PDA

View Full Version : Morals are subjective.


Rower_CPU
Jan 11, 2004, 04:45 PM
Morals are subjective. Making value judgments about them is ridiculous, IMHO. Disagree all you want, but don't make statements about absolutes.

That said, I think you did the right thing, g30ffr3y, and here's my subjective opinion.

Anyone who cheats on/with someone else will not be able to be trusted should a "committed" relationship develop. By respecting her and her bf's relationship, you show you are a trustworthy guy.

I'd watch out for her, though. ;)

[edit - See 3rdpath's comments for more detail on my watching out comment.]

Phil Of Mac
Jan 11, 2004, 05:59 PM
Originally posted by Rower_CPU
Morals are subjective. Making value judgments about them is ridiculous, IMHO.

************.

pseudobrit
Jan 11, 2004, 07:07 PM
Here's how you handle this.

**** morals. Ignore them. Your instincts were right, but not based on guilt or morals or doing what's right. This is about you not being a sucker or doing stupid things you'll regret.

A) If this chick isn't someone you see yourself getting serious with and you'd like to get your rocks off, go ahead and sleep with her and get it out of your system or whatever. If you hate your job anyway, you can always get another one if things get hairy, right? Ce la vie.

B) If you like your job enough, tell her you can't date her because of that. Let her know that if she or you change jobs, then it's a go, but you follow the rule that you don't screw the crew.

C) You like this chick and think you could make beautiful music together. So you give her your number and tell her that you realise her boyfriend is circling the drain. Tell her when he's out of the picture for good to give you a call. Until then, don't screw the crew. You don't want to mess this thing up by letting her trapeze.

Never get involved in relationship trapeze-ing -- wait until you are free falling before looking for the next swing (make sure the same is true for her).

Phil Of Mac
Jan 11, 2004, 09:06 PM
Originally posted by Kwyjibo
I think it was your call to make; and its whatever your most comofrtable with but not reason you can't move forward with your getting to know her period

I don't think most guys WANT to know their girls' periods :P

iJon
Jan 11, 2004, 09:09 PM
Originally posted by Phil Of Mac
I don't think most guys WANT to know their girls' periods :P
well although we dont want to know, its good to know, cause then we know when to shut the hell up for about a week.

iJon

Rower_CPU
Jan 11, 2004, 10:46 PM
Originally posted by Phil Of Mac
************.

Prove it.

pseudobrit
Jan 11, 2004, 10:49 PM
Originally posted by Rower_CPU
Prove it.

I already did. But not the way you'd think. Wait, what were we arguing about again?

Rower_CPU
Jan 11, 2004, 10:55 PM
Originally posted by pseudobrit
I already did. But not the way you'd think. Wait, what were we arguing about again?

Heh. I saw your post, but I want to see if Phil has something more than a one word rebuttal.

Phil Of Mac
Jan 11, 2004, 10:57 PM
Originally posted by Rower_CPU
Prove it.

You want me to prove that moral absolutes exist? I thought you'd appreciate me stating my views for the record and not starting a tangental argument. You mods are so unpredictable.

You don't believe that, for instance, it's absolutely wrong to steal potatoes from homeless people? Do you *honestly* think that sort of thing is something up to subjective question?

Some things are wrong without exception. Not every situation has an absolutely correct answer, but absolutes *do* exist.

Rower_CPU
Jan 11, 2004, 11:02 PM
Since this thread is ultimately about a moral judgment I think it flies...we'll see.

You didn't quote my statement about absolutes, just about morals being subjective and that value judgments are silly.

You made the borderline personal attack about someone's "utter lack of morality". This is an absolute statement based on a subjective assessment of someone's morals from a single statement.

Now who's twisting words?

pseudobrit
Jan 11, 2004, 11:03 PM
Originally posted by Phil Of Mac
You don't believe that, for instance, it's absolutely wrong to steal potatoes from homeless people? Do you *honestly* think that sort of thing is something up to subjective question?

What if they're fat homeless people and you're starving?

Bada-bing!

vniow
Jan 11, 2004, 11:05 PM
Originally posted by Phil Of Mac
Not every situation has an absolutely correct answer, but absolutes *do* exist.

