# What are the best arguments against the idea that objective morality doesn’t exist because it can’t be measured scientifically? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [November 16, 2023, 4:24am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-are-the-best-arguments-against-the-idea-that-objective-morality-doesn-t-exist-because-it-can-t-be-measured-scientifically/993218 "2023-11-16T04:24:04Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![crowmanyclouds](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/crowmanyclouds/32/19884_2.png) [@crowmanyclouds](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/crowmanyclouds)\ **Post date:** [November 16, 2023, 8:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-are-the-best-arguments-against-the-idea-that-objective-morality-doesn-t-exist-because-it-can-t-be-measured-scientifically/993218/21 "2023-11-16T20:50:28Z")
I’ve listened to hundreds of hours of people debating and discussing objective morality and I have never heard it rejected on the basis that it isn’t a tangible object found in the Universe and can’t be measured scientifically. ---
**Author:** ![RitterSport](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/rittersport/32/6326_2.png) [@RitterSport](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RitterSport)\ **Post date:** [November 16, 2023, 8:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-are-the-best-arguments-against-the-idea-that-objective-morality-doesn-t-exist-because-it-can-t-be-measured-scientifically/993218/22 "2023-11-16T20:52:56Z")
Same here. Leaving aside whether _objective_ morality exists, plain old human morality can be measured – look at morals in human society over time, survey people on morality questions. Scientists who study other primates have seen evidence of morality in those societies. ---
**Author:** ![Buck\_Godot](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/buck_godot/32/6573_2.png) [@Buck\_Godot](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Buck_Godot)\ **Post date:** [November 16, 2023, 9:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-are-the-best-arguments-against-the-idea-that-objective-morality-doesn-t-exist-because-it-can-t-be-measured-scientifically/993218/23 "2023-11-16T21:09:57Z")
> [@Jasmine](#): > > Well ethics is totally unrelated to science. I can’t think of a better argument than that. Yeah that is my view as well. To me the question in the OP seems to be a non sequitur. Morality isn’t a physical object, its a set of rules and principals. You might as well ask if Number theory or the game of chess exists given that they also can’t be studied scientifically. ---
**Author:** ![Sage\_Rat](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/sage_rat/32/399_2.png) [@Sage\_Rat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sage_Rat)\ **Post date:** [November 16, 2023, 9:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-are-the-best-arguments-against-the-idea-that-objective-morality-doesn-t-exist-because-it-can-t-be-measured-scientifically/993218/24 "2023-11-16T21:27:18Z")
If we assume that all people have equal right to be here, equal right to the resources of the land, equal right to treat others as they want and equal right to be treated as they want, then you effectively end up with a requirement that some system of voting on subjects be implemented, so that we can find a universally acceptable compromise between all of these individuals who must share the world and life. Those votes are measurable. ---
**Author:** ![Omar\_Little](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/omar_little/32/269_2.png) [@Omar\_Little](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Omar_Little)\ **Post date:** [November 16, 2023, 10:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-are-the-best-arguments-against-the-idea-that-objective-morality-doesn-t-exist-because-it-can-t-be-measured-scientifically/993218/25 "2023-11-16T22:50:08Z")
> [@HoneyBadgerDC](#): > > I believe there is an objective morality, but it is **not the same for all of us**. I don’t think you understand the meaning of “objective morality”…if it is true and exists then it **is** the same for all of us. [What Is Objective Morality?](https://www.verywellmind.com/what-is-objective-morality-5525515#:~:text=Objective%20morality%20is%20the%20idea,what%20else%20you%20believe%20in). “Objective morality is the idea that right and wrong exist factually, without any importance of opinion. It’s the concept that some actions and beliefs are imperatively good or inherently bad, and that the goodness or badness of those things holds true no matter who you are or what else you believe in.” The best argument for objective morality is a universal belief in certain constructs of morality are immutable. Could we as a universal society agree on some of those constructs which would be pervasive and exist in every society? ---
**Author:** ![HoneyBadgerDC](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/honeybadgerdc/32/1033_2.png) [@HoneyBadgerDC](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/HoneyBadgerDC)\ **Post date:** [November 16, 2023, 11:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-are-the-best-arguments-against-the-idea-that-objective-morality-doesn-t-exist-because-it-can-t-be-measured-scientifically/993218/26 "2023-11-16T23:25:20Z")
> [@Omar\_Little](#): > > I don’t think you understand the meaning of “objective morality”…if it is true and exists then it **is** the same for all of us That was slightly tongue in cheek. The concept that " Just or justifiable" may always hold true but one’s verson of what is just may vary. ---
