this post was submitted on 22 Feb 2024
700 points (94.0% liked)

Memes

45704 readers
1197 users here now

Rules:

  1. Be civil and nice.
  2. Try not to excessively repost, as a rule of thumb, wait at least 2 months to do it if you have to.

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Flumpkin@slrpnk.net 1 points 9 months ago (1 children)

You misrepresent or misunderstood my argument

[–] Dasus@lemmy.world 2 points 9 months ago (1 children)

No such thing as objective morality exists or can exist.

It's contextual, ie subjective.

No need to equicovate.

[–] Flumpkin@slrpnk.net 1 points 9 months ago

I'm not arguing for "one single 100% objective morality". I'm arguing for social progress - maybe towards one of an infinite number of meaningful, functioning moralities that are objectively better than what we have now. Like optimizing or approximating a function that we know has no precise solution.

And "objective" can't mean some kind of ground truth by e.g. a divine creator. But you can have objective statistical measurements for example about happiness or suffering, or have an objective determination if something is likely to lead to extinction or not.