Should morality be objective or subjective?

Question

What would the two worlds look like, one in which morality is objective, the other in which morality is subjective.

Thank you for your thoughtful answers.

Super Atheist - Do you have any evidence or studies to demonstrate that, when left to their own devices, humans are inherently good?
I have plenty of information to prove the opposite is true. Or you do really think the world is happy place filled with nice happy people?

Answer 1

I disagree with some of my fellow atheists here.

Moral truths can be objectively known in the same way that scientific truths can be.

Morality is the practice of living so as to enhance the happiness of other sentient beings. These questions can be examined rationally , and using the evidence we have available. The basic moral axioms we have, such as the Golden Rule and Kant's categorical imperative (while not infallible) provide a generally universal platform to lauch our reason.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Categorical_imperative

Where we get problems is when people use unquestionable religious texts and traditions as their basis. Since there are several of these, and numerous supposedly authoritative interpretations from each we either get into endless unresolvable disputes about whose text/interpretation is "right" in an absolute sense, or agree to disagree in the name of harmony. The latter approach is called "moral relativism".

A world in which morality is subjective is one based on multiple traditions immunised against reasonable enquiry and criticism (and universally approved elements like compassion). It is absurd as a world where all scientific hypotheses are treated with equal weight, irrespective of their inherent conflict with objective evidence.

Just as there is bad science and better science, there is bad and better morality. And as in science, just because a question is not completely finalised does not mean that we don't know anything.

Answer 2

The world we live in is the world where morality is subjective. Morality is often thought of as objective, but being that there are so many views of what is "moral". There is not standing, measurable evidence of morality. What is taught and is believed of as moral can differ greatly between different cultures.

Example: In some tribal communities a girl is married off at her first menstrual cycle- for some that is as young as 10 years old. In the United states this is called child molestation and is deemed immoral. In some cultures the blood line is ONLY traced through matralinial OR patralineal lines. This allows marriages between individuals who are genetically related via the line which is considered. Siblings and first cousins included. That is considered immoral here as well. In some cultures it is highly moral to kill people of opposing faiths- as history and the news are always recounting.
In a world where morality was measurable and indisputable we would not see such striking differences in thought. There would not be tap dancing around trying not to offend anothers ideals of morals or going to war because you vehemently disagree with them

Answer 3

Morality being objective or subjective is always from the point of view of the person who has to follow the moral values.

When the code of conduct/ moral values are clear to the person , he wants to follow them, he feels the moral values are objective.

When the person wants to deviate from the moral values he starts to find reasons for not following the moral code of conduct, That is when the if's and but's come in . And the code of conduct becomes subjective.

i.e. it is to be followed , but not in this situation.

What does ISLAM teach.
Book of the sayings of the last prophet Muhammad s.a.w.

Sahih Al Bhukhari Hadith
Narrated An Numan bin Bashir - 1-49

I heard Allah's Apostle saying, 'Both legal and illegal things are evident but in between them there are doubtful (suspicious) things
and most of the people have no knowledge about them. So whoever saves himself from these suspicious things saves his religion and his honor. And whoever indulges in these suspicious things is like a shepherd who grazes (his animals) near the Hima (private pasture) of someone else and at any moment he is liable to get in it. (O people!) Beware! Every king has a Hima and the Hima of Allah on the earth is His illegal (forbidden) things. Beware! There is a piece of flesh in the body if it becomes good (reformed) the whole body becomes good but if it gets spoilt the whole body gets spoilt and that is the heart.

Answer 4

The world in which morality is subjective would look just like the one we've got--because it is.

This hypothetical world in which morality is objective would probably be a lot cleaner, calmer and more efficient because everyone would always know exactly the right thing to do. Justice would be administered with perfect fairness. There would never be any gray areas in behavior. Sounds a little dull.

Answer 5

Morality is a concept essential for regulating interpersonal transactions and collective behaviour in a society, to ensure health of individuals as well as healthy living in the society! Morality could be viewed as having two major elements: Constant Values (for all times, in all contexts, among all types of people and societies), and, Contextual&Trendy Values. Morality therefore is relative, and to a large extent, objective, the values tested against the gains that society would obtain in terms of peace and happiness and good health all around for all members, or at any rate for the majority of members! -- These are the thoughts i have to offer you, briefly, in response to the very thought provoking question, which may perhaps be looking for more elaborate and explanatory responses!

Answer 6

If morality was objective, the world would probably look something like North Korea or Afghanistan. The only way to keep morality 'objective' would be enforcement of morality.

Morality IS subjective, and such a world would look like the world actually does, i.e. subtly different everywhere you go...

As Mark (below) says:

"For example, in biblical times, a homosexual or woman pastoring a church of Christians would be stoned...today some, who have twisted the Gospel of Christ, embrace it."

There is your 'objectivist', someone who believes in killing others for not following his religion.

Answer 7

Morality can only be objective if there is a static basis or fundamental metric by which to measure it.

For many, that basis is the Law and commands of Jesus Christ in the Bible.

