Shouldn't we all be moral objectivists logically?

Either:
>Evil ISN'T objective, so it doesn't matter anyways if we fight it or not.
>Evil IS objective, so we should fight it

Why risk assuming that it's subjective? The only reason you wouldn't fight evil is because you ARE evil.

Nothing Ever Happens Shirt $21.68

Black Rifle Cuck Company, Conservative Humor Shirt $21.68

Nothing Ever Happens Shirt $21.68

  1. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Why do IQfyposters thinks “subjective” means “I don’t care” it literally means “I do care” you actually wouldn’t need to follow “objective morality” if you didn’t want to.
    Subjective morality is morality that you actually care about and act on.

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Because morality being subjective means it literally doesn't matter. It's just some artificial construct we made up back when we were apes flinging dung in caves.

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        This

        Why do IQfyposters thinks “subjective” means “I don’t care” it literally means “I do care” you actually wouldn’t need to follow “objective morality” if you didn’t want to.
        Subjective morality is morality that you actually care about and act on.

        This homie could be told by 50 people to stay in a corner and starve to death and do it just because 50 people said it and 50 people can't be wrong

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Anon that’s what it’s always been. It matters almost more than anything.

        https://i.imgur.com/XjoxcqL.gif

        This
        [...]
        This homie could be told by 50 people to stay in a corner and starve to death and do it just because 50 people said it and 50 people can't be wrong

        That’s not what morality being subjective means.
        It doesn’t mean you don’t care about it, doesn’t mean it doesn’t matter, doesn’t mean that any group consensus you find yourself in is right and doesn’t mean that you don’t care if other people violate your moral code.
        All it means is there is not a single supreme authority on morality, and in that circumstance different groups and individuals are not in total agreement,

        • 2 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          That means it doesn't matter. It's literally nothing more than groupthink

          • 2 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Please explain why stomping on your balls repeatedly would be wrong even though it would be funny to me.

          • 2 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >the preachy morality guy who is very concerned about right and wrong has seething violent thoughts that bubble up the moment someone disagrees with him
            Interesting

          • 2 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            How did you get "preachy morality guy" from that, I am arguing a subjectivist position by prompting Anon to imagine a situation where he cannot turn away from his subjective point of view. He's not going to sit there and think, "well this is morally wrong in an objective sense because blah blah blah", he's going to assert a subjective viewpoint that it's wrong to stomp on his balls because they're HIS balls, and my not agreeing doesn't make his subjective viewpoint not "valid". It's valid enough for him because he'd like his balls to stop getting stomped.

          • 2 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Because God said so.

          • 2 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Yeah so what? Humans work, live, often think and act in groups. If you really think you have a case that some aspect of what people do is wrong you can make your case and change their minds. If you can’t do that you’re probably not smart enough to be trying to make rules for everyone in the first place.

        • 2 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          >All it means is there is not a single supreme authority on morality
          Which means any morality is valid. Which means no two people will ever share the same morality. Which means it's pointless.

          • 2 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Define "valid" correctly and your confusion will clear.

          • 2 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >Only my subjective morality is valid
            Ok champ

            Why don’t you people get this? There’s nothing about subjective morality that says you can’t try to impose what you think is right on others or that you can’t disagree. You just don’t get it.

            >There’s nothing about subjective morality that says you can’t try to impose what you think is right on others
            The clue is in the name. "Subjective". As in, not objective. As in, people will disagree with you and by trying to impose your subjective morality on them you're trying to create objective morality.

          • 2 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Still waiting for that definition. I can tell what you think it means but it would be educational for you to figure it out. Maybe it would be easier if I asked why you felt the need to insert the word "valid" into this discussion in the first place.

          • 2 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >Still waiting for that definition
            Keep waiting. I don't play those games. "ummm define this" "ummm define that". Go read a dictionary before you talk to people on the internet.

          • 2 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >go read an "objective" text to find out what I mean when I specifically use a word
            Delicious irony. Come on you're really close to figuring it out, you almost Freudian slipped it in your last post. I'll give you another hint.

            >Only my subjective morality is valid
            Ok champ

            [...]
            >There’s nothing about subjective morality that says you can’t try to impose what you think is right on others
            The clue is in the name. "Subjective". As in, not objective. As in, people will disagree with you and by trying to impose your subjective morality on them you're trying to create objective morality.

            >objectivity is when your subjective viewpoint beats someone else's

          • 2 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >Delicious irony. Come on you're really close to figuring it out, you almost Freudian slipped it in your last post. I'll give you another hint.
            If I say "dog", you know what a dog is. If I say "valid", you know what valid means. I have 0 interest in talking to people who just want to score points and quote the "rules of debate" at each other. I'm here to have a conversation with another person, not a robot. Grow up.

