After our recent ‘Death of Morality’ issue, Mitchell Silver replies to the amoralists.
https://philosophynow.org/issues/83/Our ... bjectivism
Our Morality: A Defense of Moral Objectivism
-
- Posts: 1207
- Joined: Sun Aug 29, 2010 8:49 am
-
- Posts: 76
- Joined: Sun Mar 23, 2014 2:14 pm
Re: Our Morality: A Defense of Moral Objectivism
Mitchell Silver appears to be confused. Even if it were the case that despite being an avowed moral subjectivist my behaviour were such that I could be deemed a moral objectivist, that would not serve to make moral objectivism valid. That would just make me inconsistent.
Actually, our author is merely projecting his subjective truth onto reality. When he says things like "If you accept permissibility rules then you are a moral objectivist", this is best interpreted as "I am a person who uses the term "moral objectivist" to describe someone who accepts permissibility rules." His justification for using the term in that way is conspicuously absent.
Actually, our author is merely projecting his subjective truth onto reality. When he says things like "If you accept permissibility rules then you are a moral objectivist", this is best interpreted as "I am a person who uses the term "moral objectivist" to describe someone who accepts permissibility rules." His justification for using the term in that way is conspicuously absent.
Re: Our Morality: A Defense of Moral Objectivism
Moral objectivism requires...... a combination of myopia, tunnel vision and navel gazing.
-
- Posts: 4257
- Joined: Fri Oct 25, 2013 6:09 am
Re: Our Morality: A Defense of Moral Objectivism
The term moral objectivism is an oxymoron because morality by definition is not something that ever be objective
- Necromancer
- Posts: 405
- Joined: Thu Jul 30, 2015 12:30 am
- Location: Metropolitan-Oslo, Norway, Europe
- Contact:
Re: Our Morality: A Defense of Moral Objectivism
You sit on the plane and travel somewhere and call that "traffic" yet the "traffic" of people is something you deny! Weird! Implausible! Navel gazing?