What is moral truth and who gets to decide what it is?

[K9Buck]

Here is something I found on the topic that I found insightful.

Moral Truth

Moral Truth – The Ultimate Judge
When it comes to moral truth, we’ve all heard the relativist mantra, “Who are you to judge?” Frank Beckwith responded powerfully when challenged at a recent presentation: “I certainly do have a right to make moral judgments. I am a rational person who is aware of certain fundamental principles of logical and moral reasoning. I think I’m qualified. Who would you rather have judge, animals? Your claim that I have no right to make moral judgments is itself a judgment about me. Your claim, therefore, is self-refuting.”

Anyone who says you should not judge has already made a moral judgment about you, namely that you are wrong for judging others. Next time someone says, “Who are you to judge?” you might reply by asking, “Who are you to ask the question, who are you to judge?” If someone says, “You should not make moral judgments,” ask a simple question: “Is that your morality?” If so, “Then why are you forcing your version of moral truth on me?”

 

[Mousterian]

Morality is a cultural construct, and, as such, is totally subjective.
One has only to consider a powerful cultural taboo like cannibalism. This taboo makes no sense at all, from a practical viewpoint. It is a total waste of a valuable resource, and has been routinely practised in many cultures.
But, in our society, anyone discovered to have indulged would be roundly condemned by all.
This dissonance in moral values pervades all societies, and we are as susceptible to incongruous judgments as any other.

 

[there4eyeM]

"Moral truth" is a construct of human thought and language. Any individual decides, though usually the choice(s) of his/her society are docilely accepted.

 

[Mac1958]

Here is something I found on the topic that I found insightful.

Moral Truth

Moral Truth – The Ultimate Judge
When it comes to moral truth, we’ve all heard the relativist mantra, “Who are you to judge?” Frank Beckwith responded powerfully when challenged at a recent presentation: “I certainly do have a right to make moral judgments. I am a rational person who is aware of certain fundamental principles of logical and moral reasoning. I think I’m qualified. Who would you rather have judge, animals? Your claim that I have no right to make moral judgments is itself a judgment about me. Your claim, therefore, is self-refuting.”

Anyone who says you should not judge has already made a moral judgment about you, namely that you are wrong for judging others. Next time someone says, “Who are you to judge?” you might reply by asking, “Who are you to ask the question, who are you to judge?” If someone says, “You should not make moral judgments,” ask a simple question: “Is that your morality?” If so, “Then why are you forcing your version of moral truth on me?”

Your thread title asks "who gets to decide what it is?", so I'll assume you mean who (a) defines it and (b) enforces it. In a "free" country - one that votes for its "leaders" rather than having their leadership imposed on them - it's ultimately the people en masse who make these decisions based upon their voting choices. Dangerous, of course, because of the manipulation and corruption inherent in the process that can bring destructive, immoral people to power, and worse, keep them there.

Between individuals, I don't think a "Moral Truth" - I have a problem with the word Truth, since it now means little more than "stuff I agree with" - is ever going to be universal. So, judge me all you want, feel free to speak to me the way you want based on your judgement of me. I don't care. It's when you take some kind of action that is based on that judgement that you're going to get my attention. And that's where we circle back to laws and societal expectations based on our culture.
.

 

[K9Buck]

Here is something I found on the topic that I found insightful.

Moral Truth

Moral Truth – The Ultimate Judge
When it comes to moral truth, we’ve all heard the relativist mantra, “Who are you to judge?” Frank Beckwith responded powerfully when challenged at a recent presentation: “I certainly do have a right to make moral judgments. I am a rational person who is aware of certain fundamental principles of logical and moral reasoning. I think I’m qualified. Who would you rather have judge, animals? Your claim that I have no right to make moral judgments is itself a judgment about me. Your claim, therefore, is self-refuting.”

Anyone who says you should not judge has already made a moral judgment about you, namely that you are wrong for judging others. Next time someone says, “Who are you to judge?” you might reply by asking, “Who are you to ask the question, who are you to judge?” If someone says, “You should not make moral judgments,” ask a simple question: “Is that your morality?” If so, “Then why are you forcing your version of moral truth on me?”

Your thread title asks "who gets to decide what it is?", so I'll assume you mean who (a) defines it and (b) enforces it. In a "free" country - one that votes for its "leaders" rather than having their leadership imposed on them - it's ultimately the people en masse who make these decisions based upon their voting choices. Dangerous, of course, because of the manipulation and corruption inherent in the process that can bring destructive, immoral people to power, and worse, keep them there.

Between individuals, I don't think a "Moral Truth" - I have a problem with the word Truth, since it now means little more than "stuff I agree with" - is ever going to be universal. So, judge me all you want, feel free to speak to me the way you want based on your judgement of me. I don't care. It's when you take some kind of action that is based on that judgement that you're going to get my attention. And that's where we circle back to laws and societal expectations based on our culture.
.

I presume that you don't believe in a creator, is that right?

 

[Mac1958]

Here is something I found on the topic that I found insightful.

