Moral Relativity: Where moral values come from?

@maxdancona,

maxdancona wrote:

Frank Apisa wrote:

A human does not need a god to understand either version of the Golden Rule: Treat others as you would want to be treated...or...don't treat others as you would resent others treating you.

That just makes sense...and allows life to function more easily.

No... You are making a religious statement. There is natural or scientific reason that you should treat other people. It certainly isnt a constant in human nature.

This is something that is true because you believe it os true. It is a matter of faith.

No...I am NOT making a religious statement at all. And I certainly am not saying it because I "believe" it is true, because I do not do any "believing."

I am saying there is utility in doing what the Golden Rule suggests. If there are no gods...the rule would still be applicable.

If you disagree...fine.

1 Reply

@hightor,

I guess I was confused by his lip service to 'divine guidence'.

0 Replies

@hightor,

In hightor's quote, de Sousa wrote:

A crucial feature of moral reasons is that they are always based (or ‘supervenient’) on other, ordinary facts that can be specified without reference to morality. Suppose for example that you are considering doing X. You notice that doing X will cause someone pain. That might strike you as a reason not to do X. Call that reason A. Another fact might also strike you as a reason against X: that it will be boring, perhaps, or too expensive. Call that reason B. Moralists will tell you that your reason A, but not your reason B, also ‘grounds’ another reason not to do X, namely that it would be immoral. And on that basis, reason A but not reason B now gets to be ‘inescapable’, ‘overriding’ any reason you had in favour of X: that it would be exciting, say, or memorable. So now it seems that reason A, unlike reason B, gives you two reasons not to do X: reason A (that it will cause pain), plus the fact that X is immoral. But since this second reason was just grounded on reason A, what can it possibly add to it? How can it suddenly make reason A override all other reasons? It seems to be just a way of counting it twice.

His reasoning here is convoluted. Doing X is immoral because reason A—X causing someone pain—is immoral. It isn't a case of counting A twice. X is an instance of A.

0 Replies

@maxdancona,

Moral values come from the self-interest of the individual and then the self-interest of a collective society. As a collective, it is an expanded concept of the self, concerned with the survival and well-being of the individual within the collective. The proper foundation of human morality is its common biology, the commonality of needs, security, wants, and sense of justice collectively structures the social contract that embraces all individuals.

1 Reply

@popeye1945,

Moral values come from Moralavia

On sea.

0 Replies

@Frank Apisa,

"I am saying there is utility in doing what the Golden Rule suggests. If there are no gods...the rule would still be applicable."
---------Jesus wouldn't want anybody telling him he was a son of Satan, but didn't Jesus tell the Jews they were sons of Satan (John 8:44)? If the Golden Rule's popularly credited inventor violated it, then apparently the rule is not quite as "applicable" as you allege. Or maybe Jesus wasn't as morally consistent as some people would feel comfortable admitting?

1 Reply

@GregorCounter,

GregorCounter wrote:

"I am saying there is utility in doing what the Golden Rule suggests. If there are no gods...the rule would still be applicable."
---------Jesus wouldn't want anybody telling him he was a son of Satan, but didn't Jesus tell the Jews they were sons of Satan (John 8:44)? If the Golden Rule's popularly credited inventor violated it, then apparently the rule is not quite as "applicable" as you allege. Or maybe Jesus wasn't as morally consistent as some people would feel comfortable admitting?

The "Golden Rule" predates the supposed birth of Jesus by centuries.

0 Replies

Morality online, touchy and feely
The immoral behaviors of abuser / conspirator / hater such as Donkey and Donkey No. 2 are always damaging the profile and future of internet, letting people feel internet looks like a rubbish dump, informal place, even negative thing and inferior to journal. Such guys are really criminal and enemy of internet, even the public enemy of human beings.
Actually the “authentic” / “standard” / “mainstream” including all journals on the Earth lag behind one era in theoretical physics research.

http://5b0988e595225.cdn.sohucs.com/q_70,c_zoom,w_640/images/20180122/1fce7ef60bc445239d9c2261b35b0747.gif

Nowadays, it’s era of internet. The fact is that it’s guys in forums such as Mr. woody, oz93666, Adesh in PHF galaxy, as well as Mr. Wasp in a2k galaxy, etc, trying to push physics ahead. They are heroes / pioneers of the new dawning era. Also, thanks to the assistance of some good men / moral guys such as izzy sir, Mr. From Opium in a2k galaxy, etc, science have a chance to be in the superposition of dead and alive on internet only.
Good luck, human beings.

0 Replies

Morality online, touchy and feely 2

There is at least two non sense threads in this forum, which are not engage in discussion of philosophy, nor science at all.
1. Donkey’s thread “His document the document he recommends”
That thread is obvious a conspiracy, to ALLOW himSELF to abuse internet resource, move unnecessary things endlessly to bury this forum. It’s absolute immoral behavior to crack down others’ chance to PRESENCE here.
Neila9876@htam9876:
You have a thread to recommend little animals too. It has nothing to do with philosophy.
htam9876@neila9876:
You idiot pig head. That thread is obviously to make fun of Donkey only. Jesus, a revolution of physics is underway, piggy even has no time to play with those lovely little animals…
2. Donkey No. 2’s thread “…No one can… think this or that…”
Isn’t that claimed a coffin cover for philosophy, science and human beings? How evil it is. That guy should be sent to the Abnormal Human Beings Research Center and closed there.

Declaration of COISA.
Dec 18, 2025

http://5b0988e595225.cdn.sohucs.com/images/20180420/e3f14ee67e554de3acedf90b132c8b71.gif

However, there are some meaningful and interesting threads in this forum too.
1. This thread. Although it discloses the cruel REALITY of human’s inherent PROPERTY: nothing is correct on the enemy’s side, it’s true philosophy.
2. Why human beings can’t solve the problem they are facing. Piggy’s answer is always that: G* at last AWARE he created something wrong. He has no idea how to sympathize them. At last G* decided to give them up.
Etc.
Especially, the most excellent and wonderful thread is Wasp’s thread “How does one PROVE that SELF is an illusion?” It directly lead to a new era in philosophy and science.

The pig is fair.

0 Replies

Moral Relativity: Where moral values come from?

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know