          • 2 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >If I say "valid", you know what valid means.
            Of course I know what it "means" (aka what you mean by it), I said so earlier. Do you? I don't think you do.

          • 2 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >I have 0 interest in talking to people who just want to score points and quote the "rules of debate" at each other.

          • 2 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Why don’t you people get this? There’s nothing about subjective morality that says you can’t try to impose what you think is right on others or that you can’t disagree. You just don’t get it.

          • 2 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Zog is winning, we crave the simplicity of one rulebook, one sense of right and wrong, one set of commandments. We are trained into it from birth. It is as subjective a worldview as any other but denies its own subjectivity, lol.

          • 2 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >Which means no two people will ever share the same morality.
            Well that’s not fricking true. I’m nearly 100% if not 100% aligned with several people I know and interact with. Even when it’s not 100% it’s more than enough to work together, share a town together, live together, hang out or eat together.

          • 2 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >Well that’s not fricking true. I’m nearly 100%
            >Proves himself to be a liar in the first 8 words
            Come on bro, try harder.

          • 2 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            You didn’t link anything past that point because I’m right and you can’t contend with the full thought. Even if absolutely perfect alignment isn’t reached enough alignment is reached that there aren’t serious problems in daily life.

          • 2 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >Even if absolutely perfect alignment isn’t reached enough alignment is reached that there aren’t serious problems in daily life.
            Not good enough.

          • 2 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Unironic autism

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      homie forgot he's a subject

      Because morality being subjective means it literally doesn't matter. It's just some artificial construct we made up back when we were apes flinging dung in caves.

      you a subject homie

      https://i.imgur.com/XjoxcqL.gif

      This
      [...]
      This homie could be told by 50 people to stay in a corner and starve to death and do it just because 50 people said it and 50 people can't be wrong

      this homie could be told it's an objective moral good to stay in a corner and starve to death and do it just because he esteems a hypothetical viewpoint from nowhere and everywhere over his own

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >this homie could be told it's an objective moral good to stay in a corner and starve to death and do it just because he esteems a hypothetical viewpoint from nowhere and everywhere over his own
        Yes, but suicide is immoral

  2. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >if there's no objective morality, you shouldn't do things you want to do or try to prevent things you don't want to happen
    Why? This doesn't make any sense.

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >see thing I "don't want"
      >start wanting it
      Problem solved.

  3. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Why risk assuming it's objective if all human experience is born out of a subjective mind? Are you moronic?

  4. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >Evil ISN'T objective, so it doesn't matter anyways if we fight it or not
    Taste is subjective so I guess you don't mind eating shit?

  5. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Why can't moral subjectivists imagine someone doing something not:
    1)Out of self interest
    2)Groupthink
    3)Random
    It's alarming that they wouldn't be the 1 guy in the crowd of 1000s that can say "No. This is Wrong." even when it's not beneficial to yourself or society.

    Say it with me:
    Slavery is wrong even when I'm a slave.
    Slavery is wrong even when I'm a slavesmaster.
    Slavery is wrong even when I don't know any slaves.
    Slavery is wrong even when I don't know any slavemasters.
    Slavery is wrong even when 100 people think it's right.
    Slavery is wrong even when 1000000 people think it's right.
    Slavery is wrong even when everyone but me thinks it's right.
    Slavery is wrong even when my brother does it.
    Slavery is wrong even when my nation becomes wealthy from it.
    Slavery is wrong even if it would make me a billion dollars.
    Slavery is wrong even when it's a former slavesmaster being enslaved.
    Slavery is wrong even when everyone, including the slaves themselves say it's right.
    Slavery is wrong.

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >Why can't moral subjectivists imagine someone doing something not:
      >1)Out of self interest
      >2)Groupthink
      >3)Random
      They can, you just pretend that they can't because it's bad for your argument.

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        No. Moral subjectivism literally say it's moral to jump off a cliff if everyone else is doing it.

        >Slavery is wrong.
        Okay, free the chickens and cows. Why is slavery okay for non-humans?

        God. Said it's fine.

        • 2 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          According to people, bimbo. God didn't say shit to you.

          • 2 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >God didn't say shit to you.
            Speak for yourself. God speaks to me.

          • 2 weeks ago
            Anonymous
        • 2 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          >Moral subjectivism literally say it's moral to jump off a cliff if everyone else is doing
          No it says you can still disagree with a group of people saying it.

        • 2 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          >Moral subjectivism literally say it's moral to jump off a cliff if everyone else is doing it.
          Nope, that's specifically moral relativism.

          • 2 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            You don't know your own ideology, Redditboy.

