|
|
Post by movieliker on Apr 12, 2021 23:42:49 GMT
That depends on the juvenile and the adult teacher. Or in other words, not dependent on the rules of the school. It's all of that --- the law, the rules of the school, and the juvenile and teacher. |
|
|
|
Post by movieliker on Apr 12, 2021 23:46:29 GMT
That depends on the juvenile and the adult teacher. Or in other words, not dependent on the rules of the school. REPLY #2 It's stupid for a teacher to have an affair with a juvenile student if it's against the law and/or the rules of the school. It's immoral for a teacher to have an affair with a juvenile student if either is not mature, responsible or well intended. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 13, 2021 2:42:43 GMT
A completely subjective opinion to an extent.
As a teacher you're bound to certain formalities and laws. Where does this stop? I've dated teachers of mine after
I'd graduated. No harm, no foul.
A big difference in what one considers moral and what is legal.
|
|
|
|
Post by Sarge on Apr 13, 2021 2:59:58 GMT
Asking for moral advice is like ordering pizza for the office, everyone wants something special but when it arrives, the pepperoni still goes first.
|
|
|
|
Post by gameboy on Apr 13, 2021 5:54:37 GMT
Asking for moral advice is like ordering pizza for the office, everyone wants something special but when it arrives, the pepperoni still goes first. No. From your perspective no one can say it's wrong for a teacher to seek a sexual relationship with a 12-year-old. Morality is not entirely subjective.
|
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Apr 13, 2021 6:01:44 GMT
Asking for moral advice is like ordering pizza for the office, everyone wants something special but when it arrives, the pepperoni still goes first. No. From your perspective no one can say it's wrong for a teacher to seek a sexual relationship with a 12-year-old. Morality is not entirely subjective. That girl lost 6 years in 3 pages! We have officially become a supermarket tabloid.
|
|
|
|
Post by gameboy on Apr 13, 2021 6:04:01 GMT
No. From your perspective no one can say it's wrong for a teacher to seek a sexual relationship with a 12-year-old. Morality is not entirely subjective. That girl lost 6 years in 3 pages! We have officially become a supermarket tabloid. Do you believe morality is always subjective?
|
|
|
|
Post by movieliker on Apr 13, 2021 6:04:56 GMT
That girl lost 6 years in 3 pages! We have officially become a supermarket tabloid. Do you believe morality is always subjective? I don't. |
|
|
|
Post by gameboy on Apr 13, 2021 6:08:39 GMT
Do you believe morality is always subjective? I don't. I agree with you. But is your belief based in religion? Can a nonbeliever make a strong case for an objective morality?
|
|
|
|
Post by movieliker on Apr 13, 2021 6:19:58 GMT
I agree with you. But is your belief based in religion? Can a nonbeliever make a strong case for an objective morality? No. Murder, theft, rape and lying are wrong. There are exceptions. But that is not the rule. |
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Apr 13, 2021 6:53:59 GMT
That girl lost 6 years in 3 pages! We have officially become a supermarket tabloid. Do you believe morality is always subjective? No, but the goal is always the same: To be or do what you believe to be right. Or to not be or do what you believe to be wrong, if there's a difference. But I do believe that there are some basic tenets that we all share, those without consciences notwithstanding. A quick Google search shows that according to some "experts," there are 7 "plausible candidates for universal moral rules": - Help your family. - Help your group. - Return favors. - Be brave. - Defer to superiors. - Divide resources fairly. - Respect others' property. I'm pretty sure I don't agree with some or all of the things on that list.
|
|
|
|
Post by movieliker on Apr 13, 2021 7:10:10 GMT
Do you believe morality is always subjective? No, but the goal is always the same: To be or do what you believe to be right. Or to not be or do what you believe to be wrong, if there's a difference. But I do believe that there are some basic tenets that we all share, those without consciences notwithstanding. A quick Google search shows that according to some "experts," there are 7 "plausible candidates for universal moral rules": - Help your family. - Help your group. - Return favors. - Be brave. - Defer to superiors. - Divide resources fairly. - Respect others' property. I'm pretty sure I don't agree with some or all of the things on that list. A sociopath believes everything that helps him or her is moral. |
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Apr 13, 2021 8:28:38 GMT
No, but the goal is always the same: To be or do what you believe to be right. Or to not be or do what you believe to be wrong, if there's a difference. But I do believe that there are some basic tenets that we all share, those without consciences notwithstanding. A quick Google search shows that according to some "experts," there are 7 "plausible candidates for universal moral rules": - Help your family. - Help your group. - Return favors. - Be brave. - Defer to superiors. - Divide resources fairly. - Respect others' property. I'm pretty sure I don't agree with some or all of the things on that list. A sociopath believes everything that helps him or her is moral. I suppose that if someone believes everything that helps him or her is moral, then from their perspective, not getting others to help them would be immoral. The problem with sociopaths is the lack (or denial) of guilt caused by moral compasses that aren't quite in sync with the rest of society.
