Re: Moral relativity
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
If you chose no could you please post the objective external standard you use to tell if a system of morality is valid or not.

[/ QUOTE ]

What if there isn't one?

[/ QUOTE ]

Then morality is subjective.

Re: Moral relativity
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
If you chose no could you please post the objective external standard you use to tell if a system of morality is valid or not.

[/ QUOTE ] I chose no, but I never claimed I could tell if a system is morally valid or not. The only things I have to build my standard on is reason, logic and at the core the feelings about morality I have as a human being. When I chose no, it was because I think these feelings are not completely determined by culture.

[/ QUOTE ]
If you can't tell what makes moral systems valid or invalid how can you possibly claim that you can tell that some are valid and some are not?

Re: Moral relativity
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
If you chose no could you please post the objective external standard you use to tell if a system of morality is valid or not.

[/ QUOTE ]
There are multiple overlapping objective external standards which are to some extent weighed subjectively. There isn't just one.

[/ QUOTE ]

what are they?

Re: Moral relativity
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
If you chose no could you please post the objective external standard you use to tell if a system of morality is valid or not.

[/ QUOTE ]

What if there isn't one?

[/ QUOTE ]

Then morality is subjective.

[/ QUOTE ]

The question was "Are all systems of morality equally valid?" not are they all subjective.

Re: Moral relativity
 

[ QUOTE ]
Don't you have to define "system of morality" for us here? If you define "system of morality" as "what you believe is right and wrong", then I do in fact think that they are all equally "valid". If you define "system of morality" as "what you believe you have the right to do to others on the basis of what you believe is right and wrong" then I do not think they are all equally "valid". This distinction is, I think, the most powerful and compelling argument that anarchists on this board make regularly.

[/ QUOTE ]

A system of morality is like a scientific theory. In science you put forward a theory and it is validated or not based on the evidence of the senses combined with the scientific method. That is the objective external standard which means that not all scientific theories are equally valid. It's not up to you if the world is round or not. I'm asking is it up to you if stealing is good or not or is there and objective external standard like the scientific method for judging conflicting moral theories?

Re: Moral relativity
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
If you chose no could you please post the objective external standard you use to tell if a system of morality is valid or not.

[/ QUOTE ]

What if there isn't one?

[/ QUOTE ]

Then morality is subjective.

[/ QUOTE ]

The question was "Are all systems of morality equally valid?" not are they all subjective.

[/ QUOTE ]

One implies the other.

Re: Moral relativity
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

The question was "Are all systems of morality equally valid?" not are they all subjective.

[/ QUOTE ]

One implies the other.

[/ QUOTE ]

Is that true? It depends what you mean by valid, I guess. If you take valid to mean objectively provable, then you are, of course, right. But is that what it means for a moral theory to be valid? I don't know that it is.

Re: Moral relativity
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Don't you have to define "system of morality" for us here? If you define "system of morality" as "what you believe is right and wrong", then I do in fact think that they are all equally "valid". If you define "system of morality" as "what you believe you have the right to do to others on the basis of what you believe is right and wrong" then I do not think they are all equally "valid". This distinction is, I think, the most powerful and compelling argument that anarchists on this board make regularly.

[/ QUOTE ]

A system of morality is like a scientific theory. In science you put forward a theory and it is validated or not based on the evidence of the senses combined with the scientific method. That is the objective external standard which means that not all scientific theories are equally valid. It's not up to you if the world is round or not. I'm asking is it up to you if stealing is good or not or is there an objective external standard like the scientific method for judging conflicting moral theories?

[/ QUOTE ]

Thanks for clarifying.

I think that one can form an opinion of what characteristics a "system of morality" should have, and if those characteristics are objectively determinable then that would form an objective measure of moralities. Then, to the extent that a group of people agree to the standard they can then agree to the validity of a system of morality. Of course, the objective standard will not be an absolute - some people will disagree.

For what it's worth, some people disagree with the scientific method as well. For example, where the scientific method creates results that conflict with the Bible. So even there, you are talking about a subjectively determined objective standard.

Re: Moral relativity
 

[ QUOTE ]
I'm asking is it up to you if stealing is good or not or is there and objective external standard like the scientific method for judging conflicting moral theories?

[/ QUOTE ]

you should have just said this initially instead of proposing the question in the manner you did in the poll (even though you said it was a trap).

there is no "objective external method" what is your point?

edit: beyond the obvious

Re: Moral relativity
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
If you chose no could you please post the objective external standard you use to tell if a system of morality is valid or not.

[/ QUOTE ] I chose no, but I never claimed I could tell if a system is morally valid or not. The only things I have to build my standard on is reason, logic and at the core the feelings about morality I have as a human being. When I chose no, it was because I think these feelings are not completely determined by culture.

[/ QUOTE ]
If you can't tell what makes moral systems valid or invalid how can you possibly claim that you can tell that some are valid and some are not?

[/ QUOTE ] I don't claim that. It's just a belief of mine that some are valid and some are not. If you had included "I don't know" in the poll, that's what I would have chosen.