this post was submitted on 17 Oct 2023
578 points (89.7% liked)

Funny: Home of the Haha

5721 readers
1223 users here now

Welcome to /c/funny, a place for all your humorous and amusing content.

Looking for mods! Send an application to Stamets!

Our Rules:

  1. Keep it civil. We're all people here. Be respectful to one another.

  2. No sexism, racism, homophobia, transphobia or any other flavor of bigotry. I should not need to explain this one.

  3. Try not to repost anything posted within the past month. Beyond that, go for it. Not everyone is on every site all the time.


Other Communities:

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] SCB@lemmy.world -2 points 1 year ago (2 children)

One pretty consistent moral among societies is that needlessly causing harm is considered wrong.

The problem with this as your moral compass is that "needless" can mean whatever you want it to mean. It's not actually a guideline to any specific behavior

[–] Kedly@lemm.ee 5 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Thats a semantics arguement to a generalized statement which is special kind of stupid. I gave a detailed response to further explain why this applies to meat eating and even ended with saying we havent reached a point in society where its fair to judge others for not abandoning eating meat. Just because society has always done things a certain way, doesnt make it right or moral, slavery was the NORM until around the last couple 100 years, and now its near universally considered atrocious. Meat eating from once living animals will likely be the next once norm, now evil, societal concept. But we arent there yet

[–] SCB@lemmy.world -5 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

I gave a detailed response to further explain why this applies to meat eating

Meat eating from once living animals will likely be the next once norm, now evil

The subjectivity of these takes is my entire point.

[–] Kedly@lemm.ee 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Damn near everything is subjective dumbass, its why theres so many societal problems that are still around even though they've plagued us for centuries

[–] SCB@lemmy.world -2 points 1 year ago (2 children)

The entire purpose of a moral compass is to not be subjective. I didn't make the claim that everyone should, or does, live by one set guideline. You did

[–] Kedly@lemm.ee 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Morality to some degree HAS to be subjective as its based on the time period it is formed. Society progresses for a reason

[–] SCB@lemmy.world -2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

"My rights end where yours begin" is not subjective, as one easy example.

[–] Kedly@lemm.ee -1 points 1 year ago (1 children)
[–] SCB@lemmy.world 0 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

That's not universal across all societies.

Historically, getting away with murder has been a privilege certain classes received.

[–] Kedly@lemm.ee 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

And your fucking example is? Lmao. Im done with you

[–] SCB@lemmy.world 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

A lord who has set their rights over serfs to be total still believes my example.

[–] Kedly@lemm.ee 0 points 1 year ago
[–] ParsnipWitch@feddit.de 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

The idea that morality is entirely based on subjectivity is your personal opinion. You can't use it as if it was a fact and ground your argument upon it like you could do with an actual fact.

[–] SCB@lemmy.world -1 points 1 year ago

This is just totally missing the plot.

[–] papertowels@lemmy.one 1 points 1 year ago

Isn't all morality subjective, rendering your comment moot?

Generally accepted morals certainly can be guidelines for behaviors.