My own life experiences tell me otherwise but whatever.

pseudobrit
Jan 11, 2004, 11:07 PM
Originally posted by vniow
My own life experiences tell me otherwise but whatever.

Can't you read, woman? The topic specifically states, "i can only tell you guys." That means dudes only.

But as a fellow PPP'er, I'll let it slide just this once. ;)

vniow
Jan 11, 2004, 11:10 PM
Bah, have it you way then.

*strut*

Phil Of Mac
Jan 11, 2004, 11:13 PM
Originally posted by Rower_CPU
Since this thread is ultimately about a moral judgment I think it flies...we'll see.

You didn't quote my statement about absolutes, just about morals being subjective and that value judgments are silly.

"Disagree all you want, but don't make statements about absolutes."

Rower, that wasn't a fair statement. What if I said, "I think all humans are men. Disagree all you want, but don't make statements about women."

Originally posted by Rower_CPU
You made the borderline personal attack about someone's "utter lack of morality". This is an absolute statement based on a subjective assessment of someone's morals from a single statement.

Not a single statement. I've had past experience with iJon.

Originally posted by vniow
My own life experiences tell me otherwise but whatever.

Your own life experiences have completely invalided the existence of moral absolutes to you?

All I'll ask is which experience invalided the absolute dealing with not murdering people for no reason.

iJon
Jan 11, 2004, 11:17 PM
Originally posted by Phil Of Mac
Not a single statement. I've had past experience with iJon.
yep i know, im on a couple of peoples s*** list, but its all good. i have no morals so i dont care ;)

iJon

Rower_CPU
Jan 11, 2004, 11:26 PM
Originally posted by Phil Of Mac
Not a single statement. I've had past experience with iJon.

I seriously doubt that breadth of your interactions with anyone on this forum, no matter how deep they may have been, qualify you to judge another poster's morals or lack thereof. You are saying "you have no morals", which is a completely bogus statement and an insult. Their morals don't match yours in these specific instances. That is all.

vniow
Jan 11, 2004, 11:28 PM
Originally posted by Phil Of Mac
Your own life experiences have completely invalided the existence of moral absolutes to you?


I wasn't nececcarally talking about morals but all the **** i've gone through in my life leads me to the conclusion that absolutes do not exist. At least in my case.

Eh, this is another thread altogether, bah.

Phil Of Mac
Jan 11, 2004, 11:41 PM
Originally posted by vniow
I wasn't nececcarally talking about morals but all the **** i've gone through in my life leads me to the conclusion that absolutes do not exist. At least in my case.

Uh..."there are no absolutes" is an absolute statement in and of itself, so it's obviously untrue.

Originally posted by Rower_CPU
I seriously doubt that breadth of your interactions with anyone on this forum, no matter how deep they may have been, qualify you to judge another poster's morals or lack thereof. You are saying "you have no morals", which is a completely bogus statement and an insult. Their morals don't match yours in these specific instances. That is all.

It's not an insult. You think it is, but that's your subjective judgment that's completely bogus. Now you're objectively claiming that it was an "insult" ;)

vniow
Jan 11, 2004, 11:58 PM
Originally posted by Phil Of Mac
Uh..."there are no absolutes" is an absolute statement in and of itself, so it's obviously untrue.

Hmm....

My statement that there are no absolutes cannot be an absolute statement in itself because if there are no absolutes then absolutely stating that they don't exist would sound rather silly and contradictory don't you think? Even my own personal belief about the lack of absolutes isn't absolute, like much other things its fluidic. I never once said that my belief of this is absolute.

Now, my reasoning for this comes from mostly my own exploration of my own identity which I'm not willing to go into right at this moment due to the very personal nature of it but its good enough for me, may not be good enough for you though. Or maybe it will. No absolutes remember?

Anyhoo, I should probably put it into better words, what I'm trying to say is that I don't believe that absolutes can manifest themselves in the world in which we consciously interact, absolutes do exist in my opinion, but they are only ideas which serve as a template for us to relate to various things.

But anyhoo, this is off topic but yeah..

Phil Of Mac
Jan 11, 2004, 11:58 PM
Originally posted by pseudobrit
With one key difference:

His subjective judgement can be as bogus as cold fusion and still get you banned.

