TJump just came into the Enlightenment Discord server to debate his odd moral theory that the imposition of will is immoral and descriptive. He asserts that morality is objective. Tjump calls himself a Moral Objectivist and defines immoral as whatever is an involuntary imposition on one's will. Which he admit entails if a rock imposes on your will then the rock is immoral.
Tom's position on morality being objective caught the attention of Philosophy Alex Malpass who wrote a blog post about him.e
What’s strange though is that Tom Jump does believe that morality can exist in an empty room. That somehow objective morality can be a trait of physical matter in some way shape or form. He believes moral laws exist in the same way that gravity is a law. Tjump claimed he was quoting out the Stanford Encyclopedia of philosophy but no philosophers hold his position.
Jump thinks that morality is objective, in a similar way to physical laws. Objective in this context means that it exists independently of any minds. We take physical laws, like the law of gravitation, to obtain in the universe just as much whether there are any minds present or not. If a moral law is objective, then it too would obtain just as well without any minds in existence.
His idea is that objective morality is defined in relation to the notion of involuntary impositions.
So this entails: S: if action phi is F then phi is immoral’. Suppose that F is filled out by some mental characteristic, eg, contrary to desires, and that S is considered an ordinary conditional statement, eg, S is not a counterfactual. In that case, S might be true even if there are no minds. At worlds where there are no minds, S is trivially true. At worlds where there are minds, S is true if actions contrary to desires are immoral.
This definition of immorality involves voluntariness, which in turn involves rationality, which itself involves the notion of beliefs about immorality, and the whole thing becomes a circle. We were offered a definition of immorality which in turn used the notion of immorality.
I wonder if Tom Jump would argue in favour of suing ones own biological mother for not having aborted the individual as a fetus because of the subjective experience of having a miserable life or life at all, because his biological mother him "into this universe where many things occur which we do not will nor consent to.
Alex Malpass Article On TJump
.png)
