Terrapin Station wrote: ↑Wed Feb 24, 2021 6:01 pm
Veritas Aequitas wrote: ↑Wed Feb 24, 2021 7:26 am
Terrapin Station wrote: ↑Tue Feb 23, 2021 4:18 pm
Then why are you hinging an argument about this stuff on mental dispositions?
Where did I hinge on mental disposition, e.g. personal feelings and their expressions.
As I explained above, for example:
"1 through 5i are stipulations and subjective assessments. There's nothing to verify, empirically confirm, etc. there aside from the fact that people are making the stipulations or subjective assessments that they are."
In other words, 1 thorugh 5i are personal feelings/dispositions.
- 5i. Each and every good-that-is-not-evil claimed as a moral fact to be a moral standard must be verified and justified empirically and philosophically within a credible moral FSK.
5i is verified and justified to the respective physical referents, i.e. the corresponding neural correlates.
My 51i reinforces 1-4.
I have already argued a "1000" times whatever is verified and justified empirically and philosophically within a credible FSK [moral in this case] are not personal feelings/disposition.
For example it is verified and justified within the Biology FSK, "all humans ought to breathe else they die" is a fact and not personal feelings/dispositions.
That Biden is the 46th President of the USA is a fact within the US-Political FSK.
It is a fact but only a political fact within a political FSK, even though appx 50% of voters did not vote for him.
But the US-Political FSK don't give a damn about that, because its constitution declared Biden the 46th President of the USA and that is a political fact and that is independent of individuals and groups opinions and beliefs.
Do you
deny 46th President of the USA is a political fact.
As such, my 5i which is verified and justified empirically and philosophically within a moral FSK is a moral fact independent of any individuals or group's opinion and beliefs.
Btw, you should provide references to your views, i.e. such and such philosopher of such philosophical tradition views said this or that which do not agree with my views.
When you do that, you will find all your supporting theories are based on the bastardized philosophies inherited from the defunct logical positivists and classical analytic philosophy.
This is what Rorty had debunked in his
Mirror of Nature, so has other philosophers who had killed classical analytic philosophy but you are so ignorant of its demise.