|
|
|
|
Post by gameboy on Apr 13, 2021 19:36:49 GMT
Do you believe morality is always subjective? No, but the goal is always the same: To be or do what you believe to be right. Or to not be or do what you believe to be wrong, if there's a difference. But I do believe that there are some basic tenets that we all share, those without consciences notwithstanding. A quick Google search shows that according to some "experts," there are 7 "plausible candidates for universal moral rules": - Help your family. - Help your group. - Return favors. - Be brave. - Defer to superiors. - Divide resources fairly. - Respect others' property. I'm pretty sure I don't agree with some or all of the things on that list. Oh, I have some major problems with a few of those. That makes it difficult to say they're objective.
- Be brave. - A serial murderer can be brave. A Nazi soldier can be brave. Bravery in immorality is not moral.
- Defer to superiors. - I don't buy this one at all. How does one make a judgment who is superior to whom? An anarchist holds no respect for the government. A slave holds no respect for a cruel master.
- Divide resources fairly. - Under libertarian capitalism the rich have a right to resources earned through their own hard work. The lazy poor guy next door has no moral right to what the rich man owns. I agree with a fair sharing of resources. But who decides what's fair? Equal distribution of resources is the only fair way to a socialist. A capitalist doesn't agree with that.
|
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Apr 13, 2021 20:18:15 GMT
No, but the goal is always the same: To be or do what you believe to be right. Or to not be or do what you believe to be wrong, if there's a difference. But I do believe that there are some basic tenets that we all share, those without consciences notwithstanding. A quick Google search shows that according to some "experts," there are 7 "plausible candidates for universal moral rules": - Help your family. - Help your group. - Return favors. - Be brave. - Defer to superiors. - Divide resources fairly. - Respect others' property. I'm pretty sure I don't agree with some or all of the things on that list. Oh, I have some major problems with a few of those. That makes it difficult to say they're objective. - Be brave. - A serial murderer can be brave. A Nazi soldier can be brave. Bravery in immorality is not moral. - Defer to superiors. - I don't buy this one at all. How does one make a judgment who is superior to whom? An anarchist holds no respect for the government. A slave holds no respect for a cruel master. - Divide resources fairly. - Under libertarian capitalism the rich have a right to resources earned through their own hard work. The lazy poor guy next door has no moral right to what the rich man owns. I agree with a fair sharing of resources. But who decides what's fair? Equal distribution of resources is the only fair way to a socialist. A capitalist doesn't agree with that.
I largely agree with you here, but I could have a major problem with two and two being four without rendering it subjective.
|
|
|
|
Post by gameboy on Apr 13, 2021 20:37:51 GMT
Oh, I have some major problems with a few of those. That makes it difficult to say they're objective. - Be brave. - A serial murderer can be brave. A Nazi soldier can be brave. Bravery in immorality is not moral. - Defer to superiors. - I don't buy this one at all. How does one make a judgment who is superior to whom? An anarchist holds no respect for the government. A slave holds no respect for a cruel master. - Divide resources fairly. - Under libertarian capitalism the rich have a right to resources earned through their own hard work. The lazy poor guy next door has no moral right to what the rich man owns. I agree with a fair sharing of resources. But who decides what's fair? Equal distribution of resources is the only fair way to a socialist. A capitalist doesn't agree with that.
I largely agree with you here, but I could have a major problem with two and two being four without rendering it subjective. Lets say when reasonable people have major objections which are easily explained, they can't be objective truths.
|
|
|
|
Post by movieliker on Apr 13, 2021 20:51:24 GMT
I largely agree with you here, but I could have a major problem with two and two being four without rendering it subjective. Lets say when reasonable people have major objections which are easily explained, they can't be objective truths. I disagree. Morality is not subjective. Of course there are exceptions. But morality is not subjective. |
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Apr 13, 2021 21:23:56 GMT
I largely agree with you here, but I could have a major problem with two and two being four without rendering it subjective. Lets say when reasonable people have major objections which are easily explained, they can't be objective truths. "Reasonable" is a subjective term. 
|
|
|
|
Post by uncreative on Apr 13, 2021 22:26:19 GMT
You get older. They stay the same age ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)
|
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Apr 13, 2021 22:28:11 GMT
Lets say when reasonable people have major objections which are easily explained, they can't be objective truths. I disagree. Morality is not subjective. Of course there are exceptions. But morality is not subjective. Does objectivity even have exceptions?
|
|
