Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Why Our Children Don't Think There Are Moral Facts

opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 165 posts

Re: Why Our Children Don't Think There Are Moral Facts

#31

Post by icebraining »

javert wrote: post #24
ikken wrote: post #17

The article doesn't provide anything to back the claim that moral opinions may be universally, non-subjectively true. The cartoonist example is deeply flawed. We're outraged because this event violated our deepest beliefs and values we hold dear, not because it violated some universal eternal moral law. We also know that there were people that weren't saddened by this event too. This is the problem I have with many p…

I'm not defending the article, but you are wrong. Stealing from others is bad if it decreases your pleasure and it is good if it increases your pleasure. That is objective.

How is that objective? Why is something bad if it decreases your pleasure?

Re: Why Our Children Don't Think There Are Moral Facts

#32

Post by evincarofautumn »

Sure, it’s a mistake to treat facts and beliefs as disjoint. But moral relativism is the only honest position—we do not know what’s morally right, nor do we know whether right things even exist, nor can we necessarily prove these things even though we believe them. So we pragmatically follow evidence and try to treat people decently in an ad-hoc fashion.

More to the point, if a teacher teaches kids any specific absolute moral system, many of their parents will be upset with it. So the school system only allows teachers to teach what is essentially agnosticism—the absence of a moral position.

The examples from the article can all be dismissed by simple descriptivism:

> If it’s not true that it’s wrong to murder a cartoonist with whom one disagrees, then how can we be outraged?

A person can be outraged for any reason they want. It happens that this kind of thing outrages a lot of people.

> If there are no truths about what is good or valuable or right, how can we prosecute people for crimes against humanity?

We can, and do, do so arbitrarily. It happens that a lot of people agree on what “crimes against humanity” entail.

> If it’s not true that all humans are created equal, then why vote for any political system that doesn’t benefit you over others?

Humans are occasionally altruistic for some reason.

Isn’t it more interesting to investigate the reasons for why so many humans believe these things than to endlessly conduct the same debates about truth, provability, and knowledge?

Re: Why Our Children Don't Think There Are Moral Facts

#34

Post by kenjackson »

savanaly wrote: post #13

I mean they are facts in that most everyone agrees on them, which is one usage of the word "fact". But they're not facts in the same way as "the sun will rise tomorrow" or "2 + 2 = 4" (which those statements themselves are two different types of fact also!).

The sun will rise tomorrow is an opinion/speculation. The sun rose today is a fact.

Re: Why Our Children Don't Think There Are Moral Facts

#35

Post by bequanna »

>Fact: Something that is true about a subject and can be tested or proven. Opinion: What someone thinks, feels, or believes. Hoping that this set of definitions was a one-off mistake ...

Two decades ago, when I was in elementary school, we were taught pretty much the exact same thing. If someone states something is a fact, demand proof. And for children, this is good enough. When they grow up to be pedantic associate professors of philisophy, they may feel free to expand on the above definitions.

Re: Why Our Children Don't Think There Are Moral Facts

#36

Post by sandworm »

The OP's mistake is to characterize all "moral facts" as simple binary answers. Cheating = bad. Killing = wrong. Those are too simple. That they are labeled opinion does not imply that there aren't any not-simple moral facts.

"Cheating undermines meritocracies and is therefor frowned upon by those in control of such."

I'd say that qualifies as a moral fact and most all would call it an accurate description of a state of affairs, a fact.

"All men are created equal" is not a fact, or even an opinion imho. It is a hope, a dream of people trying to describe an ideal state of affairs. That it isn't a "fact" doesn't mean that it cannot be something to believe in and strive for.

Re: Why Our Children Don't Think There Are Moral Facts

#37

Post by cjbprime »

spiritplumber wrote: post #11

There are facts. There are moral positions. What are moral facts?

The most plausible definition I can think of involves stating your metaethics (e.g. utilitarianism) and then showing evidence that there is a reliably-reached conclusion for a claim under those ethics.

Like, I don't know: "Under utilitarianism, if you are comparatively rich, it is wrong not to attempt to relieve the suffering of people in extreme poverty, because you can do so very cheaply in comparison to the happiness gain you could cause for other people as rich as you". I'd say that's a moral fact.

Re: Why Our Children Don't Think There Are Moral Facts

#40

Post by icebraining »

sandworm wrote: post #36

The OP's mistake is to characterize all "moral facts" as simple binary answers. Cheating = bad. Killing = wrong. Those are too simple. That they are labeled opinion does not imply that there aren't any not-simple moral facts. "Cheating undermines meritocracies and is therefor frowned upon by those in control of such." I'd say that qualifies as a moral fact and most all would call it an accurate description of a state…

"Cheating undermines meritocracies and is therefor frowned upon by those in control of such."

I'd say that qualifies as a moral fact

What makes that a moral fact? What's the moral part?

Post reply on HN