right and wrong

[Reincarnate]

Let's talk examples instead so you may be able to better explain yourself. I'll use one from the video.

You are a doctor. You've got five patients about to die if they don't get organ transplants immediately. In the next room, you see Chuck, a man who is perfectly healthy. You could let the five patients die, or you could kill Chuck and use his organs to save the five patients.

What would you do, and why is this moral call right/wrong, and why is it objective?

[TheSaxRunner05]

Ask Chuck if he would give up his life to save five people. If he says no, it's wrong. The people with failing organs do not have a right to his healthy ones unless by that man's (chuck's) will. Your rights (in this case, right to survival) end when they infringe upon another's rights.

It is objective because the 'correctness' of a given action is often determined by the average disposition of the masses. While not always best for society, what is morally acceptable depends on your culture.

[Reincarnate]

Originally Posted by TheSaxRunner05

Ask Chuck if he would give up his life to save five people. If he says no, it's wrong. The people with failing organs do not have a right to his healthy ones unless by that man's (chuck's) will. Your rights (in this case, right to survival) end when they infringe upon another's rights.

It is objective because the 'correctness' of a given action is often determined by the average disposition of the masses. While not always best for society, what is morally acceptable depends on your culture.

Let's say he's still asleep from his surgery and is still under anesthesia. By the time he wakes up, the five other patients will be dead. The only way to save the five is to kill Chuck without his consent.


Also, that isn't the definition of "objective."

[TheSaxRunner05]

Still no, for the same reason

And oops, that was subjective, not objective

[Reincarnate]

The point though is that there's no "objective" answer to these kinds of questions. Morality isn't objective.