P_Holmes: Moral Facts remain Moral Opinions. WTF

[FlashDangerpants]

I will be very pleased to welcome your very necessary criticisms of my proposed moral FSK [I have not presented the full details [so far only principles] of the framework and system yet]. You can critique whatever you know of it so far. I relied on scientific facts to a large degree, do you condemn that?

You are completely pseudoscientific. Your measuring system for the badness of actions is nothing more than a list of some things with an estimate of "badness units" out of 100 that you just make up as you go along. All anyone has to do is make their own list and have different priorities than you and there is an equally valid counterscience ranged against you.

I agree at this stage it is a rough abductive guess.
Surely any rational person will agree to an initial relative difference in credibility of Science [proper] given a rating of 80/100 while theism is given 10/100. You dispute this guess?
From the above, we can proceed to do a more serious measurement that most rational person will accept.

As for my proposed moral system riding on the credibility of the scientific FSK, I will definitely have to present a detailed justifications of my ratings that any rational person will accept, give & take with a 5% margin of error.

Those values of 10/100, 80/100 are just made up. They aren't a measurement gained by counting an objective quantity of anything. They just tell us that you like one thing more than another thing.

It's meaningless to assert precision for made up numbers, so it's absurd to wish a 5% margin of error into existence for your made up bullshit numbers.

You are a delusional fantacist if you think this FSK can ever work. I will give it a 1/1000 rating and so will everyone else in the world who ever hears about it. You can never make this thing credible.