Philosophy Now Forum

You haven't read much of what I've said. This isn't my first rodeo here, you know. :wink: Okay, I haven't seen an argument, and I doubt that you could come up with an even slightly persuasive one. Well, as soon as we dispatch with Subjectivism, maybe we'll talk about that. But let's see Subjectivis...

The first statement is true, plausibly; the second, verifiably not. There is page after page here of me arguing, with reasons, for objective morality. You haven't got an argument. You haven't read much of what I've said. This isn't my first rodeo here, you know. :wink: Okay, I haven't seen an argum...

The first statement is true, plausibly; the second, verifiably not. There is page after page here of me arguing, with reasons, for objective morality. You haven't got an argument. All you've got is, there is a God, and he decides what's moral and what's not. That's it; that's all you've got. That's...

You have said absolutely nothing to change my view, and you have said absolutely nothing to support your own. The first statement is true, plausibly; the second, verifiably not. There is page after page here of me arguing, with reasons, for objective morality. You haven't got an argument. All you'v...

We have spent enough time putting my version of morality up against the wall for you to shoot at... Is it dead yet? If not, why not? I've shown that logically, it makes no sense at all, even on its own terms. Why is it still kicking? :? You have said absolutely nothing to change my view, and you ha...

Then you "incorporate" an idea that isn't even possibly true. It's incoherent -- The words, "true" and "coherent", are not applicable. They're applicable to everything, so long as it's true and applicable. If your version of morality isn't true or applicable, then exac...

I'm not talking about the incoherent concept you think "morality" is, that's for sure. No, it isn't what I think morality is; it is what morality is to me, and to a good many others here, it seems. Then you "incorporate" an idea that isn't even possibly true. It's incoherent -- ...

It isn't, actually. Because you haven't established that any of those opinions are actually "moral." I know for sure that I have feelings about right and wrong, and that is what morality is, and that is what I am referring to when I talk about morality. You are obviously talking about som...

No God, no morality. If you think otherwise, just show what I asked you to show: that you can justify one moral precept. Just one . Any one , with no reference to objectivity. We know that everybody has subjective moral opinions, so the only question is, is there any other kind of morality; It isn'...

No God, no morality. If you think otherwise, just show what I asked you to show: that you can justify one moral precept. Just one . Any one , with no reference to objectivity. We know that everybody has subjective moral opinions, so the only question is, is there any other kind of morality; one tha...

None you will admit, anyway. But yeah, there is. No there isn't. Yeah, there is. But you have to allow the evidence to be recognized as evidence. If you just gratuitiously insist there's none, and never look, then not surprisingly, you'll remain convinced of that. But the deficiency won't be in the...

It looks like the discussion now hinges on whether God exists. If there is no God, there’s no morality. Since there’s no such thing as objective morality and furthermore subjective morality is subjective and worthless, God is either worthless or doesn’t exist. IC's claims about morality are inextri...

Of course they can. Being moral makes the world more habitable, unless you want to fortify your home against your neighbors walking in and stealing from you. Morality holds society together. That is why you should be moral. Nietzsche had an answer for that one, too. Yes, it can be useful for other ...

Veritas Aequitas wrote: ↑Mon May 13, 2024 6:09 am
The fact is your realism view is a primal and primitive view driven by an evolutionary default, thus supported by the majority.

It seems you are wrong on the grounds that too many people agree with you, Peter.

No, rationality makes it so. There is no rationality by which it can be shown that God is an objective reality. None you will admit, anyway. But yeah, there is. No there isn't. There are some things about nature that we yet have no explanation for, so you arbitrarily attribute them to God, that's a...