Did we discover morality or invent it? | Slavoj Žižek and Peter Singer debate for the first time

[@kylebowles9820]

Zizek didn't say "and so on" not even once

[@Fralegri]

Bc it's edited

[@SurenMaz]

Edited in a frustrating manner

[@OmniversalInsect]

Morality is a behaviour we evolved as a social species, but we also invented certain aspects of it. It is in our nature to view the suffering of others as bad, but who is deemed worthy of moral consideration and which actions are thought to cause suffering changes as we gain knowledge.

[@someonenotnoone]

I think moral discussions are often misleading because we use words like "truth" and "knowledge" in ways that could apply regardless of people's opinions, but in the case of morality, seem to fundamentally reflect people's opinions. That is, the "truth" and "knowledge" that cease suffering are the "truth" and "knowledge" of other people's opinions.

[@daanschone1548]

​@@someonenotnooneknowledge is not the same as truth of course.

[@joshyman221]

No. It is wrong to murder. This isn’t a behavioural evolution. It is just wrong definitionally like 1+1=2.

[@michaelmaloskyjr]

Uhh wtf is he saying? I see so much histrionics, start/stop half-baked ideas, etc. Thank God Singer has the discipline of thought and philosophical rigor to clearly articulate. So hard to watch and hear this guy, especially remotely. (also philosophers without genomic expertise, field biology depth and cursory evolutionary familiarity need to steer clear of those waters)

[@luzr6613]

Descartes was of the view that non-human animals were automatons.... So many years have passed, yet still there are people who fervently hold forth while exhibiting the exact same lack of familiarity with non-human animals. The confidence with which people assert on subjects that they must surely know (?) they lack a reliable understanding of - just making it up as they go along (looking at you, Slavoj).

[@someonenotnoone]

It reminds of objectivists talking about humans being the only animals that change their environment to suit their survival. Like, how do these people not know about beavers?

[@michaelmaloskyjr]

Exactly. He's almost cringeworthy hearing all his literal handwaving and fragmented stabs at ethology.

[@garycgibson]

Morality is said to be a description of how people behave toward others. That changes obviously. One may make up rules of conduct or follow some that already exist.

[@bradokamura]

What if.........morality is just instinct version 2.0? Specifically, a more evolved version of "Harm avoidance", extended to others and living things. It's basically biology.

[@CanaanZhou2002]

Morality, as moral realists like Peter Singer care about, is the objective answer of "what we should do", not anything contingent on culture or time. For example, Singer recognize eating animals in many cases as immoral, since it contributes to causing suffering. But under your definition, eating animals aren't immoral in our times.

[@someonenotnoone]

@@CanaanZhou2002 " But under your definition, eating animals aren't immoral in our times." I don't think this is accurate. Under their definition, eating animals is judged by some to moral, and judged by others to be immoral. Deciding "what we should do" is a defining characteristic of living organisms.

[@CanaanZhou2002]

@@someonenotnoone Yes indeed! What I meant was that the general consensus is we are morally permitted to eat animals, much like how back in the day people generally think that slavery is morally fine.

[@ValentinBrutusBura]

Discovered.

[@bradgers92]

The human herding instinct became a survival requirement. It still is, we're just slow.

[@guypanton8341]

But herding isn’t necessarily social in itself. Herding merely offers safety in numbers. A number of animals milling around together grants no fixed target for a predator, absorbs more damage from attacks, replaces tired, hurt, or weak members with its strongest, etc. The behaviour of each individual in the herd could be selfish or reactive, but a herd could form nonetheless.

[@bradgers92]

@@guypanton8341 good herding instincts are selfless and proactive. Often the weak and young are protected. Predators are discouraged and/or actively aggressed or hunted. Herding instincts have no function in "replacing" anything, unless you define sex and procreation as a herding instinct. Anyway, semantics and metaphor..

[@leegosling]

We evolved morality. Those with it stayed alive. This is the danger of the anti-woke brigade.

[@bradokamura]

But those with too much of it start witch hunting innocent people who said a few "offensive" words, as if they are the same as Hitler.

[@scdundee12]

Empathy. Watch small children learn from hurting each other.

