Subjective morality

Subjective morality
A 2011 QualiaSoup video still depicting William Craig as an objective morality proponent and a generic Jane Doe as a subjective morality sider. [1]
In terminology, subjective morality, as compared to objective morality, is []

The following are related quotes:

“It is no more ‘just’ to punish an assassin than a tiger.”
— Francois Broussais (c.1834), paraphrase of fatatist views of Spinoza, Hobbes, or Priestley [2]

“On atheism objective right and wrong cannot exist. It is not morally wrong to torture pets, to rape, abuse the weaker, or to perform experiments on human subjects. To dislike these things is merely a matter of personal taste as there is no binding transcendent law that only god could establish. But no atheist can live consistently with such as view, and Dawkins himself illustrates this by saying that evil does not exist. However, he then calls faith a ‘great evil’ and goes on to call the biblical god ‘vindictive’, ‘unjust’, and ‘petty, words that entail moral status.”
— James Bishop (c.2014) (Ѻ)(Ѻ)

Morals and ethics are still subjective, which means I can still feel that being pulled over by the police is wrong. However, if a person wants to live in that society, they will have to adapt their ethics to society’s standards or face the consequences. We can debate if a society’s standards are actually moral, but that's a different conversation.”
— TheFishDude100 (2015), “Comments to Atheist Sin Problem” (Ѻ), c. Jun 15

See also
Maxwell on the soul

1. Anon. (2011). “Morality 3: Objectivity and Oughtness” (Ѻ), QualiaSoup, Nov 6.
2. Thomson, Ann. (2008). Bodies of Thought: Science, Religion, and the Soul in the Early Enlightenment (pg. 226). Oxford University Press.

Further reading
● Anon. (2004). “Objective vs Subjective Morality” (Ѻ), New Burkeian, Blogspot, Dec 5.

TDics icon ns

More pages