Message from @The Big Oof
Discord ID: 536681252284268554
But that implies the moral consquences are viewed as minimal
a more accurate phrase for moral subjectivity is moral hypocrisy; you are unable of following through with what you claim to be moral, nevermind in real life, you can't do it in words
its like thinking the main reason people dont murder is because they dont want to be arrested
"What if the only option to worship God is to kill your neighboring village, would you do it?"
the jews did
it's fair to ask me the same thing, though
would you?
No
i mean, they saw it as the only way to survive
@PunishedMuskovy
```The action itself is wrong because it hurts someone else when it doesn't need to
and
let's scroll up
to what I said
"among other things"
```
If God told me to do X id do X
The problem and the reason why I don't invoke the empathy argument
is because it's never
"good enough"
so they massacred the men, children & women of a competing tribe, you wouldn't do that? or in other words, was what they did morally right?
TBH yes hypotheticals are a bad option
Anyways
Unless the hypothetical is smart
Let's get back on track
Yes, it's bad because it causes unnecessary harm
and for other reasons
isn't the very first principle that what is good is what helps you survive?
That is the root of morality, empathy exists to encourage you
1. To work with others.
2. To not hurt others, so that they will want to work you
or to help others
so they will return the favor
So yes, empathy is justified since it was given to us through evolution
for those reasons
Civilizations that are inherently selfish do not last
and individualistic*
Indeed, just look at Mongols
expanded so fast that once Genghis died it immediately fractured
hell, even arguing just being selfish towards their own in group
is bad
ok let me just ask one question
I answered his question and then he left
good
Why is subjective morality good?
or is it bad, just a painful truth
it's not that it's either good or bad
it's that it's reality