For others, it is whatever modern society thinks is right today. For example, in biblical times, a homosexual or woman pastoring a church of Christians would be stoned...today some, who have twisted the Gospel of Christ, embrace it. The morality for these people are like the waves tossed in the sea. Ultimately, for these people, too, morality is subjective.

So, we do have both "worlds" already on planet earth.

Answer 8

It's both: we have an instinctive drive to be moral (and to not be immoral) which come down to a desire to be nice/helpful to others. That's pretty objective.

What we DO about that drive, and how we satisfy it, is left to our subjective interpretation of what's best.

It's similar to hunger: the drive to eat is there, but there are zillions of ways to satisfy it - including resisting it because we're dieting, etc.

CD

Answer 9

If morality is objective by whose definition of Morality are we using? each culture has different idea's of what is moral and what isn't.

Answer 10

Lord Krishna in Bhagavad Gita said, "Chathur Varnyam Maya Srishtam", meaning all the four castes in society are created by me. Brahmins, the intellectuals or thoughtful visioneries, The Kshatriyas, the Ruling community, The Vaisyates, the artists and leading traders and the Shudarites, the Common Men or the General Masses.

Here one link into explaining some more into the details of four races not just with the birth like white or black or Brahmin or Kshathrite, but with the attitude and activities performed in life.

http://uk.blog.360.yahoo.com/blog-_RsR1gw7er8vskAxZZPnsvuokQ6mkyrIYA--?cq=1&p=14

Now for the people practicing the Real Brahminical Values, they do not need any objective or subjective or Victorian Value concepts as they do have this innate Values instilled in them for the welfare of All.

For the ones practicing the Real Kshathrites themes in life also have Inner Guidance that in Welfare of Masses lie their successful existence. So perhaps for them Subjective Value Systems are enough.

And for the ones practicing the Real Values of Vysyates likes of Artists and Leading Traders/Business men a mixture of Subjective and Objective Value system is okay as they also understand the importance for maintaing a lively society for their own performance and knows the importance for maintaing a minimum decorum.

For the Common Men, the Regular General Masses who perform the Values of Shudraites who are unable to imagine of the larger consequences of their own action for the future, perhaps require absolutely Objective Value Systems clearly defined.

As you may be aware that the same action outwardly seen can be of either with good intention benefitting many or also be with bad intention to hurt many.

So after thinking of all the probable pros and consequences of all actions the Value Systems need to be emerged for particular actions. Any outwardly seen good action with bad intention can be used to hurt many. So the care, Rulers, the Kshathrites should take is to reduce harmful effects of actions done with bad intetion. Of course if its with good intention, since it benefits the society, there won't be much complaints. So the objective Value System for the Common Men who can not think of much of the benefits of others should be formulated in such a manner that bad impacts are reduced even if performed with bad intention.

Since as you say, the Majority seems to be the common general masses who are not long term thought oriented and more self centered without much care for others unless invoked with a VALUE concept, the only solution is perhaps with the Objectivism with VALUE system.

Perhaps with a Real meaning Verified and Aligned Link within with THAT Ultimate Entity (VALUE) and a translated meaning ie Truth, Righteousness, Peace, Love and Non - Violence (Understandable and Objective) for the common Masses.

Visions for the thoughtful, Sages, Rishies, Appostels and Prophets. And Smrithies (Manu Smrithi), Word of God, Bible, Quran and Laws for the Common Masses for the maintenance of a Social Decorum and running of a Civilized World with lesser violence.

Studies done into the genes and genetical aspects of Natural Noble Values inherent in the people also perhaps confirms this thing that, God has created only lesser people blessed with such genes of nobilities and for majority a constant conditioning outwardly only can sustain a delusive positive thinking with noble qualities helping the world to be run in a better manner

Any way since different kinds of laws for different ones since may seem to hurt the present day ordinary man, Objectivity with VALUE systems seems a better proposal as majority only understands only objectivity more. Any way the thoughtful shall find ways to keep their Real VALUE system somehow intact with their Natural Instincts irrespective of whatever the Objective System.

Here one link with some thoughts

http://uk.blog.360.yahoo.com/blog-_RsR1gw7er8vskAxZZPnsvuokQ6mkyrIYA--?cq=1&p=10

Here the Sathya Sai Thought for the Day,

Devotion to the Lord is really a form of discipline for reaching the goal. The seeker should not stop with the acquisition of devotion, nor pay so much attention to the love he has for the Lord, but rather on the love and grace the Lord bestows on him. One should always be eager to find out what behaviour and what actions will be most pleasing to the Lord. Inquire about that, yearn for that, and carry out the things that will secure that objective. But people do not generally follow this ideal. They pay more attention to the love that the devotee has for the Lord and, in the process, do not pay much attention to the righteousness and the work that the Lord appreciates. Whatever a devotee does, plans or observes should draw down the grace of God. One should not be subject to one’s own will but be in accordance with His Will. The devotee should test every thought and feeling on the touchstone of the Lord’s declared preferences.

- BABA

http://www.radiosai.org/pages/thought.asp

SAI RAM