You missed the little wink at the end. I chose to change the subject and use it to illustrate my point.

I would like to think that Rower believes he has more legitimacy in his actions as a mod than just exercising his power arbitrarily. (No, you can't claim that the owner of MacRumors gave him that authority, because who's to say the concept of ownership is absolute? ;))

Phil Of Mac
Jan 12, 2004, 12:03 AM
Originally posted by vniow
Hmm....

My statement that there are no absolutes cannot be an absolute statement in itself because if there are no absolutes then absolutely stating that they don't exist would sound rather silly and contradictory don't you think?

That's my point. Since "there are no absolutes" is in and of itself an absolute statement, it is self-contradictory and thus *cannot* be true.

In terms of evaluating your own identity, may I suggest that you only invalidated a couple *specific* absolutes, and not the existence of absolutes in *general*? You'd have to spend a long time before you invalidated every possible absolute.

Counterfit
Jan 12, 2004, 12:07 AM
I invalidated 2+2=4 yesterday...





but then I found I was wrong :rolleyes:

vniow
Jan 12, 2004, 12:09 AM
Originally posted by Phil Of Mac
That's my point. Since "there are no absolutes" is in and of itself an absolute statement, it is self-contradictory and thus *cannot* be true.

Which is why I explained what I meant by that in the last little paragraph of the dark red post above...

In terms of evaluating your own identity, may I suggest that you only invalidated a couple *specific* absolutes, and not the existence of absolutes in *general*? You'd have to spend a long time before you invalidated every possible absolute.

Lets just say is this part of my own identity and that which relates to it I have spent much of my life exploring and questioning is not absolute then I don't see how anything else can be either since it is the basis of how we define much (not all) of ourselves.

Cheers,

-V

pseudobrit
Jan 12, 2004, 12:10 AM
Originally posted by Phil Of Mac
That's my point. Since "there are no absolutes" is in and of itself an absolute statement, it is self-contradictory and thus *cannot* be true.

In terms of evaluating your own identity, may I suggest that you only invalidated a couple *specific* absolutes, and not the existence of absolutes in *general*? You'd have to spend a long time before you invalidated every possible absolute.

How about this: the only absolute is that there are no other absolutes.

I win.

Phil Of Mac
Jan 12, 2004, 12:14 AM
Originally posted by pseudobrit
How about this: the only absolute is that there are no other absolutes.

I win.

That's an ad hoc statement with no backing. You don't win.

Phil Of Mac
Jan 12, 2004, 12:16 AM
Originally posted by vniow
Lets just say is this part of my own identity and that which relates to it I have spent much of my life exploring and questioning is not absolute then I don't see how anything else can be either since it is the basis of how we define much (not all) of ourselves.

The unstated premise in that assumption is that all reality comes from ourselves. I think you're assuming what you're supposed to prove.

pseudobrit
Jan 12, 2004, 12:16 AM
Originally posted by Phil Of Mac
That's an ad hoc statement with no backing. You don't win.

That sounds pretty absolutist to me. Let's just say I didn't lose.

Phil Of Mac
Jan 12, 2004, 12:18 AM
Originally posted by pseudobrit
That sounds pretty absolutist to me. Let's just say I didn't lose.

If you only won in your own mind, why did you bother telling us about it?

vniow
Jan 12, 2004, 12:20 AM
Does every debate which involves you two involve a bunch of one-liners right after the other?

Phil Of Mac
Jan 12, 2004, 12:22 AM
Originally posted by vniow
Does every debate which involves you two involve a bunch of one-liners right after the other?

Yes. Welcome to the debate.

vniow
Jan 12, 2004, 12:23 AM
Originally posted by Phil Of Mac
The unstated premise in that assumption is that all reality comes from ourselves. I think you're assuming what you're supposed to prove.

I'm talking about myself here, I'm not trying to define other's realities for them, this is my own personal journey. Regarding my take on where reality (and how the idea of absolutes) comes from I already mentioned above:

Originally posted by vniow
Anyhoo, I should probably put it into better words, what I'm trying to say is that I don't believe that absolutes can manifest themselves in the world in which we consciously interact, absolutes do exist in my opinion, but they are only ideas which serve as a template for us to relate to various things.

