL LAWS based upon THEIR own opinions

Because you think they're immoral for doing so and you want to enforce your own morality in this regard?

 

[JBeukema]

LIBERALS too

if neither liberals nor conservatives are allowed to enact moral laws then I will be happy


because there will be no laws against divorce, sex before marriage, polygamy, homosexuality

if neither side is allowed to enact moral laws then liberals win!

I can accept that

No taxes to pay for poor people, unempolyed people, healthcare for other people... no regulations on pollution, my toilet can flush as much water as I want it too, my furnace can run as much as I want it too... no taxes or 'credits' for 'global warming', etc... Sounds good to me...

Because you want the State to recognize your morality?

It's not like you have a right to your money, life, or property... after all. 'rights' are a moral argument and we're talking about leaving morality out of it

Hence, the only right you have to anything is what you can take. Might is the only Right...

Sweet, sweet, Social Darwinism...

 

[JBeukema]

Where does your 'conscience' come from?

A combination of natural instinct, social programming, and personal development

 

[Dante]

dipshit

I am a big fan of TED, but...

part of being a fan of TED is watching the sheeple types mistake ideas for revelation

 

[Gadawg73]

LIBERALS too

if neither liberals nor conservatives are allowed to enact moral laws then I will be happy


because there will be no laws against divorce, sex before marriage, polygamy, homosexuality

if neither side is allowed to enact moral laws then liberals win!

I can accept that

No taxes to pay for poor people, unempolyed people, healthcare for other people... no regulations on pollution, my toilet can flush as much water as I want it too, my furnace can run as much as I want it too... no taxes or 'credits' for 'global warming', etc... Sounds good to me...

"no regulations on pollution"
So I can open a toxic waste dump next to your home.
Great idea.