Philosophy Now Forum

The reason for that is simple. Subjectivism gives you no basis to do so at all. So you're realizing the truth of that. Then slavery is not wrong, in your world. It's just...unpalatable for the moment, but not wrong in any real or durable way. Again you arrive at Nihilism. Why don't you live there, ...

Well, are we both convinced that slavery is actually wrong? Or are you just saying, "I feel it is, but it might be just fine for the other Africans, or the Arabs, or for sex traffickers..." what are we agreeing here? You see, if I have just sentiment, and you have just sentiment, then wha...

Let's start with something you can be quite sure you and I can agree is morally right, or something we can both agree is morally wrong. I'll totally let you pick it. The field is wide open to you. What will you pick? Charity? Slavery? Racism? Theft? Educating women? Foreign aid? Feeding the hungry?...

I am much more curious about the strange phenomenon of objective moral truth, but nobody seems to have enough confidence in the idea to risk making a fool of himself by trying to explain it, except VA, of course, but the horse has already bolted in his case. Anything is possible, objective moral tr...

Let's start with something you can be quite sure you and I can agree is morally right, or something we can both agree is morally wrong. I'll totally let you pick it. The field is wide open to you. What will you pick? Charity? Slavery? Racism? Theft? Educating women? Foreign aid? Feeding the hungry?...

Then the question becomes, how to find it? But that's a second-stage question, so we begin with the debunking of Subjectivism, which cannot even get that far. I thought you had already debunked it to your own satisfaction. Just get on with explaining how objective moral truth is possible if you dare.

I am much more curious about the strange phenomenon of objective moral truth, but nobody seems to have enough confidence in the idea to risk making a fool of himself by trying to explain it Here I am, Harbal. Prepare your mind! If you want to try and explain how there could be such a thing as objec...

I retract the "we". Perhaps you can't see it. But in that case, I've overestimated either your sagacity or your openness to arguments. I hope I have not. I think it's my gullibility you have overestimated. Apparently not. I've offered you clear reasons, and even a means of proving it to y...

We can see that Subjectivism is indeed a "shack" Are you referring to yourself and Alexis by "we"? I retract the "we". Perhaps you can't see it. But in that case, I've overestimated either your sagacity or your openness to arguments. I hope I have not. I think it's my ...

Alexis Jacobi wrote: ↑Tue May 21, 2024 3:59 pm What the •shack• is and what •on fire• refers to — these ideas need development.

If the shack is on fire, at least there is plenty of murky water close at hand to put it out with.

I think it's a public service to point it out. After all, if somebody is trying to live in a shack that's on fire, wouldn't you want to at least tell them they'd better leave it? Seems fair. 8) No shack is on fire, except in your imagination. We can see that Subjectivism is indeed a "shack&quo...

Alexis Jacobi wrote: ↑Tue May 21, 2024 3:06 pm I work with what is close at hand.

I also sense a closeness between us.

I know. But what is obvious is that for Subjectivists, the word "morality" cannot possibly have any content. It just means, "whatever I feel." And that is not morally commendable: neither others, nor even you can say that makes you objectively "moral." All it means is ...

I'm not a Christian, so I have to make my own arrangements. I know. But what is obvious is that for Subjectivists, the word "morality" cannot possibly have any content. It just means, "whatever I feel." And that is not morally commendable: neither others, nor even you can say th...

It depends on Who they were. :wink: There is only one ultimate moral authority, and only one Judge of the universe. So only one Entity sets the bar for morality. And I hate to say it, but it isn't you. :wink: Why should I believe you, are you infallible, or something? Did you really think I meant &...