Phil Of Mac
Jan 12, 2004, 12:28 AM
Originally posted by vniow
I'm talking about myself here, I'm not trying to define other's realities for them, this is my own personal journey. Regarding my take on where reality (and how the idea of absolutes) comes from I already mentioned above:

See, you're still assuming as an unstated premise what you're supposed to prove. This business of "other people's realities"--all you've established is that a given premise that you've already chosen leads to itself as its logical conclusion. What did you expect?

vniow
Jan 12, 2004, 12:30 AM
Originally posted by Phil Of Mac
Yes. Welcome to the debate.

Absolutely.

pseudobrit
Jan 12, 2004, 12:30 AM
Did this thread take the train to Tediumville (population: Phil) or what?

Phil Of Mac
Jan 12, 2004, 12:34 AM
Originally posted by pseudobrit
Did this thread take the train to Tediumville (population: Phil) or what?

Thank you for riding Pseudobrit Railways, we hope you had a safe and pleasant trip.

vniow
Jan 12, 2004, 12:36 AM
*sniff sniff*

*looks around*

*FLUSH*

That was the sound of a thread getting Wastelanded.

Phil Of Mac
Jan 12, 2004, 12:39 AM
Originally posted by vniow
*sniff sniff*

*looks around*

*FLUSH*

That was the sound of a thread getting Wastelanded.

Damn. I wanted a chance to clarify my thoughts on perception and reality too. Thanks for ruining the discussion pseudobrit.

vniow
Jan 12, 2004, 12:43 AM
Originally posted by Phil Of Mac
Damn. I wanted a chance to clarify my thoughts on perception and reality too. Thanks for ruining the discussion pseudobrit.

Wow, so much for validading your own paritcipation eh?

This isn't the first debate I've seen you two get into that ended up like this, its neither pseudo's or your fault, its both of yours as far as I'm concerned. Keep this up and I'll start reporting both of your posts.

vniow
Jan 12, 2004, 12:48 AM
Originally posted by Phil Of Mac
See, you're still assuming as an unstated premise what you're supposed to prove.

Woah there. I'm not trying to prove anything, I'm stating my views on how I believe the idea of absolutes relates to my existence. I offer no proof for this other than my own experiences which have led me to this conclusion. This does not mean that I'm automtically negating yours or anyone else's. In all fairness, the only person I have to "prove" this to is myself, it does not require anyone else's validation to make it true for me.

That dosn't mean its completely true or valid though, like I mentioned before, since I mentioned I don't believe in absolutes then that believe cannot be absolute within itself, therefore if even the belief that there are no absolutes is not absolute then I'm just going around in circles here......

Phil Of Mac
Jan 12, 2004, 12:48 AM
Originally posted by vniow
This isn't the first debate I've seen you two get into that ended up like this, its neither pseudo's or your fault, its both of yours as far as I'm concerned. Keep this up and I'll start reporting both of your posts.

Aha! But if as far as you're concerned is only valid for you, than how can you possibly expect me or pseudobrit to change OUR actions, much less involve a mod? Thanks for the opportunity to wrestle this back on topic.

Originally posted by vniow
Woah there. I'm not trying to prove anything, I'm stating my views on how I believe the idea of absolutes relates to my existence. I offer no proof for this other than my own experiences which have led me to this conclusion. This does not mean that I'm automtically negating yours or anyone else's. In all fairness, the only person I have to "prove" this to is myself, it does not require anyone else's validation to make it true for me.

That dosn't mean its completely true or valid though, like I mentioned before, since I mentioned I don't believe in absolutes then that believe cannot be absolute within itself, therefore if even the belief that there are no absolutes is not absolute then I'm just going around in circles here......

And here we are, where there might be absolutes for me, and not for you? Don't you see how all of your statements showing why you believe what you believe PRESUME your end conclusion as a premise to your reasoning to begin with? Don't you at least see how it's hard to debate this issue without the whole thing collapsing in on itself because the basic assumptions we are questioning are essential for us to *begin* making points?