[@first-fundamental-field]

Who on Earth came to idea to frame this shameful interaction by naming it "Did we discover morality or invent it?"? (1) The first eminently philosophical question should be: Did the questioner discover the very question (namely: "Did we discover morality or invent it?") they had posed or invent it? (2) The second philosophical question (that goes beyond any claptrap) regarding the issue of "morality" is: How we, as philosophers, can put morality in motion so that morality prevails in the balance of power between bloodthirsty bureaucrats and those who prioritize logic and life, thus proving that our sublime science, far from belonging to the realm of mere claptrap, is a power in the purest that no stupidity can ever corner.

[@thenatureofnurture6336]

Chicken and egg is a perfect topic for Z

[@JohnThomas]

Peter Singer always comes across as calm, reasonable and persuasive. Slavoj Žižek, not so much. 😛

[@tinyf666]

i think zizeks comments were quite reasonable, i don't see singer was somehow more convincing.

[@Thomas-gk42]

That´s funny😅

[@michaelmaloskyjr]

Uhh wtf is he saying? I see so much histrionics, start/stop half-baked ideas, etc. Thank God Singer has the discipline of thought and philosophical rigor to clearly articulate. So hard to watch and hear this guy, especially remotely. (also philosophers without genomic expertise, field biology depth and cursory evolutionary familiarity need to steer clear of those waters)

[@induchopra3014]

Morality is not human. Animals have it too

[@ricardogarcia-vi6hv]

They have behavioral patterns not morality. They cannot comprehend universal laws to adapt the particular behavior of the individual.

[@jacob18310]

Humans are animals.

[@ricardogarcia-vi6hv]

@jacob18310 True, the precise term is beasts, in contrast with humans as rational animals

[@Man-v2vv2wt2q]

@@jacob18310 Unfortunately many(If not most) are...

[@asanboo]

“Why are you wasting your time on… [THIS GUY]”. Toxic speaker.

[@daanschone1548]

Easy, we are not the only social species. So no we didn't invent morality. Nor did we discover it.

[@thedolphin5428]

Slavoj really should just stuck to writing. It's just too hard to interpret him.

[@Καταθλιπτικός-Αθηναίος]

@@thedolphin5428 Captions help a little bit but trying to follow what he is saying as well interpreting the inout feels like a chore most of the time lol

[@thenatureofnurture6336]

😜No one is rushing him, but he always acts like he's desperately trying to spit out his ideas before he gets cut off. 🚀Elon uses the same camouflage. If Dunning-Kruger was a large language model it would have this same manner of speaking. 💻

[@Doo_Doo_Patrol]

are we supposed to be understanding the tv guy? I know, I speak english, so maybe it is my fault.

[@thedolphin5428]

Welcome to Zizek.

[@mxrkxo]

What is the morality of genocide ??? Ah forgot peter doesn’t care about that, and zizik is indifferent

[@nuqwestr]

Discussions like this is why middle-school kids are showing up to class as "furries" and morph into cosplay as adults.

[@glenncurry3041]

Sad tiny minds!

[@domenhitrec3288]

And what kind of discussions are the reason for hate speech?

[@11th_defender51]

wdym by that?

[@OmniversalInsect]

😂

[@CrazyLinguiniLegs]

The adults I know who are into cosplay are some of the most easy going, good natured people I know.

[@MasoudJohnAzizi]

Moral behavior = genetically programmed = compassionate behavior = that which prevents suffering/pain in self and others.

[@parse.thoughtspace]

You're delusional. The entirety of human history consists of warfare, torture, rape, incest, thievery etc. We aren't genetically programmed to be compassionate generically. We're nice to those who we benefit from being nice to. And we're violent toward those who we benefit from being violent towards. Morality is a delusion. Cooperation has a selfish function, and is therefore not altruistic compassion. People mistake cooperation for altruism.

[@guypanton8341]

@@MasoudJohnAzizi Nope. That just doesn’t bear out in the history of humanity. Not to mention that, if moral behaviour was genetically programmed, then one could argue that all human behaviour is moral from the fact of it being human behaviour.

[@MasoudJohnAzizi]

@@guypanton8341 Indeed there are many opinions on this topic, however there is a growing body of peer-reviewed published empirical evidence that agrees with the notion that morality is largely determined by genetics and epigenetics.

[@MasoudJohnAzizi]

Well, empirical evidence is showing that morality is indeed 'genetically programmed".

[@parse.thoughtspace]

@MasoudJohnAzizi That is not at all true. We have social emotions naturally that plug into morality, but morality itself is not genetic. There is no gene or set of genes that somehow generate ideas like 'thou shalt not murder'. Morality is a kind of delusion that arises from social values.