Moral Truth

Moral Truth – The Ultimate Judge
When it comes to moral truth, we’ve all heard the relativist mantra, “Who are you to judge?” Frank Beckwith responded powerfully when challenged at a recent presentation: “I certainly do have a right to make moral judgments. I am a rational person who is aware of certain fundamental principles of logical and moral reasoning. I think I’m qualified. Who would you rather have judge, animals? Your claim that I have no right to make moral judgments is itself a judgment about me. Your claim, therefore, is self-refuting.”

Anyone who says you should not judge has already made a moral judgment about you, namely that you are wrong for judging others. Next time someone says, “Who are you to judge?” you might reply by asking, “Who are you to ask the question, who are you to judge?” If someone says, “You should not make moral judgments,” ask a simple question: “Is that your morality?” If so, “Then why are you forcing your version of moral truth on me?”

Your thread title asks "who gets to decide what it is?", so I'll assume you mean who (a) defines it and (b) enforces it. In a "free" country - one that votes for its "leaders" rather than having their leadership imposed on them - it's ultimately the people en masse who make these decisions based upon their voting choices. Dangerous, of course, because of the manipulation and corruption inherent in the process that can bring destructive, immoral people to power, and worse, keep them there.

Between individuals, I don't think a "Moral Truth" - I have a problem with the word Truth, since it now means little more than "stuff I agree with" - is ever going to be universal. So, judge me all you want, feel free to speak to me the way you want based on your judgement of me. I don't care. It's when you take some kind of action that is based on that judgement that you're going to get my attention. And that's where we circle back to laws and societal expectations based on our culture.
.

I presume that you don't believe in a creator, is that right?

I'm doubtful. I think it's up to us to deal with this mess.
.

 

[Divine Wind]

Morality is a cultural construct, and, as such, is totally subjective.
One has only to consider a powerful cultural taboo like cannibalism. This taboo makes no sense at all, from a practical viewpoint. It is a total waste of a valuable resource, and has been routinely practised in many cultures.
But, in our society, anyone discovered to have indulged would be roundly condemned by all.
This dissonance in moral values pervades all societies, and we are as susceptible to incongruous judgments as any other.

As social animals, "morality" is more than cultural constructs but also genetic. Look as simian troops for examples. Obviously a gene for murderous psychopathic rages would quickly decimate a chimp troop or human tribe. Hence, why those genetics are not common.

 

[fncceo]

"What is moral truth and who gets to decide what it is?"

I do, obviously.

 

[Taz]

There's no such thing as a moral truth, so nobody gets to decide, not even fncceo.

 

[fncceo]

Well ... see ... you SAY that.

 

[Bonzi]

If you are a believer in God, I suppose your moral code comes from whatever God you believe in or worship.

That being said, most of us have an instinctive idea of what is right or wrong. Or perhaps it's born out of what our parents taught us when we were young. Not sure.

Ravi in the Flame Zone posted something about how babies are hard wired with some sort of moral code. I have not read the article... so...

All that being said, I do believe we all know what is right or wrong deep down.
We do "wrong" when we feel like we have an excuse or some justifiable reason for it that we keep telling ourselves.

 

[SeaGal]

Matthew 7:1 may be the most misused verse in the Bible. That verse with the following two speaks to hypocrisy on a personal level...a personal moral truth/code. It is not advocating -'anything goes', 'if it feels good do it'...or to keep silent when faced with unethical behavior. We make judgments about other people all the time - when we choose our friends, when we defend the weak or vulnerable, when we sense danger from another person, when we stand up to bullies etc. etc.

Universal moral truth (in contrast to personal morality) is generally enforced through law. Some of which is contained within the Ten Commandments...bearing false witness, theft, killing...but accepted by civilized society as a way of protecting members of that society - atheist, agnostic or religious.

We are free to live our lives according to our own version of a moral truth as long as it falls within the law of the land. We are not free of criticism. We are not free to use our own version of a moral truth to cause harm to someone else. For example - cannibalism. No, you cannot eat your neighbors leg - but you are free to eat your own. (though most folks may think you a little strange for doing so)

Moral relativism is fine for individuals as long as it does not impact others - but moral absolutism is absolutely necessary for the survival of a society and its weaker members. Western law is moral absolutism with caveats - not perfect, but it's working pretty well.

 

[Mikeoxenormous]

Here is something I found on the topic that I found insightful.

Moral Truth

Moral Truth – The Ultimate Judge
When it comes to moral truth, we’ve all heard the relativist mantra, “Who are you to judge?” Frank Beckwith responded powerfully when challenged at a recent presentation: “I certainly do have a right to make moral judgments. I am a rational person who is aware of certain fundamental principles of logical and moral reasoning. I think I’m qualified. Who would you rather have judge, animals? Your claim that I have no right to make moral judgments is itself a judgment about me. Your claim, therefore, is self-refuting.”

Anyone who says you should not judge has already made a moral judgment about you, namely that you are wrong for judging others. Next time someone says, “Who are you to judge?” you might reply by asking, “Who are you to ask the question, who are you to judge?” If someone says, “You should not make moral judgments,” ask a simple question: “Is that your morality?” If so, “Then why are you forcing your version of moral truth on me?”