Phil Of Mac
Jan 12, 2004, 12:53 AM
Originally posted by Dros
But this movement to the abstract is alarming!

Even I will agree that it may have been alarming to you, but not to me ;)

3rdpath
Jan 12, 2004, 12:56 AM
calling doctor wasteland....


edit: there is one obvious absolute...you two are absolute philosophy wanksters.

nice hijack.

Phil Of Mac
Jan 12, 2004, 01:04 AM
I think the problem we're all having is the fact that none of us actually directly conscious of reality. We're only conscious of our own perception of reality, which may or may not be accurate. It's fallacious to confuse this with the idea that there is no reality or that each of us has a different reality, because ultimately we're all perceiving different points of view of the same reality. I'm not quite sure of myself or my terminology here, but those are my thoughts thus far. The basic idea I wanted to get across was that we all have different *perceptions* of the same *reality*, we don't all have different realities.

vniow
Jan 12, 2004, 01:19 AM
Originally posted by Phil Of Mac
Aha! But if as far as you're concerned is only valid for you, than how can you possibly expect me or pseudobrit to change OUR actions, much less involve a mod?

That would assume that the world revolves around me which I don't believe it does (most of the time) so it it were only to concern me and no one else then it shouldn't matter if I report a post or not as no one would care since it doesn't concern them. My concern is my own, you can all have yours but mine is mine. But I am not the only one to have concerns here as this does not involve just me.

Thanks for the opportunity to wrestle this back on topic.

You're kidding right? This has been off topic since the middle of page 1!

And here we are, where there might be absolutes for me, and not for you?

Note: this is all opinion and not fact. If I did indeed believe in absolutes I would be stating my own beliefs as valid for everyone else which I am not doing. What I am trying to say here is that my own personal experiences have led me to the conclusion that absolutes do not exist. Now this could be wrong as nothing is absolute but it seems to be the general direction I'm heading personally.


Don't you see how all of your statements showing why you believe what you believe PRESUME your end conclusion as a premise to your reasoning to begin with?

I think you've got my take on this a bit backwards here, my conclusion has come from my experiences, not the other way around.

Regarding my identity, the most I'm willing to go is; all my life I thought I was one thing. It was the way I was born, it was the way I was raised, it is what I grew up to be and it has contunually defined how I interact with myself and others, it has helped form the basis of how I defined myself and now al. of that has changed. I thought I was absolutely one thing and not the other, there was no question of what and who I was. Now all of that has changed. Dramatically. So if this one thing which was previously thought by me to be absolute and it suddely changes, I started thinking about other things which I prevously thought as being absolute which has led me to the conclusion that I don't believe they can manifest themselves into things we can consciusly perceive.

Don't you at least see how it's hard to debate this issue without the whole thing collapsing in on itself because the basic assumptions we are questioning are essential for us to *begin* making points?

Absolutely.

I think the problem we're all having is the fact that none of us actually directly conscious of reality. We're only conscious of our own perception of reality, which may or may not be accurate. It's fallacious to confuse this with the idea that there is no reality or that each of us has a different reality, because ultimately we're all perceiving different points of view of the same reality. I'm not quite sure of myself or my terminology here, but those are my thoughts thus far. The basic idea I wanted to get across was that we all have different *perceptions* of the same *reality*, we don't all have different realities.

This is something that I am and have struggled with myself, I'm not sure if I believe that I'm percieving a different part of the same reality in which you are or a completely different reality altogether, if we're going to argue about that then its just going to be a circular one which I can't stand but whatever.

I'm tired.

Phil Of Mac
Jan 12, 2004, 01:25 AM
Originally posted by vniow
[color=gray]You're kidding right? This has been off topic since the middle of page 1!

I meant back on the new topic.

Originally posted by vniow
Note: this is all opinion and not fact. If I did indeed believe in absolutes I would be stating my own beliefs as valid for everyone else which I am not doing.

Not necessarily. Just because there are absolutes doesn't mean that everything's an absolute.

Originally posted by vniow
Absolutely.

Even for you? ;)

Originally posted by vniow
This is something that I am and have struggled with myself, I'm not sure if I believe that I'm percieving a different part of the same reality in which you are or a completely different reality altogether, if we're going to argue about that then its just going to be a circular one which I can't stand but whatever.

