Why Our Children Don’t Think There Are Moral Facts

[TransitJohn]

Indeed, in the world beyond grade school, where adults must exercise their moral knowledge and reasoning to conduct themselves in the society, the stakes are greater. There, consistency demands that we acknowledge the existence of moral facts. If it’s not true that it’s wrong to murder a cartoonist with whom one disagrees, then how can we be outraged? If there are no truths about what is good or valuable or right, how can we prosecute people for crimes against humanity? If it’s not true that all humans are created equal, then why vote for any political system that doesn’t benefit you over others?
snip
We can do better. Our children deserve a consistent intellectual foundation. Facts are things that are true. Opinions are things we believe. Some of our beliefs are true. Others are not. Some of our beliefs are backed by evidence. Others are not. Value claims are like any other claims: either true or false, evidenced or not. The hard work lies not in recognizing that at least some moral claims are true but in carefully thinking through our evidence for which of the many competing moral claims is correct. That’s a hard thing to do. But we can’t sidestep the responsibilities that come with being human just because it’s hard.

That would be wrong.

http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2015/03/02/why-our-children-dont-think-there-are-moral-facts/?_r=0
I rather enjoyed this piece.

[gcomeau]

1. They think that because apparently...

...they have a more sophisticated understanding of morality than the writer of that article.

The author may be uncomfortable with the *fact* that morals are judgment calls... aka opinions... but that remains what they are.

[TransitJohn]

2. Lulz

Nice post.

[SoLeftIAmRight]

3. Try some Kant and William James

strong foundations

[fasttense]

4. Moral relativism

is a handy idea if you are an uber rich capitalist trying to ignore all the pain and suffering you have caused.

Or a slave owner trying to justify the theft of another man's life and labor.

Or you are a king trying to pretend you deserve so much more than everyone else.

But moral absolutism has its own pitfalls too.

All things in moderation.

[Jim__]

5. The article needs some more context before I can make an informed decision.

For instance, from the article (my bolding):

... As it turns out, the Common Core standards used by a majority of K-12 programs in the country require that students be able to “distinguish among fact, opinion, and reasoned judgment in a text.” And the Common Core institute provides a helpful page full of links to definitions, lesson plans and quizzes to ensure that students can tell the difference between facts and opinions.

And, further down in the article:

In summary, our public schools teach students that all claims are either facts or opinions and that all value and moral claims fall into the latter camp. The punchline: there are no moral facts. And if there are no moral facts, then there are no moral truths.

The first excerpt distinguishes between facts, opinions, and reasoned judgments, the latter claims that schools only distinguish between facts and opinions. I wonder if his son's classroom also had the definition of reasoned judgement hanging on the wall. His claim that our public schools were teaching children that it is not true that it’s wrong to kill people for fun or cheat on tests appears to be an inference drawn by him, an inference that is not directly supported by any evidence cited in the article. If the schools are actually teaching children that it is not true that it’s wrong to kill people for fun, then I agree that we have a serious problem. Following his links out to some of the instructional videos, I believe that even if a teacher did make such a claim in the middle of a lesson, by the end of the lesson it would be clear that reason leads to the judgment that killing someone for fun is wrong. I think his article somewhat misrepresents what is being taught in school.

[Enrique]

6. question for the professor

"Drug dealers belong in prison."

if that's a "fact",then what happens when the law changes? It's not a fact anymore?

What about states with different laws? It's a "fact" until you cross the border into Colorado?

[uriel1972]

7. There are no moral facts inherint in the universe

We make them up based on our own desires. As a community we can make laws about what is "Right" and what is "Wrong", but as opinions change so do laws.

It is the height of arrogance to claim your personal views are encoded into the universe. Show me a subatomic particle of morality, decency, goodness or evil, then I will think again.

The Universe doesn't care because it has no apparatus to care with.

[TransitJohn]

8. So, we're not in the universe?

Not following you.

[uriel1972]

9. We are in the universe that is true

We might care, but the stars don't. People seem to believe that there is some sort of inherint justice or karma or something that will see things put right, that does not exist.

[TransitJohn]

10. No, but other people exist, and it's a moral truth that killing them is wrong eom

n/t

[uriel1972]

11. only if you believe in moral truth...

I don't believe that opinions are 'Truth's"