What is moral truth and who gets to decide what it is?

GOD......

 

[Bonzi]

Another case that no matter what we tell ourselves, we instinctively know what is moral - what is "right or wrong"...

Most say that premarital sex between consenting adults is a normal expression of natural desires. Yet hardly any are comfortable telling anyone, especially their own children, how many people they have slept with themselves. (From the book, "What We Can't Not Know")

 

[Moonglow]

Another case that no matter what we tell ourselves, we instinctively know what is moral - what is "right or wrong"...

Most say that premarital sex between consenting adults is a normal expression of natural desires. Yet hardly any are comfortable telling anyone, especially their own children, how many people they have slept with themselves. (From the book, "What We Can't Not Know")

I don't mind telling my past history....Most people think I'm lying about it or exaggerating but that is their opinion, still doesn't change the past..

 

[cnm]

Morals are community norms, they will vary with communities. Valid morals assist or enhance the survival of the community. One can see from this that communities decide morals and a community's survival determines their truth.

 

[Mikeoxenormous]

Another case that no matter what we tell ourselves, we instinctively know what is moral - what is "right or wrong"...

Most say that premarital sex between consenting adults is a normal expression of natural desires. Yet hardly any are comfortable telling anyone, especially their own children, how many people they have slept with themselves. (From the book, "What We Can't Not Know")

I don't mind telling my past history....Most people think I'm lying about it or exaggerating but that is their opinion, still doesn't change the past..

One thing about being a libertarian/conservative, is that I couldn't care less what another person does with their bodies, because if they want to destroy their temple, with drugs, alcohol or immoral sexual activity, go for it. Just don't shove that shit in my face and tell me I have to accept that behavior as normal. Liberals who are only in it for the fight, once they get that little inch of immorality FORCED upon the rest of US, instead of being satisfied, they continue in their miserable way, to FORCE more immoral behavior on us , trying to subjugate the moral people, because the liberal knows as long as there is resistance to the immoral ideologue of Liberalism, they(liberals) cant move forward with even more immorality. Which is why, Bitch Hillary did not become president. Because after 8 years of the first bi racial, homosexual, Muslim loving, community agitator, moral US citizens decided enough was enough.

Saul Alinsky's Rules for Radicals

Hillary Clinton's 1969 Political Science Thesis ("There is Only the Fight") refers to an earlier version of Alinsky’s training manual. "In 1946,” she wrote, "Alinsky's first book, Reveille for Radicals, was published."

 

[cnm]

Most say that premarital sex between consenting adults is a normal expression of natural desires. Yet hardly any are comfortable telling anyone, especially their own children, how many people they have slept with themselves.

A desire for privacy is also a normal expression of natural desires. Certainly is in my case. As though any normal expression of natural desires or needs requires open disclosure for them to be valid.

 

[K9Buck]

Here is something I found on the topic that I found insightful.

Moral Truth

Moral Truth – The Ultimate Judge
When it comes to moral truth, we’ve all heard the relativist mantra, “Who are you to judge?” Frank Beckwith responded powerfully when challenged at a recent presentation: “I certainly do have a right to make moral judgments. I am a rational person who is aware of certain fundamental principles of logical and moral reasoning. I think I’m qualified. Who would you rather have judge, animals? Your claim that I have no right to make moral judgments is itself a judgment about me. Your claim, therefore, is self-refuting.”

Anyone who says you should not judge has already made a moral judgment about you, namely that you are wrong for judging others. Next time someone says, “Who are you to judge?” you might reply by asking, “Who are you to ask the question, who are you to judge?” If someone says, “You should not make moral judgments,” ask a simple question: “Is that your morality?” If so, “Then why are you forcing your version of moral truth on me?”

Your thread title asks "who gets to decide what it is?", so I'll assume you mean who (a) defines it and (b) enforces it. In a "free" country - one that votes for its "leaders" rather than having their leadership imposed on them - it's ultimately the people en masse who make these decisions based upon their voting choices. Dangerous, of course, because of the manipulation and corruption inherent in the process that can bring destructive, immoral people to power, and worse, keep them there.

Between individuals, I don't think a "Moral Truth" - I have a problem with the word Truth, since it now means little more than "stuff I agree with" - is ever going to be universal. So, judge me all you want, feel free to speak to me the way you want based on your judgement of me. I don't care. It's when you take some kind of action that is based on that judgement that you're going to get my attention. And that's where we circle back to laws and societal expectations based on our culture.
.

I presume that you don't believe in a creator, is that right?

I'm doubtful. I think it's up to us to deal with this mess.
.

Your statement about truth never being universal is what prompted my question.

I DO believe in a creator and I believe that our creator has determined what is moral and what is truth.

 

[cnm]

Another case that no matter what we tell ourselves, we instinctively know what is moral - what is "right or wrong"...

Rubbish. Babies instinctively know right from wrong? Yeah, right.