Emotion informs the subject matter of debate. It does matter.

No you determine what is best for society as a whole in moral debates

Not on emotions

I think some animals do, such as a dog that lets its owner put a biscuit on its nose

For example law and order

That's good for society as a whole

That takes some willpower, you know

what makes law and order good

Ok but that's not free will

Why not?

I think it's a scale, it's not like binary

Law and order is good because humans who did not care about being civil did not cooperate well with each other

And they died

A dog has less free will than you or me, but it does make decisions based on it's consciousness

*its

so those who felt it was important to care established standards

it seems incorrect to exclude emotion from a moral debate

but i can see why you might disagree

Let's have a moral debate on the death penalty

Someone gets emotional and says it should not happen because human rights bla bla

I say it should happen to a mob boss because he'll operate within prison anyways

So might as well give him the syringe

Which choice is better for society as a whole

I think it's moral if the guilt is proven beyond any doubt

Yes of course

In cases of unforgivable violence

You don't kill maybe innocent people

well there were numerous debates on death penalties around the world and it was found that many people are disgusted by it, so it became law that the practice was no longer enacted

Look everyone is going to use emotions in a debate regardless unless they're psychopaths and cannot feel emotion. However, You cannot make pure emotional statements with nothing to back its utility

Yeah that's retarded

Some people have to die

@מוות שחור#2673 There is a difference between something able to exist, and something being able to be argued for. Obviously, existence precedes reason. And reason never reaches infallible conclusions, it is relative to previous ones, and therefore can at once be totally wrong. Reason and debate exists on a lesser level than emotion: both produce our motivations in the world, but in terms of truth, the comprehension through emotion is capable of a higher level of understanding because it has the capacity to comprehend that which is yet unproven.

Like mob bosses and gang leaders who can operate within prisons

No emotion cannot comprehend what is yet unproven it *assumes* the unproven is proven

That's what makes it retarded

It *assumes* truth

You can assume truth on literally anything

A Muslim can assume truth

A Christian can assume truth

An atheist can assume truth

But sometimes that assumption resembles truth.