View Topic

Nothing is objectively right or wrong there's just anti-social behaviours that we have evolved to avoid, like murder. There's nothing objectively wrong with it so should we just let a murderer back into normal society if we can prove that they're not more likely to do it again than any other person or we can in someway ensure that they can't do it again?

Short of mind control, how can it be proven that a murderer isn't more likely to do it again?

But beyond this issue, we're talking about someone who has taken someone's life, apparently not in self-defense or with any valid reason. Even if it could be proven, shouldn't they face some kind of punishment? It's not like we can go back and reverse what they did, or make things whole after the fact. Fortunately most people's sense of right and wrong goes beyond an 'objective' anything goes.

murder bad

Of course there's no objective morality, only what society agrees on. But in terms of what we can agree on, I think we can generally agree that killing people is bad. Saying "nothing objectively wrong with it" is a cop-out; we humans can generally agree that murder is unwarranted, irreversible harm to an individual, their social circle, and society as a whole.

That said, while I think it's tempting to think in terms of retribution and punishment for murder, I don't think that's the best path for society. It makes far more sense to me to rehabilitate past murderers so that they can once again reenter into and participate fully again in society.

Human morality is just the instinctual judgement of social behaviours and anti-social behaviours. If someone is anti-social we reject them because having them around reduces our own likelyhood of surviving until reproduction which makes sense but were we able to ensure that they can reintegrate into society and live a normal life we should 100% let them instead of ruining their life. What is actually wrong with murder, it's just an anti-social behaviour, if we can be sure that they aren't an anti-social human then there's nothing wrong with them.

Short of mind control, how can it be proven that a murderer isn't more likely to do it again?

But beyond this issue, we're talking about someone who has taken someone's life, apparently not in self-defense or with any valid reason. Even if it could be proven, shouldn't they face some kind of punishment? It's not like we can go back and reverse what they did, or make things whole after the fact. Fortunately most people's sense of right and wrong goes beyond an 'objective' anything goes.

What is wrong about murder? Why is ending someone else's life a bad thing?

I would like to note that I have reasons for why simply allowing murder is wrong but I find it interesting to challenge people's morals and play the devil's advocate to see if people can actually make a convincing argument against something as seemingly simple to prove immoral as murder.

Murder is considered not okay simply because having murder be allowed in society would mean your chance of being made dead would be very much increased. You (probably) don't want to be dead. Most people would consider being dead to be one of the things to be most avoided. So we call murder bad.

I would like to note that I have reasons for why simply allowing murder is wrong but I find it interesting to challenge people's morals and play the devil's advocate to see if people can actually make a convincing argument against something as seemingly simple to prove immoral as murder.

"Playing devil's advocate" as an excuse to make an inane argument that nobody actually believes in, as is the case here, is a nonsensical waste of time. You're basing an argument on illogical assumptions that people don't actually hold to reach a conclusion that people don't believe.

"There is no objective morality so what is wrong with murder" is not an argument. It doesn't even make sense logically. It just conflates objective morality with subjective societal ethical systems in order to reach a point that feels like it's trying to sound deep but actually just makes no sense.

No.