Archived

Moral Argument

Read 10090 times

Aaron Massey

  • ****
  • 5483 Posts
  • absit iniuria verbis
    • View Profile
If OMV are true....
« on: March 09, 2016, 05:14:48 am »
IF Objective moral values and Dutys really exist...

Then why did Jesus claim:

Quote
"Forgive them father, for they know, not what they do"

This seems to be a direct claim that some humans do not know that what they do is Evil or a sin.

So why dont these people, not recognize OMV?   Jesus is directly claiming that they dont have a clue, they dont even know that concept that what they do is wrong, it is oblivious. 

The only explanation is that they are possessed by Demons that control "what they do"

Thoughts?   the bible has alot of quotes that seems to destroy the idea of OMV. 
Proverbs 8:30 "then I was beside him, like a master workman, and I was daily his delight, rejoicing before him always, rejoicing in his inhabited world and delighting in the children of man."

1

jdschoone

  • **
  • 108 Posts
    • View Profile
Re: If OMV are true....
« Reply #1 on: March 09, 2016, 06:55:28 am »
Hello Aaron,

Jesus appears to be making an epistemic claim about knowledge of objective moral facts. This does not mean that objective moral facts do not exist. Although our knowledge of particular objective moral facts might be limited (which might be one of the reasons why we sin and are in need of forgiveness) this does not entail that objective moral facts don't exist.

Jesus appears to be making all kinds of objective moral claims, specifically in speeches such as the Sermon on the Mount.

Take also the following account of Paul in Romans chapter 2:

Quote
12  For all those who sinned without law will also perish without law; but all those who sinned under law will be judged by law. 13  For the hearers of law are not the ones righteous before God, but the doers of law will be declared righteous. 14  For when people of the nations, who do not have law, do by nature the things of the law, these people, although not having law, are a law to themselves. 15  They are the very ones who demonstrate the matter of the law to be written in their hearts, while their conscience is bearing witness with them, and by their own thoughts they are being accused or even excused.

It seems that human beings have some moral laws written in their hearts. I take this to be an epistemic intuitionist approach.

2

aleph naught

  • ****
  • 7392 Posts
  • For the glory of the Canadian empire.
    • View Profile
Re: If OMV are true....
« Reply #2 on: March 09, 2016, 11:51:31 am »
IF Objective moral values and Dutys really exist...

Then why did Jesus claim:

Quote
"Forgive them father, for they know, not what they do"

This seems to be a direct claim that some humans do not know that what they do is Evil or a sin.

So why dont these people, not recognize OMV?   Jesus is directly claiming that they dont have a clue, they dont even know that concept that what they do is wrong, it is oblivious. 

The only explanation is that they are possessed by Demons that control "what they do"

Thoughts?   the bible has alot of quotes that seems to destroy the idea of OMV.

Nothing about the objectivity of morality is incompatible with people being in error about morality. In fact, objectivism best explains the propensity of false ethical beliefs:

Though it's possible that we would fail to recognize what we truly desire or prefer, or what our opinions are, it's fairly unlikely. People generally have good epistemic access to these sorts of things. And so if morality is constituted of our own desires and preferences and opinions, then we would expect that most people would find it fairly easy to discern ethical truth.

But that's not the case. People can be very wrong about morality, and very often are. Therefore, morality must not be constituted of our desires or preferences or opinions, or anything like that. Therefore, morality must be objective.

Remember the definition of objective: being constitutively independent of anyone's attitudes.
« Last Edit: March 09, 2016, 11:53:41 am by aleph naught »

3

Biep

  • **
  • 909 Posts
    • View Profile
    • Apologetics in Dutch
Re: If OMV are true....
« Reply #3 on: March 10, 2016, 10:48:20 am »
It can be objectively true that if I switch on the light, and in doing so unintentionally electrocute  my brother who was just installing another lamp, I am not guilty of killing him.

Jesus came to pay for all our sins - and as such had to be infinite, because the largest finite value, all of creation, does not suffice to pay for even a single person (Matthew 16:26; Mark 8:36).  Assuming measure theory can be applied to God, if someone were actually guilty of killing God, God would not suffice to pay for all men's sins - which Jesus did (1 Timothy 2:6; 1 John 2:2).
Therefore, Jesus had to be killed by people who genuinely didn't know they were killing God - that way their guilt would be less, and could be covered by Jesus' blood.  And Jesus being the advocate of sinners (1 John 2:1), He brought up this fact before the Father.

That also explains why Jesus was both clear and not clear about being God, and why speaking against Jesus was forgivable, whereas speaking against the Spirit wasn't (Matthew 12:32; Luke 12:10) - one could slander Jesus without intentionally slandering God, but one cannot slander the Spirit without intentionally slandering God.
-- Biep
I tend to post and run, but always hope to return eventually.  Don't hold your breath, though.

I have very little energy at the moment, so don't expect much of me right now.

4

john doe

  • **
  • 919 Posts
    • View Profile
Re: If OMV are true....
« Reply #4 on: March 10, 2016, 02:04:12 pm »
IF Objective moral values and Dutys really exist...

Then why did Jesus claim:

Quote
"Forgive them father, for they know, not what they do"

This seems to be a direct claim that some humans do not know that what they do is Evil or a sin.

So why dont these people, not recognize OMV?   Jesus is directly claiming that they dont have a clue, they dont even know that concept that what they do is wrong, it is oblivious. 

The only explanation is that they are possessed by Demons that control "what they do"

Thoughts?   the bible has alot of quotes that seems to destroy the idea of OMV.

Nothing about the objectivity of morality is incompatible with people being in error about morality. In fact, objectivism best explains the propensity of false ethical beliefs:

Though it's possible that we would fail to recognize what we truly desire or prefer, or what our opinions are, it's fairly unlikely. People generally have good epistemic access to these sorts of things. And so if morality is constituted of our own desires and preferences and opinions, then we would expect that most people would find it fairly easy to discern ethical truth.

Or perhaps it is people mistakenly assuming OMV which makes the most sense of all of our moral experience.


But that's not the case. People can be very wrong about morality, and very often are. Therefore, morality must not be constituted of our desires or preferences or opinions, or anything like that. Therefore, morality must be objective.

Remember the definition of objective: being constitutively independent of anyone's attitudes.

Perhaps just being constituted independent of anyone's conscious attitudes is all that is required.  But since values are tied up with desires and preferences of every sort which do not originate from conscious deliberation, morals can be perceived as objective inasmuch as they are the ones which one discovers to be most useful in living a fulfilling life.  They aren't one's own invention, they are as objective as anything else one discovers.

5

Miles_Donahue

  • **
  • 71 Posts
    • View Profile
    • The Universe in Essays
Re: If OMV are true....
« Reply #5 on: March 22, 2016, 02:28:01 pm »
Aaron Massey, you seem to think that Jesus' words imply that objective moral values and duties do not exist. To my mind, however, no such conclusion follows. First, at worst all that follows from Jesus' remarks is that we cannot know that objective moral values and duties exist. Nevertheless, perhaps they do exist and we are completely ignorant of them. As J. D. Schoone reminds us, "Jesus appears to be making an epistemic claim about knowledge of objective moral facts", not an ontological claim about the existence of moral facts. Indeed, the whole concept of sin makes no sense unless there is some objective moral standard by which to judge our conduct, because sin is by definition a failure to live up to that standard. If there is no objective referent for moral behavior, there is no sin. Insofar as Jesus taught the reality of sin, he implies that objective moral values and duties exist - even if we cannot know what they are.

Second, Jesus wasn't even implying that we do not know what is good and what is evil. In the cited passage, Jesus was addressing the Romans who were crucifying him. His point was that these men did not understand that they were murdering the Son of God. Clearly, one cannot take his remarks and apply them to all of humanity and every moral failing - that would be to ignore the context of the passage.
« Last Edit: March 22, 2016, 08:22:21 pm by Miles_Donahue »
- Socrates said the unreflective life is not worth living. I say the indecisive life is not worth living, because even if you choose wrongly, at least you chose.

6

john doe

  • **
  • 919 Posts
    • View Profile
Re: If OMV are true....
« Reply #6 on: March 22, 2016, 02:53:10 pm »
You seem to think that Jesus' words imply that objective moral values and duties do not exist. To my mind, however, they have no such implication. First, at worst all that follows from Jesus' words is that we cannot know that objective moral values and duties exist. Nevertheless, perhaps they do exist and we are completely ignorant of them. As Jdschoone reminds us, "Jesus appears to be making an epistemic claim about knowledge of objective moral facts", not an ontological claim about the existence of moral facts. Indeed, the whole concept of sin makes no sense unless there is some objective moral standard, because sin is by definition a failure to live up to that standard. If there is no objective referent for moral behavior, there is no sin. Insofar as Jesus taught the reality of sin, he implies that objective moral values and duties exist - even if we cannot know what they are.

Second, Jesus wasn't even implying that we do not know what is good and what is evil. In the cited passage, Jesus was addressing the Romans who were crucifying him. His point was that these men did not understand that they were murdering the Son of God. Clearly, one cannot take his remarks and apply them to all of humanity and every moral failing - that would be to ignore the context of the passage.

Hello Miles.  I assume you were not responding to my post (the most recent one), since I don't think I brought up anything to do with Jesus.  You might just want to make it clearer who you are addressing.  Good luck.
« Last Edit: March 22, 2016, 09:01:36 pm by whateverist »

7

Miles_Donahue

  • **
  • 71 Posts
    • View Profile
    • The Universe in Essays
Re: If OMV are true....
« Reply #7 on: March 22, 2016, 08:07:45 pm »
The response was to Aaron Massey. (:
- Socrates said the unreflective life is not worth living. I say the indecisive life is not worth living, because even if you choose wrongly, at least you chose.

8

Aaron Massey

  • ****
  • 5483 Posts
  • absit iniuria verbis
    • View Profile
Re: If OMV are true....
« Reply #8 on: March 24, 2016, 06:14:18 pm »
Aaron Massey, you seem to think that Jesus' words imply that objective moral values and duties do not exist.
Yes.

Quote
To my mind, however, no such conclusion follows. First, at worst all that follows from Jesus' remarks is that we cannot know that objective moral values and duties exist.


There are other claims by Jesus.  "do unto other as you would have do unto your self"  is a subjective moral claim, yet is is probably a maxim that is a corner stone for christian behavior.

"Love your neighbour as you love yourself."
 
Quote
Nevertheless, perhaps they do exist and we are completely ignorant of them. As J. D. Schoone reminds us, "Jesus appears to be making an epistemic claim about knowledge of objective moral facts", not an ontological claim about the existence of moral facts.


I dont think he ever makes a epistemic claim, "he never says X is wrong and heres why"
He hardly gives us a why. 

Quote
Indeed, the whole concept of sin makes no sense unless there is some objective moral standard by which to judge our conduct, because sin is by definition a failure to live up to that standard. If there is no objective referent for moral behavior, there is no sin. Insofar as Jesus taught the reality of sin, he implies that objective moral values and duties exist - even if we cannot know what they are.

It makes little sense that there is sin and that we should avoid it, yet... we cant know what is and is not sin in any tangable way that we can share with each other, even amongst christians.
I have a very diffrent take on it than you, which i have not shared here.
Im only looking to see if the bible supports the idea of OMV, and i dont see that "per se"  There is a morality in the bible no doubt.     

Quote
Second, Jesus wasn't even implying that we do not know what is good and what is evil. In the cited passage, Jesus was addressing the Romans who were crucifying him. His point was that these men did not understand that they were murdering the Son of God. Clearly, one cannot take his remarks and apply them to all of humanity and every moral failing - that would be to ignore the context of the passage.

I am willing to accept that the people carrying out the crucification are under some demonic spell.
but these guys crucify people all the time, Jesus would not have been any diffrent.
So that creates the problem of them "not knowing" even when it is not our lord and saviour.
It could be that they simply did not realise who this was in the Regal sense.
Proverbs 8:30 "then I was beside him, like a master workman, and I was daily his delight, rejoicing before him always, rejoicing in his inhabited world and delighting in the children of man."

9

jdschoone

  • **
  • 108 Posts
    • View Profile
Re: If OMV are true....
« Reply #9 on: March 27, 2016, 02:07:32 am »
There are other claims by Jesus.  "do unto other as you would have do unto your self"  is a subjective moral claim, yet is is probably a maxim that is a corner stone for christian behavior.

"Love your neighbour as you love yourself."

But the examples you give appear to be examples of objective moral claims. When Jesus says "love your neighbour as yourself" he does not appear to be claiming that this statement is true depending on the subject. One ought to love one's neighbour for this the right thing to do. He appears to be making an objective and universal claim about morality here.

10

alex1212

  • **
  • 761 Posts
    • View Profile
Re: If OMV are true....
« Reply #10 on: March 27, 2016, 01:25:37 pm »
IF Objective moral values and Dutys really exist...

Then why did Jesus claim:

Quote
"Forgive them father, for they know, not what they do"

This seems to be a direct claim that some humans do not know that what they do is Evil or a sin.

So why dont these people, not recognize OMV?   Jesus is directly claiming that they dont have a clue, they dont even know that concept that what they do is wrong, it is oblivious. 

The only explanation is that they are possessed by Demons that control "what they do"

Thoughts?   the bible has a lot of quotes that seems to destroy the idea of OMV.

OMV can still exist (ontology), and people don't know this fact (epistemology).

Some moral situations are hard to figure out. We often don't know what to do, but in general, it seems we do. (Perhaps we know moral facts from experience, reason, intuition, arguments, etc.) 

The only explanation is not demons. People are ignorant and often want to do what they want to do because they are selfish. We know this, so the demon hypothesis adds another assumption, that demons exist which is ad hoc.

11

Aaron Massey

  • ****
  • 5483 Posts
  • absit iniuria verbis
    • View Profile
Re: If OMV are true....
« Reply #11 on: March 28, 2016, 02:40:25 am »
There are other claims by Jesus.  "do unto other as you would have do unto your self"  is a subjective moral claim, yet is is probably a maxim that is a corner stone for christian behavior.

"Love your neighbour as you love yourself."

But the examples you give appear to be examples of objective moral claims. When Jesus says "love your neighbour as yourself"
But he is giving it a subjective grounding in you, yourself.  This makes it subjectively grounded.
Same as Do unto others as yourself...    again the grounding for your behaviour is you.

Quote
he does not appear to be claiming that this statement is true depending on the subject. One ought to love one's neighbour for this the right thing to do. He appears to be making an objective and universal claim about morality here.

But he is asking you to be the measure... "as yourself" a subjective grounding.
Proverbs 8:30 "then I was beside him, like a master workman, and I was daily his delight, rejoicing before him always, rejoicing in his inhabited world and delighting in the children of man."

12

Aaron Massey

  • ****
  • 5483 Posts
  • absit iniuria verbis
    • View Profile
Re: If OMV are true....
« Reply #12 on: March 28, 2016, 02:44:01 am »
IF Objective moral values and Dutys really exist...

Then why did Jesus claim:

Quote
"Forgive them father, for they know, not what they do"

This seems to be a direct claim that some humans do not know that what they do is Evil or a sin.

So why dont these people, not recognize OMV?   Jesus is directly claiming that they dont have a clue, they dont even know that concept that what they do is wrong, it is oblivious. 

The only explanation is that they are possessed by Demons that control "what they do"

Thoughts?   the bible has a lot of quotes that seems to destroy the idea of OMV.

OMV can still exist (ontology), and people don't know this fact (epistemology).

I know this.

Quote
Some moral situations are hard to figure out. We often don't know what to do, but in general, it seems we do. (Perhaps we know moral facts from experience, reason, intuition, arguments, etc.) 

I disagree, and there are lots of evil people around.

Quote
The only explanation is not demons. People are ignorant and often want to do what they want to do because they are selfish. We know this, so the demon hypothesis adds another assumption, that demons exist which is ad hoc.

Demons in relation to Jesus roman soldier crucifiers. 
Proverbs 8:30 "then I was beside him, like a master workman, and I was daily his delight, rejoicing before him always, rejoicing in his inhabited world and delighting in the children of man."

