Isn't morality just supersition?

[Simon Anders]

I mean what are morals made of?
In a materialistic universe they must be made of something.

Ah, yes, patterns in neurotransmitter levels, neuron firings, etc.

But then that is Pandora's box. We should reify such things as if they had some objective status. Any more than dreams which also manifest as similar patterns.

I move the whole forum be shifted to the Cesspool.

 

[draqon]

morality is way of life based on care for other opinions, care for others, other than yourself.

 

[one_raven]

Even a materialist would concede that racism exists, no?

Concepts and ideas do exist, thrive and norph in the social consciousness.

 

[Simon Anders]

morality is way of life based on care for other opinions, care for others, other than yourself.

That is what some moralities are based on.

And I should add that your post is not superstitious. You did not suggest that this was correct to base morality on care of other than oneself - which by the way many animals are capable of.

However the moment you take a step and say that morality should be based on care of others...

or if you say

It is moral to______________

you are preaching or describing fantasy.

 

[Simon Anders]

Even a materialist would concede that racism exists, no?

I assume so. In fact I am sure most would. However to say that racism is wrong, morally, would be engaging in fantasy or theology and has no place in science forums. A materialist could of course attack the false assertions of a racist.

Concepts and ideas do exist, thrive and norph in the social consciousness.

Excellent point. Ethics can be discusses as a phenomenon in a science forum. One can look at it in sociological terms, which is how I took dragon's post, or anthropological terms, etc.

but the moment you say what is moral
or what should be done or not done

you are engaging in theology or fantasy.

IOW most posts and most threads in Ethics Morality and Justice.

 

[draqon]

It is moral to______________

you are preaching or describing fantasy.

you're the one living in the world of fantasy, by suggesting that morality means nothing, when it is everything we are.

 

[Simon Anders]

you're the one living in the world of fantasy, by suggesting that morality means nothing, when it is everything we are.

You are opening yourself up to not only criticism, for believing in fantasies, or even ridicule from the scientific community here.

 

[draqon]

You are opening yourself up to not only criticism, for believing in fantasies, or even ridicule from the scientific community here.

who's scientific community? you? lol I dont even know who you are. Take me on, brother. Like I said, morality is a way of life, a belief and faith in values of the good actions.

 

[Simon Anders]

Like I said, morality is a way of life, a belief and faith in values of the good actions.

This is true, though rather vague and open to much interpretation. But again in this post you are not advocating a morality, you are describing one. Once should speak starts, it is fantasy.

 

[one_raven]

but the moment you say what is moral
or what should be done or not done

you are engaging in theology or fantasy.

I disagree.
A basic, core, universal moral code can be quite soundly and scientifically extracted from what behaviors would be a benefit or detriment to cooperative living.

Do not murder.
Do not steal or destroy what rightfully belongs to another.
Do treat others with courtesy and respect.
etc.

Ethics, is simply the basic moral code applied to situations and fodder for valid philosophical debate of the details.

 

[Roman]

I mean what are morals made of?
In a materialistic universe they must be made of something.

Ah, yes, patterns in neurotransmitter levels, neuron firings, etc.

But then that is Pandora's box. We should reify such things as if they had some objective status. Any more than dreams which also manifest as similar patterns.

I move the whole forum be shifted to the Cesspool.

Morality is simply what we call a set of behavioral rules when discussing humans. The reason why it's so controversial is because it's directly relevant to us, and we get to have feelings about it. Discussion of the mating habits of geese or rape in lions isn't that big of a deal, since they're just animals. Nevermind that we too, are just animals.

 

[Simon Anders]

I disagree.
A basic, core, universal moral code can be quite soundly and scientifically extracted from what behaviors would be a benefit or detriment to cooperative living.

These are words loaded with assumptions, or better put unprovable axioms about what is good and what is bad.

Do not murder.
Do not steal or destroy what rightfully belongs to another.
Do treat others with courtesy and respect.
etc.

And then someone else will develop a morality that says you are making weak people. No there is no objective good. To assert this is to engage in fantasy and to place oneself in a position of authority without justification.

Ethics, is simply the basic moral code applied to situations and fodder for valid philosophical debate of the details.

All ethics and morality are based on unprovable axioms or evaluation criteria. Any assertion of this is good or that is bad is a claim to objective good and smacks of religion.

 

[Simon Anders]

Morality is simply what we call a set of behavioral rules when discussing humans.

And such a descriptive discussion can be scientific. These people believe this.....
This belief seems to lead to this...
It seems that these actions indicate a belief in this....

and so on.

Describing existant ethics can be a perfectly rational and scientific endeavor. To lay down opinions on what is in fact objectively good is fantasy.

One can of course speak of what one wants, but then that isn't really ethics.

Most threads and posts in EMJ do not pass muster.

 

[one_raven]

And then someone else will develop a morality that says you are making weak people. No there is no objective good. To assert this is to engage in fantasy and to place oneself in a position of authority without justification.

Words. Words. Words. - Hamlet

You can justify anything you wish.
In fact it is quite an uncanny gift humans have.
That does not, however, make it true.

If murder is allowed there is not mutual trust, the foundation of community is destroyed.
Without community, humans can not survive.
As Nietzsche said, the basis of the first truth was, "I will not kill you".

Objective morality does not necessarily imply religion.

 

[Roman]

And such a descriptive discussion can be scientific. These people believe this.....
This belief seems to lead to this...
It seems that these actions indicate a belief in this....

and so on.

Describing existant ethics can be a perfectly rational and scientific endeavor. To lay down opinions on what is in fact objectively good is fantasy.

I disagree. It is entirely possible to define "objectively good" when you explain what good is.

Merely saying "Sharing is good" is worthless. Unfortunately, virtually all ethics is full of these sorts of circular statements. No ethicist can actually tell you what good means. The problem isn't science.

One can of course speak of what one wants, but then that isn't really ethics.

Yes it is.
I believe that would fall under Naturalism.

Most threads and posts in EMJ do not pass muster.

Most threads and posts in Sciforums do not pass muster.
This is a pretty weak science site.

 

[Mr. Hamtastic]

So the entire site should be cessed, for anything that is not explainable by the tools of science does not belong in a science forum?

 

[Enmos]

Morality is a time-tested method of self preservation through group preservation.

 

[Baron Max]

Morality is a time-tested method of self preservation through group preservation.

You should have continued that cute little sentence ....like this:

"Morality is a time-tested method of self preservation through group preservation that is forced on a society."

Whenever we talk about morality and ethics, we always seem to forget or ignore that those values are forced upon us. And almost everyone would agree that using force on someone is not very nice.

There would be no morals or ethics without the power to enforce them.

Baron Max

 

[S.A.M.]

Morality is humbug

 

[cosmictraveler]

Morality should be what the majority of society wants to belive in to try and adhere to within their confines.