Music Banter

Go Back   Music Banter > Community Center > The Lounge > Current Events, Philosophy, & Religion
Register Blogging Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
Welcome to Music Banter Forum! Make sure to register - it's free and very quick! You have to register before you can post and participate in our discussions with over 70,000 other registered members. After you create your free account, you will be able to customize many options, you will have the full access to over 1,100,000 posts.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 10-06-2020, 06:30 PM   #11 (permalink)
jwb
Music Addict
 
jwb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2019
Posts: 2,749
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by elphenor View Post
eating meat is fine but so is eating babies and maybe even moderately retarded adults
If you actually believe so then that's fine (I don't actually believe you do tbh)

I'd chalk this up under a moral system that doesn't come close to representing the values most of us would accept
jwb is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-06-2020, 06:37 PM   #12 (permalink)
stay the |fvck| inside
 
Frownland's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: East of the Southern North American West
Posts: 33,887
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by jwb View Post
My contention is that in order to actually justify it your moral system will not be satisfactory to most people in general
Which implies a universal morality that you already seem to have a strong concept of, and that One True Morality would be...?
__________________
At a time like this, scorching irony, not convincing argument, is needed.

Frownland is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-06-2020, 06:49 PM   #13 (permalink)
jwb
Music Addict
 
jwb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2019
Posts: 2,749
Post

That doesn't imply any sort of objective morality. It implies there are multiple possibly workable moralities that conform roughly to the general popular consensus of what is right. There are also a infinite number of possible moral systems that don't do so.

For example you can easily construct a moral system where child rape is perfectly acceptable but not without deviating strongly from the norms we abide by to the point that invoking "morality" in such a case is virtually useless.

If I issued the same challenge to provide a coherent case that child rape is wrong, it would be easy to do so from multiple angles. You could easily make utilitarian or consequentialist arguments or deontological arguments along those lines.

I only add this constraint that the moral system you will have to construct to justify meat eating will necessarily be less compelling to most of us and more at odds with the values we generally hold because without this constraint it's pointless to talk about morality at all and you can literally justify any and everything.
jwb is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-06-2020, 07:43 PM   #14 (permalink)
stay the |fvck| inside
 
Frownland's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: East of the Southern North American West
Posts: 33,887
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by jwb View Post
the general popular consensus of what is right
And what would that be?
__________________
At a time like this, scorching irony, not convincing argument, is needed.

Frownland is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-06-2020, 08:12 PM   #15 (permalink)
jwb
Music Addict
 
jwb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2019
Posts: 2,749
Default

I mean it's not any one thing it's just that you can make general statements about which moral systems or rules will be more or less compelling to most people based on general trends

I believe morality is ultimately subjective and relative so you can justify eating meat just like you can justify child rape or anything else, theoretically, depending on the moral system. The challenge is how compelling of a case can you make for said moral system to the rest of us. That's a subjective question by its very nature.

Since you seem hung up on this though I can modify the question to can you justify eating meat based on the actual moral system you believe in / abide by rather than some hypothetical system you construct to justify it post hoc.
jwb is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-06-2020, 09:25 PM   #16 (permalink)
stay the |fvck| inside
 
Frownland's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: East of the Southern North American West
Posts: 33,887
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by jwb View Post
can you justify eating meat based on the actual moral system you believe in / abide by
yes
__________________
At a time like this, scorching irony, not convincing argument, is needed.

Frownland is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-07-2020, 03:01 AM   #17 (permalink)
Zum Henker Defätist!!
 
The Batlord's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Beating GNR at DDR and keying Axl's new car
Posts: 43,368
Default

Give us an example, Frown.
__________________
CHINA IS CAPITALIST
The Batlord is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 10-07-2020, 06:38 AM   #18 (permalink)
stay the |fvck| inside
 
Frownland's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: East of the Southern North American West
Posts: 33,887
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by The Batlord View Post
Give us an example, Frown.
no
__________________
At a time like this, scorching irony, not convincing argument, is needed.

Frownland is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-07-2020, 07:05 AM   #19 (permalink)
Born To Be Mild
 
Lisnaholic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: He lives on Love Street
Posts: 3,528
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Frownland View Post
Which implies a universal morality that you already seem to have a strong concept of, and that One True Morality would be...?
If I might interject my own answer to that question, I think I would turn to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights - the One True Morality being, "Don't infringe on another person's human rights." The UDHR was signed by the UN in 1948:

Quote:
Of the 58 members of the United Nations at the time, 48 voted in favour, none against, eight abstained, and two did not vote.
I think a vote like that meets the bar of jwb's "...generally accepted.... popular consensus.." even if some countries/communities haven't followed it since. I suppose that like any moral system, it's there as an ideal and is not necessarily invalidated even when broken.

Unfortunately for this thread, the UDHR doesn't specifically mention eating meat or raping babies; those items must fall into some morally grey area that the UN were reluctant to tackle.

Spoiler for Principle rights under the UDHR:
The Declaration consists of the following:

The preamble sets out the historical and social causes that led to the necessity of drafting the Declaration.
Articles 1–2 established the basic concepts of dignity, liberty, and equality.
Articles 3–5 established other individual rights, such as the right to life and the prohibition of slavery and torture.
Articles 6–11 refer to the fundamental legality of human rights with specific remedies cited for their defence when violated.
Articles 12–17 established the rights of the individual towards the community, including freedom of movement.
Articles 18–21 sanctioned the so-called "constitutional liberties" and spiritual, public, and political freedoms, such as freedom of thought, opinion, religion and conscience, word, and peaceful association of the individual.
Articles 22–27 sanctioned an individual's economic, social and cultural rights, including healthcare. It upholds an expansive right to a standard of living, provides for additional accommodations in case of physical debilitation or disability, and makes special mention of care given to those in motherhood or childhood.[12]
Articles 28–30 established the general means of exercising these rights, the areas in which the rights of the individual cannot be applied, the duty of the individual to society, and the prohibition of the use of rights in contravention of the purposes of the United Nations Organisation.[13]
__________________
Did you ever hear of having more than you wanted? So that you couldn’t want anything else and then started looking for something else to want? It seems like we’re always searching for something to satisfy us, and never finding it. - Susan Eloise Hinton, 1967
Lisnaholic is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 10-07-2020, 08:53 AM   #20 (permalink)
Just Keep Swimming...
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: See signature...
Posts: 5,648
Default

I've already accepted the fact that I'm a horrible person.

*takes a bite of steak*

*spits out the gristle*

Bring me another cow.
__________________
See location...
Plankton is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Similar Threads



© 2003-2020 Advameg, Inc.