          • 2 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            It’s not an ideology anon, the fact that morality is subjective in no way means that you have to do what the majority around you are doing or agree with it.

          • 2 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            I'm not a moral subjectivist, I'm just correcting your terminology. The theory that states the rightness or wrongness of an action depends on time or place is moral relativism.

            You have it precisely backwards, only moral objectivists would jump off a cliff if they saw everyone else doing it because they must believe the popular sentiment they see around them is built into the universe in order to function. A subjectivist would be able to make a subjective judgement that jumping off a cliff is bad for him, even though it goes against the conclusion of the group.

            Brainwashed.
            Moral objectivism is when morals are real.
            Moral subjectivism is when you think morals are just a social construct.
            Moral relativism is when you play twister to decide where morals come from.

          • 2 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Social constructs are realer than anything you hold to be objective.

          • 2 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Brainwashed into what? I'm not a moral subjectivist or a moral relativist, I'm just correcting your terminology because you learned incorrect shit from memes.[...]

            >morals are real.
            What the frick does that even mean? A consensus agreed upon morals are real. Objective implies morals are hardcoded into the universe outside of human perspective.

            I can smell the Reddit from here. Evil is real. Get over it.

          • 2 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >my argument is (You) are reddit
            You fricking moron. That's literally nothing.

          • 2 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Anon I'm literally just telling you that you don't know what moral subjectivism and moral relativism are lol. I'm not saying that they're correct.

          • 2 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            And I'm telling you that you don't know what you're talking about. Post your IQ if it's under 110, this conversation is over.

            >my argument is (You) are reddit
            You fricking moron. That's literally nothing.

            Yes. You're a sheltered Reddit pseud who only understands evil through some textbook you got in freshman year philosophy.

          • 2 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >who only understands evil through some textbook you got in freshman year philosophy.
            Are you not able to engage on that level? Why even post anything? You're calling me a pseud but when you were presented with an opportunity to challenge my position you shat your pants and screeched reddit. How is that better?

          • 2 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >No u
            Thanks for conceding

            Never had my IQ measured, why would you do that?
            Anyway, I don't know why you're so upset just because you don't know what some ethical theories say. It's not a huge deal.

            Never had my IQ measured, why would you do that?
            No idea, Redditboy.

          • 2 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            No one conceded, pussy. You're just fleeing.

          • 2 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            I can smell your Redditness from here. Take a shower and then come back.

          • 2 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            You smell my balls on your face and it just reminds you of your favorite subreddit.

          • 2 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Never had my IQ measured, why would you do that?
            Anyway, I don't know why you're so upset just because you don't know what some ethical theories say. It's not a huge deal.

          • 2 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Brainwashed into what? I'm not a moral subjectivist or a moral relativist, I'm just correcting your terminology because you learned incorrect shit from memes.

            What's your argument?

          • 2 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >morals are real.
            What the frick does that even mean? A consensus agreed upon morals are real. Objective implies morals are hardcoded into the universe outside of human perspective.

          • 2 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            I'm not a moral subjectivist, I'm just correcting your terminology. The theory that states the rightness or wrongness of an action depends on time or place is moral relativism.

        • 2 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          You have it precisely backwards, only moral objectivists would jump off a cliff if they saw everyone else doing it because they must believe the popular sentiment they see around them is built into the universe in order to function. A subjectivist would be able to make a subjective judgement that jumping off a cliff is bad for him, even though it goes against the conclusion of the group.

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >Slavery is wrong.
      Okay, free the chickens and cows. Why is slavery okay for non-humans?

  6. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Pretending your subjective morality is objective does not make it objective.
    Furthermore none of you seem to fully understand what subjective means.

  7. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    The simple fact of the matter is this:

    >Objective morality is set in stone, the same rules applied 2000 years ago that apply today
    vs
    >Subjective morality hinges on the whims of one person on one particular day, there's nothing to stop a subjective moralist from waking up one day and saying to himself "well it's ok if I go out and kill this guy because he stole my bike"

    You'll sit there and say "oh I would never do that" but the fact is there's nothing stopping you from doing it.

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      What's your argument?

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        That moral subjectivism doesn't exist.

        You're just looking for excuses to not feel bad when you slip up and act like a piece of shit to someone else out of spite, anger, jealousy or ego.

        • 2 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          Metaethical commitments have zero actual impact on how people act lol, it's all just post-hoc study.

          • 2 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >Metaethical commitments have zero actual impact on how people act lol
            Because "most people" are Black person-cattle.

        • 2 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          Weird that I can just do that, why doesn't moral objectivism stop me?

        • 2 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          Buddy I’m not autistic or mentally ill so I do feel bad when I slip up and am mean to someone on occasion. I don’t have to think about it, it feels bad.

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *