16 Jun 16
Originally posted by robbie carrobiePeople's consciences are diverse. I don't deny that societies have national and international laws and that these create a reality and that people can be, and are, punished, according to those laws. I don't deny that people may for the most part support those laws. But I cannot agree that a consensus, by its very nature, as you put it, is not subjective but objective. I think a consensus is only reached by people's subjective views overlapping and reaching a critical mass.
We share with almost every human being the natural faculty of conscience which we are free to exercise. This has produced a shared objective reality enshrined in national and international law.
With murder, the only objective reality is that there is a law forbidding murder is on the books. The consensus in society that it is right for the law to be on the books is the result of the amalgamation and combination of the predominant subjective views of the society's members.
If the law instead said (because a consensus emerged that supported it): murder is forbidden except in the case of (say) revenge for adultery, what is the nature of the "objective reality" in such a society? That murder in the case of revenge for adultery is - objectively speaking - still wrong, or that it is - objectively speaking - no longer wrong?
16 Jun 16
Originally posted by robbie carrobieYou said that "consensus by its very nature is not subjective but objective". But here you are saying that all that is being expressed in a consensus is subjective preferences. This is also my view.
To try to reach a consensus on 'the best film ever', is not expressing any kind of objective reality and its ludicrous to think that it is. All that is being expressed is a subjective preference, not an objective reality.
16 Jun 16
1 edit
Originally posted by robbie carrobieIt's an "objective reality" that Indonesia executes people for smuggling drugs. It's an "objective reality" that the United Kingdom doesn't execute people at all, for anything. That it is seen as right to execute people for smuggling drugs in Indonesia is arrived at by the subjectivity of the population and its lawmakers. That it is seen as wrong to execute people for any crimes in the United Kingdom is arrived at based on the subjectivity of the members of British society.
Yes it creates an objective reality. 'Murder of innocents is wrong', is an objective reality agreed upon and ratified by countless nation states. If you were to go to a court of law and plead based on your subjectivity that someone 'deserved to die', its most likely that the court will through your defence out based on the objective reality that mu ...[text shortened]... wrong and your subjectivity will have literally no bearing on the matter when you are sentenced.