13

jdschoone

  • **
  • 108 Posts
    • View Profile
Re: If OMV are true....
« Reply #13 on: March 28, 2016, 02:55:42 am »
There are other claims by Jesus.  "do unto other as you would have do unto your self"  is a subjective moral claim, yet is is probably a maxim that is a corner stone for christian behavior.

"Love your neighbour as you love yourself."

But the examples you give appear to be examples of objective moral claims. When Jesus says "love your neighbour as yourself"
But he is giving it a subjective grounding in you, yourself.  This makes it subjectively grounded.
Same as Do unto others as yourself...    again the grounding for your behaviour is you.

Quote
he does not appear to be claiming that this statement is true depending on the subject. One ought to love one's neighbour for this the right thing to do. He appears to be making an objective and universal claim about morality here.

But he is asking you to be the measure... "as yourself" a subjective grounding.

I think you misunderstand. Obviously when Jesus states that you should love your neighbor as yourself he seems to presuppose that one usually loves oneself (I don't think we should take Jesus' statement to mean that if one hates oneself one is allowed to hate ones neighbor). But when it concerns the question about ontological objectivity or subjectivity this is irrelevant, for the rule as a whole (love your neighbor as yourself) is not grounded in you or in your neighbor. If it were then it would be up to you whether you would believe this to be truly good or not. The whole point is that the statement "love your neighbor" is good, independent of your own personal feelings or beliefs concerning this statement. The same goes for almost every moral statement that Jesus makes, whether it is about loving God or about divorce or about reaching for the sword. All his statements seem to be both objective (grounded in something else than personal preferences) and universal (applicable under all or most circumstances).

In other words: the fact that moral statements are about people does not mean that they are ontologically grounded in people.

14

Aaron Massey

  • ****
  • 5483 Posts
  • absit iniuria verbis
    • View Profile
Re: If OMV are true....
« Reply #14 on: March 29, 2016, 05:29:25 am »
There are other claims by Jesus.  "do unto other as you would have do unto your self"  is a subjective moral claim, yet is is probably a maxim that is a corner stone for christian behavior.

"Love your neighbour as you love yourself."

But the examples you give appear to be examples of objective moral claims. When Jesus says "love your neighbour as yourself"
But he is giving it a subjective grounding in you, yourself.  This makes it subjectively grounded.
Same as Do unto others as yourself...    again the grounding for your behaviour is you.

Quote
he does not appear to be claiming that this statement is true depending on the subject. One ought to love one's neighbour for this the right thing to do. He appears to be making an objective and universal claim about morality here.

But he is asking you to be the measure... "as yourself" a subjective grounding.

I think you misunderstand. Obviously when Jesus states that you should love your neighbor as yourself he seems to presuppose that one usually loves oneself (I don't think we should take Jesus' statement to mean that if one hates oneself one is allowed to hate ones neighbor). But when it concerns the question about ontological objectivity or subjectivity this is irrelevant, for the rule as a whole (love your neighbor as yourself) is not grounded in you or in your neighbor. If it were then it would be up to you whether you would believe this to be truly good or not. The whole point is that the statement "love your neighbor" is good, independent of your own personal feelings or beliefs concerning this statement. The same goes for almost every moral statement that Jesus makes, whether it is about loving God or about divorce or about reaching for the sword. All his statements seem to be both objective (grounded in something else than personal preferences) and universal (applicable under all or most circumstances).
I disagree with you, and you are cherry picking by leaving the qualifiers out.

Love your neighbour you say...    in what measure exactly?   how is that maxim of any benfit or can be fruitful with out a m

Quote
In other words: the fact that moral statements are about people does not mean that they are ontologically grounded in people.

It is actully the fact jesus is using us (people) as the judge is what makes the ontological source of Morality Man himself.     
I am open to the idea that God maybe talking to the hearts of men who believe and follow Jesus Maxims, but on face value, that is not being said.


Proverbs 8:30 "then I was beside him, like a master workman, and I was daily his delight, rejoicing before him always, rejoicing in his inhabited world and delighting in the children of man."