• Kurroth@aussie.zone
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    2 days ago

    But suffering objectively exists. I know this. I experience this. It is an objectively immoral experience that exists in this reality that I am calling ‘suffering’.

    That pretty much enough for moral objectivism for me on some level.

    Do no harm, do only good. In that order.

    • Makeshift@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 day ago

      The keyword there is experience.

      You are a subject. Suffering isn’t an object, it’s a feeling. A concept.

      Subjective doesn’t mean “not real”. It’s something that needs a subject to exist. The suffering, just like morals, do exist. They are real, they can be measured, they can be discussed, they have real effects.

      What makes them subjective isn’t “well that’s like, just your opinion, man”, it’s the fact that without a subject to experience them, they would cease to exist.

        • Makeshift@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 day ago

          You have a physical presence in space. That’s objective. Emphasis on object. Something being objective doesn’t mean “this is a fact”, it means it has physical form.

          The pain you feel is not an object. It’s an experience. Again, that does not translate to “that’s your opinion”. It is real, it simply is not a physical object.

          Objective and Subjective are both real. They’re mind and matter, not opinions and facts.