Wertbag Posted July 24, 2018 Share Posted July 24, 2018 I recently saw a two hour debate on Cosmic Skeptics YouTube channel regarding the moral argument. Basically boiling down to Christians saying morals are objective because God and non-religious saying morals are subjective as seen all around us. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Ulnmb-4v2M (long video and I don't feel like anything was really resolved, but included for anyone with too much free time) There was one statement the apologist made which stood out to me, where he said rape was objectively bad because there was never a situation where it could be good. Which I just saw as a lack of imagination. Three possible situations popped into my head: - A thousand years ago an army captures a town, and wanting to make an example of the people decide to rape all of the women. The alternative, which was commonly done, was to slaughter the population. If you want to make a statement that those who surrender will receive mercy, but resistance will be dealt with harshly, and thereby attempt to save thousands of lives in from future needless battles/sieges, then this option is the less severe choice. It is horrific for the captives, but if their suffering potentially saves tens of thousands of lives then I can certainly see how people could justify rape for the greater good. - A country that has its justice system based on an eye for an eye catches a rapist. The punishment is for the man to be tied down and raped in turn. As a disincentive this one rape could stop many others from occurring. The rape can be seen as justice and can be seen as helping protect those who would be at risk. - An army marches for months to invade a neighbouring country, but upon taking the first town they find all valuables have been removed and they have no plunder with which to pay the army. With their goals not achieved and morale low the army is at risk of mutiny, so the general gives the order that the soldiers can rape and plunder to their hearts content, thereby keeping his army together and satisfied enough to continue to the next battle. This is an even easier choice if you think of your enemy as less than human and consider your glorious campaign to be perfectly just. Each idea can be shown to be right or wrong from different perspectives, and while abhorrent to our modern thinking, you can guarantee those same examples would have been much less so in our recent past. I can't think of a single activity that is universally considered wrong. Cannibalism was the norm in some cultures, killing can be justified and genocide can be to the greater good if the people destroyed would have caused more harm than their elimination causes. People can justify pretty much anything, and this to my mind makes morals clearly subjective. 2 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.