Gimme some Moral Realism arguments

[marshadow]

I need some. Give me them.

 

[BimaxLaser]

 

[Regressive]

use fuckin chatgpt

 

[marshadow]

use fuckin chatgpt

Chatgpt is stupid : (

 

[Regressive]

Chatgpt is stupid : (

Moral realism is the philosophical position that there are objective moral facts or truths that exist independently of human beliefs, feelings, or perspectives. Here are some arguments in support of moral realism:

1. Argument from Moral Experience​

• Premise: We experience moral truths as objective in our everyday lives. When we make moral judgments (e.g., "murder is wrong" or "helping others is good"), we often do so with a sense of their objective truth, as though they are facts to be discovered, not merely subjective preferences.
• Support: Just as we experience the external world as containing objective facts (like the existence of trees or mountains), we also experience moral facts as objective, suggesting that there might be a similar kind of objectivity in the moral realm.

2. Argument from Moral Disagreement​

• Premise: The existence of moral disagreements doesn’t necessarily undermine moral objectivity. Just as there can be disagreements about factual matters (e.g., the best scientific theory), moral disagreements can be understood as people having different perspectives on the same objective moral facts.
• Support: Disagreement is compatible with objective truth; it simply indicates that individuals or cultures might be mistaken or have incomplete knowledge about moral facts, similar to disagreements in science or history.

3. Argument from Moral Progress​

• Premise: Throughout history, societies have made moral progress (e.g., the abolition of slavery, the recognition of women's rights, the acceptance of LGBTQ+ rights). This progress implies that there are moral standards to which we can be held accountable.
• Support: If moral truths were entirely subjective or culturally relative, it would be difficult to make sense of the notion of progress in moral understanding. Moral realism provides a framework for this kind of objective improvement.

4. Argument from Moral Agreement​

• Premise: Many moral values, such as prohibitions against murder or the importance of fairness, are widely shared across different cultures and societies, despite their differences. This suggests that these moral values are not mere social conventions but reflect objective moral truths.
• Support: If there were no objective moral truths, we would not expect such cross-cultural agreement on certain fundamental moral issues.

5. Argument from Evolutionary Biology​

• Premise: Evolutionary biology can explain the development of moral intuitions as adaptive traits that helped humans cooperate and survive. However, this does not imply that moral values are purely subjective or relative. Evolutionary explanations can coexist with moral realism, suggesting that humans are attuned to objective moral facts that promote human flourishing.
• Support: If moral facts were merely evolutionary byproducts with no objective truth, they wouldn't have the same universal appeal across different human societies. Instead, evolution might have selected for accurate recognition of objective moral truths that promote cooperation and social harmony.

6. The Argument from the Role of Moral Terms​

• Premise: The language we use to discuss moral issues implies objectivity. When people talk about right and wrong, they typically treat these terms as if they refer to real properties of actions or behaviors, not just expressions of personal or cultural preference.
• Support: If moral claims were purely subjective, it would be puzzling why people so often use moral language in a way that suggests objective facts, such as asserting that certain actions are wrong in a way that is independent of individual or cultural perspectives.

7. The Argument from Moral Motivation​

• Premise: People are often motivated to act morally because they believe that moral rules or duties apply universally, regardless of personal desires or societal approval. This universal motivation suggests that there is something objective about moral facts.
• Support: If moral realism were false, and moral facts were merely subjective, it would be more difficult to explain why people feel a sense of moral obligation or duty beyond their immediate desires or social conditioning.

8. The Argument from Practical Reasoning​

• Premise: Moral reasoning, when done correctly, seems to aim at discovering objective truths about what is right or wrong, rather than merely expressing subjective preferences or attitudes. If moral realism were false, we would expect moral reasoning to be more like preference or opinion formation.
• Support: The fact that moral arguments can be rationally debated and can lead to better or worse solutions suggests that objective moral truths exist to be discovered.

9. The Argument from the Necessity of a Foundation for Moral Law​

• Premise: In order to explain the binding nature of moral laws, we need to posit objective moral facts that exist independently of human beings. Without such facts, moral laws would have no foundation and would seem arbitrary or merely conventional.
• Support: Just as laws of physics and mathematics are not dependent on human belief, moral laws, if they are to bind us, must also be objective and independent of human opinion.

These arguments aim to support the idea that moral facts exist in a way that is independent of our individual beliefs, emotions, or cultural practices. Critics of moral realism typically counter these arguments with alternative explanations for moral experience, progress, and disagreement, but moral realism remains a significant and influential position in ethical philosophy.

 

[upcoming gooner]

you should thing about this while gooning for enlightment

 

[marshadow]

you should thing about this while gooning for enlightment

I DONT WANNA GOON!!!!

 

[Harold O'brien]

go back to reddit

 

[marshadow]

go back to reddit

I dont use reddit bud.

 

[Harold O'brien]

I dont use reddit bud.

redditor energy

 

[marshadow]

redditor energy

How exactly do you plan on justifying your claim that I give off “redditor energy”? Do you not realize “energy” as a social tool is completely unjustified and lacking empirical backing?