**Author:** ![octopus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/octopus/32/3716_2.png) [@octopus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/octopus)\ **Post date:** [November 17, 2023, 3:41am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-are-the-best-arguments-against-the-idea-that-objective-morality-doesn-t-exist-because-it-can-t-be-measured-scientifically/993218/27 "2023-11-17T03:41:48Z")
The best argument is the fact that moral conclusions rely upon moral axioms. ---
**Author:** ![Voyager](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/voyager/32/133_2.png) [@Voyager](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Voyager)\ **Post date:** [November 17, 2023, 7:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-are-the-best-arguments-against-the-idea-that-objective-morality-doesn-t-exist-because-it-can-t-be-measured-scientifically/993218/28 "2023-11-17T19:47:21Z")
> [@Thudlow\_Boink](#): > > And, in general, I support @UDS1’s response to the OP. The OP’s “argument” only works if you already accept that the only things that exist are “tangible objects found in the universe that can be measured scientifically.” Otherwise, it’s just begging the question. My objection was to the assertion that materialism is just an assumption and faith based. It is a hypothesis, but one with support. On a computer a program is clearly a tangible object, but a process, the state of a computer running that program probably isn’t, yet the existence of a process does not conflict with materialism. I’m not sure of your position on this, but I’ve seen materialism straw manned to not allow for the existence of a process. Pretty much everyone in this thread seems to agree that the argument put forth against objective morality in the OP is not a good one - and is unclear to me that the OP think it is a good argument in any case. ---
**Author:** ![griffin1977](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/977dab/32.png) [@griffin1977](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/griffin1977)\ **Post date:** [November 17, 2023, 8:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-are-the-best-arguments-against-the-idea-that-objective-morality-doesn-t-exist-because-it-can-t-be-measured-scientifically/993218/29 "2023-11-17T20:04:53Z")
> [@Voyager](#): > > And it is not at all faith based, in that if we got good evidence that materialism is not true then we’d change our view of it. So what kind of measurement would be able to disprove the belief that only things that can be measured exist? That is the basic problem with the argument in the OP saying “objective morality and moral facts aren’t tangible objects found in the universe and can’t be measured scientifically.” Saying “only things that are tangible objects that can be measured scientifically exist” is as much a profession of faith as saying “there is a universal objective moral code created by a omnipotent (but non-interventionist) god.” ---
**Author:** ![RitterSport](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/rittersport/32/6326_2.png) [@RitterSport](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RitterSport)\ **Post date:** [November 17, 2023, 8:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-are-the-best-arguments-against-the-idea-that-objective-morality-doesn-t-exist-because-it-can-t-be-measured-scientifically/993218/30 "2023-11-17T20:47:40Z")
This thread is annoying (so, stop reading it! But, it’s also interesting). I think it would be better phrased that “morality doesn’t exist because it can’t be measured scientifically” rather than “objective morality…”. As I stated above, I don’t think objective morality exists, but not because it can’t be measured scientifically. I think morality can be measured (again, as I stated above). Love isn’t a tangible object, but it can be shown to exist. People interact with other people that they love differently than those that they don’t. Even some animals show grief when their mate or child dies, and they don’t show that when a strange animal dies. You can make predictions that will be statistically significant over large populations based on whether someone has professed love for someone else – will they let them live in their home, feed them, care for them, etc. ---
**Author:** ![74westy](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/74westy/32/3950_2.png) [@74westy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/74westy)\ **Post date:** [November 17, 2023, 9:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-are-the-best-arguments-against-the-idea-that-objective-morality-doesn-t-exist-because-it-can-t-be-measured-scientifically/993218/31 "2023-11-17T21:26:46Z")
> [@griffin1977](#): > > Saying “only things that are tangible objects that can be measured scientifically exist” is as much a profession of faith as saying “there is a universal objective moral code created by a omnipotent (but non-interventionist) god.” With regard to the existence of things that cannot be measured. Obviously some may exist and some may not .So what knowledgte claims can I make? I think there are three choices 1. All things that cannot be measured do not exist. 2. All things that cannot be measured do exist. 3. I’ll just pick and choose which exist without any objective reason. None of these is completely satisfying but the universe has taught me not to expect satifaction. 2 and 3 seem to me to present a lot more problems than 1 so I’m stuck with 1 until I get better information. No faith required. ---
