• SCB@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    arrow-down
    6
    ·
    1 year ago

    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
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      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
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        5
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        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
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          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
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            1 year ago

            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
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              3
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              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
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                1 year ago

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

                  • SCB@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    ·
                    edit-2
                    1 year ago

                    That’s not universal across all societies.

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

            • ParsnipWitch@feddit.de
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              3
              arrow-down
              3
              ·
              1 year ago

              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.

    • papertowels@lemmy.one
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

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

      Generally accepted morals certainly can be guidelines for behaviors.