Stance A
Yes, morality is objective
- Universal moral intuitions across cultures (e.g., prohibitions on murder, theft) point to objective standards. - If morality were purely subjective, all moral disagreements would be merely matters of taste, which they clearly aren't. - Saying "morality is subjective" is self-defeating, as it presents an objective claim about morality's nature.
Stance B
No
- Universal moral intuitions reflect shared human biology and social needs, not transcendent truths. - Subjective morality can still involve deep, reasoned values—not mere personal taste. - Stating morality is subjective is a descriptive claim, not an objective moral prescription.
Stance A
Yes, morality is objective
- Biology and social evolution shaped our moral senses toward objective frameworks, not away from them. - Reason applied to moral dilemmas often converges on similar principles, suggesting underlying objectivity. - You cannot consistently judge societal moral progress without an objective standard against which to measure it.
Stance B
No
- Evolution shapes morality for social utility, not objective reality; it's adaptive, not transcendent. - Moral convergence arises from common experiences and needs, not independent objectivity. - Progress is measured against evolving subjective goals like reduced suffering, not fixed standards.
Stance A
Yes, morality is objective
- Evolution's drive toward empathy and cooperation indicates an objective moral framework, not just adaptive utility. - Subjective morality renders "progress" meaningless, as it lacks a fixed standard to measure improvement against. - Moral reasoning inherently seeks truth, implying objective principles exist to be discovered, not merely invented.
Stance B
No
- Evolution fosters cooperation for survival, not objective moral truths; it's adaptive, not metaphysical. - Progress is meaningful when measured against evolving human goals like well-being, not fixed absolutes. - Moral reasoning seeks coherent, beneficial outcomes based on shared values, not discovery of inherent truths.
Stance A
Yes, morality is objective
- Well-being and reduced suffering are objective goods; evolution adapts to these realities, not just survival. - Coherent moral reasoning presupposes fixed truths for consistent judgment and progress. - Subjective frameworks cannot explain why moral advances are seen as genuine improvements.
Stance B
No
- Well-being and suffering are valued based on human experiences, not as objective, inherent realities in the universe. - Moral reasoning builds coherent systems from shared, evolving values, not by discovering fixed, pre-existing truths. - Progress is measured against subjective goals like reduced suffering, which change over time, not against eternal standards.
Stance B carries it — No
Second consistently countered first's arguments with explanations based on biology, social needs, and evolving values, presenting a coherent case for subjective morality.