**Author:** ![jjakucyk](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/3d9bf3/32.png) [@jjakucyk](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jjakucyk)\ **Post date:** [November 17, 2023, 10:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-are-the-best-arguments-against-the-idea-that-objective-morality-doesn-t-exist-because-it-can-t-be-measured-scientifically/993218/32 "2023-11-17T22:03:27Z")
I don’t think there can be objective morals if the foundation of morality is subjective. Since morality is in itself a human construct, then it may by its very nature be subjective. However, when you decide on a foundation, such as human well-being, then you can make objective assessments of moral questions in respect to that foundation. We are physical beings in a physical universe, and there are objectively good and bad actions that can be taken in regards to our well-being. In much the same way that the rules of chess are completely made up, once you agree that you’re playing chess by those rules, you can objectively assess whether a move is good or bad in respect to the goal of not losing the game. ---
**Author:** ![griffin1977](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/977dab/32.png) [@griffin1977](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/griffin1977)\ **Post date:** [November 17, 2023, 10:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-are-the-best-arguments-against-the-idea-that-objective-morality-doesn-t-exist-because-it-can-t-be-measured-scientifically/993218/33 "2023-11-17T22:39:47Z")
> [@74westy](#): > > None of these is completely satisfying but the universe has taught me not to expect satifaction. 2 and 3 seem to me to present a lot more problems than 1 so I’m stuck with 1 until I get better information. > > No faith required If it’s not faith then you must have had good luck observing all those unobservable things and drawing scientific conclusions from them. ---
**Author:** ![Voyager](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/voyager/32/133_2.png) [@Voyager](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Voyager)\ **Post date:** [November 17, 2023, 11:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-are-the-best-arguments-against-the-idea-that-objective-morality-doesn-t-exist-because-it-can-t-be-measured-scientifically/993218/34 "2023-11-17T23:17:35Z")
> [@griffin1977](#): > > So what kind of measurement would be able to disprove the belief that only things that can be measured exist? Beats the heck out of me. Ghost who can be reliably observed and not measured, perhaps? > [@griffin1977](#): > > That is the basic problem with the argument in the OP saying “objective morality and moral facts aren’t tangible objects found in the universe and can’t be measured scientifically.” Saying “only things that are tangible objects that can be measured scientifically exist” is as much a profession of faith as saying “there is a universal objective moral code created by a omnipotent (but non-interventionist) god.” Depends on what you mean by exist. Does a process exist? Does a generational attitude exist - you can survey it, but that’s not the same as really measuring it. But, as I said, there are way better arguments against objective morality than the one in the OP. It is more a four sided triangle, something you can kind of define but which makes no sense due to internal contradictions. ---
**Author:** ![Voyager](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/voyager/32/133_2.png) [@Voyager](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Voyager)\ **Post date:** [November 17, 2023, 11:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-are-the-best-arguments-against-the-idea-that-objective-morality-doesn-t-exist-because-it-can-t-be-measured-scientifically/993218/35 "2023-11-17T23:23:00Z")
> [@RitterSport](#): > > Love isn’t a tangible object, but it can be shown to exist. People interact with other people that they love differently than those that they don’t. Even some animals show grief when their mate or child dies, and they don’t show that when a strange animal dies. You can make predictions that will be statistically significant over large populations based on whether someone has professed love for someone else – will they let them live in their home, feed them, care for them, etc. You can measure the effects of love. Hormone level, actions by the person in love, etc. On the other hand if objective morality existed, if not tangible, you can measure things about it. If it is our hearts you can quiz people about their actions in different circumstances. If it comes from a god you can quiz the god about it, or read the god’s holy books. If the god can’t be found, and if the god’s holy books are contradictory on moral issues, you can conclude that a certain variety of objective morality does not exist, and tangability has nothing to do with it. ---
