Is there such a thing as objective morality?

[Feral_Punctuation]

The one thing stopping me agreeing with the relativists is that suffering/happiness seem intrinsically morally bad and good respectively. It seems almost axiomatic (is that a word?). I'm sure there's something wrong with this idea, but I can't put my finger on it. Would you kindly put your finger on it?

[Trolldor]

The one thing stopping me agreeing with the relativists is that suffering/happiness seem intrinsically morally bad and good respectively. It seems almost axiomatic (is that a word?). I'm sure there's something wrong with this idea, but I can't put my finger on it. Would you kindly put your finger on it?

How long would a species have survived if it had evolved to enjoy suffering?

[Feral_Punctuation]

I think by definition you can't enjoy suffering.

[Trolldor]

I think by definition you can't enjoy suffering.

Who says you can't?

[Feral_Punctuation]

You may well be able to derive pleasure from suffering, but you can't enjoy suffering itself. Otherwise it wouldn't be suffering, it would be pleasure.

[Trolldor]

You may well be able to derive pleasure from suffering, but you can't enjoy suffering itself. Otherwise it wouldn't be suffering, it would be pleasure.

You mean there's nobody out there who derives pleasure from 'acute physical pain' or 'severe psychological distress'?

[Feral_Punctuation]

I classed suffering as any kind of negative emotion (assuming pain is an emotion). I mean suffering can cause pleasure in you, but you wouldn't be enjoying the suffering itself. You'd be enjoying the pleasure caused by it.

[Parrot Face]

Someone going by the name of Melanie said the same thing in another forum. The accompanying graphics were a perfect match.

The character Melanie aka Parrot Face has been posting her non-sense at the TOE forum for nearly 3 years, is there a problem ??

And who are you? and do you post at the TOE too?

And sorry for being off topic, it's only natural to be off topic, when no-one understands a word you are saying...my bad.

Never mind, so be it.

[Coito ergo sum]

The one thing stopping me agreeing with the relativists is that suffering/happiness seem intrinsically morally bad and good respectively. It seems almost axiomatic (is that a word?). I'm sure there's something wrong with this idea, but I can't put my finger on it. Would you kindly put your finger on it?

Except that what makes one person suffer and one person happy can be the same thing. Some people are made happy by murder and rape, others aren't. Some people suffer, others don't. Suffering and happiness are just judgments or reactions to what exists or happens. Saying that things that increase happiness are moral doesn't really tell us anything for certain. It only tells us that based on the assumption that X is good, then it's moral. Well, that's basically just saying that if it's moral it's moral.

[Parrot Face]

I classed suffering as any kind of negative emotion (assuming pain is an emotion). I mean suffering can cause pleasure in you, but you wouldn't be enjoying the suffering itself. You'd be enjoying the pleasure caused by it.

Pleasure brings you pain and vice versa.

[PsychoSerenity]

You may well be able to derive pleasure from suffering, but you can't enjoy suffering itself. Otherwise it wouldn't be suffering, it would be pleasure.

You mean there's nobody out there who derives pleasure from 'acute physical pain' or 'severe psychological distress'?

Well obviously an individual can derive pleasure from an experience, that someone else, or even themselves at a different time, would suffer from. But I think what they are getting pleasure from is not suffering. They may even be suffering and getting pleasure both at the same time - but still they enjoy the pleasure, not the suffering.

[Coito ergo sum]

Many people have derived great pleasure from harming other people. Someone may rape and murder a guy's wife, and that guy might derive immense pleasure from vengeance against he perpetrator, enjoying watching the perpetrator die a slow and painful punishment. Is it moral?

Pain and pleasure as a source of morality is limited and not objective.

[PsychoSerenity]

Many people have derived great pleasure from harming other people. Someone may rape and murder a guy's wife, and that guy might derive immense pleasure from vengeance against he perpetrator, enjoying watching the perpetrator die a slow and painful punishment. Is it moral?

Pain and pleasure as a source of morality is limited and not objective.

But what about when you look at morality within a society, like I did a few posts back?

[Coito ergo sum]

Many people have derived great pleasure from harming other people. Someone may rape and murder a guy's wife, and that guy might derive immense pleasure from vengeance against he perpetrator, enjoying watching the perpetrator die a slow and painful punishment. Is it moral?

Pain and pleasure as a source of morality is limited and not objective.

But what about when you look at morality within a society, like I did a few posts back?

All morality is within a society, unless a person lives on their own in the wilderness. I'm not sure what you mean.

[Feck]

No there isn't.

Topic closed.

I tried that ages ago Leo, they are not listening .