So good and evil are subjective due to an inability to objectively view things and fairly quantify them?
I’m glad we agree.
I might’ve said this a while ago.
Like I said, I’m not interested in the complications so I didn’t read it.
heh there might be a lot of words in this entire thread. me and bargain have been arguing for ages. I would not recommend attempting to read it.
1 Like
I don’t have the attention span to attempt it xD
But my general take is that good and evil are fundamentally subjective based on the fact that no human being is purely objective and never can/will be.
1 Like
legit
good and evil are subjective
period
1 Like
Prove it.
Humans determine good and evil. They are concepts. Humans are not objective.
I counter that humans do not determine good and evil, they only perceive its existence and attempt to measure it.
Good and evil are objective values that can be measured, it is simply impossible to measure them using the current tools.
Also imma stop talking for a while because of this:
How does one measure it then? And how can you prove that your understanding of that measurement isn’t biased?
If y’all want a definitive answer, the deepest roots of philosophy have the answer for you, and it’s that everything is subjective.
The branch that deals with these things is called epistemology, formally it’s about knowledge and stuff, but basically it deals with the most basic principles of reasoning.
If you think about it, how can you know that anything could be objective, even the most obvious of things? Yes, you could say that you see something above you, call it the sky, realise it has a colour, call that colour blue and proclaim “ah, the sky is blue”. But is it tho?
How can you be sure that what you’re seeing and sensing is true?
Then it comes round to dealing with how you can’t even be sure causality is true, because it might very well all be a lie.
So all discourse is held under certain assumptions, they are mostly easily acceptable by everyone and boil down to “causality exist”, “the world you can sense around you is real” etc. and matters concluded under those assumptions are then called objective, because they’re the best we can get, because without them we might as well not argue, as it can all be for nothing and you can never be sure about anything.
So, everything is technically subjective, what we call objective are matters concluded under the most baseline assumptions without which any discourse would be pointless, and since I’m not in the mood to argue about this under even the most baseline assumption imma just drop the universal answer to absolutely everything that ever was and call it a day.
Fylosofi
2 Likes
ez
firstly you got soldiers in a war
one side kills 10000 soldiers on the other side. the side that killed 10000 soldiers has their general population praising and venerating the military.
meanwhile the side that lost 10000 soldiers loathes their opposing side and wants to get back at them. Claiming they are evil and horrible
not greatest explanation but meh
crud danny is typing an essay
1 Like
People have said stuff, so I can talk again.
One cannot measure it, I directly state that it’s impossible. And what’s more, one cannot measure it accurately without omniscience. However, they are objective.
This is incorrect, because of a simple detail. Just because it is impossible to perfectly objectively know something without omniscience does not mean that all things are subjective. Rather, all things have an objective value that can be perceived subjectively.
Each soldier has an innate value of around 1.
One side kills 10000 soldiers. If there are x soldiers doing the killing, then each soldier loses on average 10000/x value. They now have a value of about 1-(10000/x).
But we’re not done yet.
Say we have a soldier George. George has a value of 3.235 (random number I came up with). This is because he has a family, and friends, and has done ___ and ____ and ____ which raise his value, but he has also done ____ when he was young and stupid and ____ which reduces his value, giving a total of 3.235.
George killed 2 men.
The first was Henry. Henry is a good man. He has a family, and friends, and has done ____ and ____ which raise his value, but he also did ____ once when he was poor and homeless. His total value is 2.157.
The second is Bob. Bob is not a good guy. He’s a single man with a penchant for violence. Without any family or friends who increase his value (a person with family and friends matters to someone else, thus their value increases) and several crimes committed throughout his life, he has a value of -5.316.
Thus, George has a value of 3.235 - 2.157 - (-5.316) = 6.394. He is thus objectively good.
Now the problem is of course that I’m oversimplifying things. This is because I’m not omniscient nor capable of recreating a perfect simulation of this situation. But this is the general principle.
How is it objective if you can’t objectively assess and define it?
Thus, the statement Bob is good can be objectively measured by an omniscient being.
Your average homo sapiens is not capable of that.
But isn’t that subjective based on what you determine to be good, as well as your understanding of the entity Bob? Not only that, but you claim good and evil only to be measurable by an omniscient being, of which no human is. So, simply put, there is not possible way to objectively measure good and evil due to a complete lack of consistent measure to go off of (a template), when every being capable of determining such a template is fundamentally incapable of being truly objective.
motherfucker I hate it when the quote just dies
1 Like
that’s your general principal from one point of view
there are multiple points of view that can easily use your formula
even then it aint accurate
1 Like
At this point we’re just arguing over what objective and subjective mean, so I’m just going to agree to disagree on that part.
Kinda confused on what you’re trying to say… could you elaborate somehow?
I’ll say what I meant by all of that. I’m saying that it’s possible to measure good and evil perfectly, if you knew everything.
good and evil are subjective because different points of view perceive different types of good and evil
1 Like