**Author:** ![RitterSport](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/rittersport/32/6326_2.png) [@RitterSport](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RitterSport)\ **Post date:** [November 17, 2023, 11:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-are-the-best-arguments-against-the-idea-that-objective-morality-doesn-t-exist-because-it-can-t-be-measured-scientifically/993218/36 "2023-11-17T23:35:00Z")
I agree that tangibility has nothing to do with it. But, all you’re measuring is human morality, not objective morality. ---
**Author:** ![74westy](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/74westy/32/3950_2.png) [@74westy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/74westy)\ **Post date:** [November 18, 2023, 12:10am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-are-the-best-arguments-against-the-idea-that-objective-morality-doesn-t-exist-because-it-can-t-be-measured-scientifically/993218/37 "2023-11-18T00:10:48Z")
> [@griffin1977](#): > > If it’s not faith then you must have had good luck observing all those unobservable things and drawing scientific conclusions from them. Can you explain what you mean by this? I haven’t observed or drawn scientific conclusions from any unobservable things and haven’t claimed to have. ---
**Author:** ![Mangetout](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mangetout/32/19_2.png) [@Mangetout](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mangetout)\ **Post date:** [November 18, 2023, 12:20am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-are-the-best-arguments-against-the-idea-that-objective-morality-doesn-t-exist-because-it-can-t-be-measured-scientifically/993218/38 "2023-11-18T00:20:13Z")
> [@Pleonast](#): > > I guess it’s not clear to me what the original question means. Nor me. '‘Objective’ is a term that has a fairly well-defined meaning; we don’t need to try to guess what the properties of an objective-but-not-actually-objective thing might be. ---
**Author:** ![Voyager](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/voyager/32/133_2.png) [@Voyager](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Voyager)\ **Post date:** [November 18, 2023, 2:37am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-are-the-best-arguments-against-the-idea-that-objective-morality-doesn-t-exist-because-it-can-t-be-measured-scientifically/993218/39 "2023-11-18T02:37:01Z")
> [@RitterSport](#): > > I agree that tangibility has nothing to do with it. But, all you’re measuring is human morality, not objective morality. Sure. If objective morality does not exist, that’s all you can measure. However, if objective morality does exist, and no one can figure out what it is, it for all intents and purposes might as well not exist, since it is useless. ---
**Author:** ![Half\_Man\_Half\_Wit](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/half_man_half_wit/32/21766_2.png) [@Half\_Man\_Half\_Wit](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Half_Man_Half_Wit)\ **Post date:** [November 18, 2023, 6:45am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-are-the-best-arguments-against-the-idea-that-objective-morality-doesn-t-exist-because-it-can-t-be-measured-scientifically/993218/40 "2023-11-18T06:45:52Z")
> [@74westy](#): > > 1. All things that cannot be measured do not exist. > 2. All things that cannot be measured do exist. > 3. I’ll just pick and choose which exist without any objective reason. > > None of these is completely satisfying but the universe has taught me not to expect satifaction. 2 and 3 seem to me to present a lot more problems than 1 so I’m stuck with 1 until I get better information. Can a headache be measured? One can perhaps measure the correlated cerebral activity, but in what sense is that the experience of pain? And even if it can be measured, I certainly don’t _need_ to measure it to know it exists. Indeed, there must be some things we can know to exist without measuring them. Otherwise, we’d just be stuck in a neverending loop: what measurements do is produce data; so I’d have to measure that data to know of its existence. And so on. In reality, of course, this bottoms out in our subjective experience: I know about the data because of the impression of seeing, say, a pointer on a scale indicate a certain value. I don’t have to measure my impression of this; I know it because I have it, and that’s that. More broadly, there’s trivially truths that aren’t empirical, as argued above. Take the sentence ‘all truths are empirical’: it purports to be true, but it surely isn’t empirical, so it’s self-negating. So there are some truths that aren’t empirical. That’s a true thing about the world we now know without having to resort to any measurement whatever. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-are-the-best-arguments-against-the-idea-that-objective-morality-doesn-t-exist-because-it-can-t-be-measured-scientifically/993218.md?page=1) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-are-the-best-arguments-against-the-idea-that-objective-morality-doesn-t-exist-because-it-can-t-be-measured-scientifically/993218.md?page=3)