"Moral opinionist" is a good term for Peter and the moral fact deniers who are merely wallowing in the mud pools of their moral opinions.henry quirk wrote: ↑Fri Aug 12, 2022 5:16 pmIn my opinion (which is all any of us have, right?) you are an amoralist. You reject moral fact as a possbility, say we each only have opinions. Would you prefer I call you moral opinionist?
I am confident you are on target with your intuition and belief 'there are moral facts' based on various evidences, at least with reference to slavery. The limitations with such an approach is it cannot give a high confidence level or credibility to its truth.
To increase the degrees of credibility, all facts must be verified and justified [fundamentally via the empirical] through the specific FSK [the scientific FSK being the best at present].
As such for a moral fact to be credible it must be verified and justified via a moral FSK with data inputted from the scientific FSK. I have done that in the various threads and posts I've raised.