It's a tough case to prove either way.

vniow
Jan 12, 2004, 01:28 AM
Wow, I do believe we've come to a standstill, I can't think of any much more to say.

Plus I'm running out of decent colours..

Phil Of Mac
Jan 12, 2004, 01:30 AM
Originally posted by vniow
Wow, I do believe we've come to a standstill, I can't think of any much more to say.

Plus I'm running out of decent colours..

Yeah, I'd complain about my woman problems but they're pretty weak compared to the originator of the thread.

Rower_CPU
Jan 12, 2004, 01:45 AM
I'd like to interrupt this oh so witty banter to point out a couple of things.

Phil, you still haven't responded directly to my argument about your absolute statement as to someone else's morals. And, I'd also like to ask how you rationalize your bisexuality or even something as mundane as sex outside of wedlock with other people's "absolute" morals

Other than that, this thread has devolved into fairly masturbatory semantics games. Can't say I'm surprised, but I am a little disappointed.

Phil Of Mac
Jan 12, 2004, 01:55 AM
Originally posted by Rower_CPU
Phil, you still haven't responded directly to my argument about your absolute statement as to someone else's morals.

I made a judgment call based on my experience with him. I think my judgment is accurate in this case, but there's no need to overanalyze it. If you want more of a response than that, tough. I choose not to discuss that particular issue any further.

Originally posted by Rower_CPU
And, I'd also like to ask how you rationalize your bisexuality or even something as mundane as sex outside of wedlock with other people's "absolute" morals.

Easy. Some people think it's absolutely wrong to engage in various sex acts. They're wrong. It's not absolutely wrong to do so. Just because absolutes exist does not mean all things are absolute. Not committing murder, that's absolute. Who to have sex with, that's not absolute.

I'm only making one assertion: ethical absolutes do exist. That's all. I'll also assert this: many proposed absolutes aren't absolutes at all. But just because gay sex isn't absolutely wrong *doesn't mean* that there are no absolutes at all. Making that leap is like assuming that since Windows is so crummy that there are no good operating systems.

(I'm not necessarily asserting that Windows IS crummy. It was just an example for means of analogy.)

Rower_CPU
Jan 12, 2004, 02:21 AM
Originally posted by Phil Of Mac
I made a judgment call based on my experience with him. I think my judgment is accurate in this case, but there's no need to overanalyze it. If you want more of a response than that, tough. I choose not to discuss that particular issue any further.

It seems to me, then, that it stands that you can't prove that he has no morals whatsoever and your previous statement was a subjective opinion.

Originally posted by Phil Of Mac
Easy. Some people think it's absolutely wrong to engage in various sex acts. They're wrong. It's not absolutely wrong to do so. Just because absolutes exist does not mean all things are absolute. Not committing murder, that's absolute. Who to have sex with, that's not absolute.

I'm only making one assertion: ethical absolutes do exist. That's all. I'll also assert this: many proposed absolutes aren't absolutes at all. But just because gay sex isn't absolutely wrong *doesn't mean* that there are no absolutes at all. Making that leap is like assuming that since Windows is so crummy that there are no good operating systems.

You've pretty much reiterated my point: just because someone holds a moral as an absolute does not mean that that absolute is appropriate for others. All it takes is one person to say "that is not a moral absolute for me" to invalidate it completely. It's subjective and situational.

Not committing murder, in some cases, will not be a moral absolute. Is it absolutely wrong to murder one person if it is guaranteed to save the lives of 1,000? No.

If moral absolutes exist, where do they come from? Society may achieve consensus on behaviors that are best for the group as whole, but there is no guarantee that the behaviors of group X will be the same as group Y, hence, no absolutes.

So, where do these supposed absolutes come from? Who is the arbiter of all moral absolutes for the universe? All I'm looking for is a simple answer to your assertion.

Mr. Anderson
Jan 12, 2004, 08:36 AM
Morals are subjective from an absolute view (if possible) since everyone has different morals. What's right for one person isn't right for another. Looking at the problem using single examples gets you no where and causes endless debate.

Move on...

D