Peter Holmes wrote: ↑Thu Dec 23, 2021 1:25 pm
Age wrote: ↑Thu Dec 23, 2021 10:25 am
Peter Holmes wrote: ↑Wed Dec 22, 2021 3:29 pm
I use the word 'we' to refer to English speakers, from whom you and I learned how to speak and understand English.
But NOT EVERY english speaker views the same things as you do here, NOR has the same opinions as you do here, OBVIOUSLY. So, WHY do you use the 'we' word here in such a False, Wrong, and Incorrect way?
Peter Holmes wrote: ↑Wed Dec 22, 2021 3:29 pm
I've explained how I think we use the words
truth,
fact,
objectivity, and so on.
WHY do you BELIEVE you could even speak for ALL of us here.
Also, how you think we use those words is OBVIOUSLY just plain Wrong and Incorrect.
Peter Holmes wrote: ↑Wed Dec 22, 2021 3:29 pm
If you disagree with my explanations, please explain how you use these words.
Have I even seen your explanations?
What you seem to have completely FAILED to NOTICE, and thus have NOT YET recognized, is that you, like just about EVERY other human being in the actual days when this was being written, only make things true or not true by the way you describe and/or define the words you use. See, there is absolutely NO thing that could make 'morality objective', to you only, and this is ONLY because of the way you personally view and define the words 'morality' and 'objective'. Just like 'you', other human beings, for example, either BELIEVE 'God exists' or 'God does not exist' not because ANY one of you has ANY ACTUAL PROOF either way, but solely because of the way you ALL individually describe and/or define the words you use, and especially the word 'God', in that example.
Peter Holmes wrote: ↑Wed Dec 22, 2021 3:29 pm
My problem is that, to me, your questions show that you haven't understood or thought through the implications of what I'm saying.
The implications of what you are saying are VERY OBVIOUS, and can be VERY CLEARLY SEEN. But what is understood, from thinking through, may be VERY DIFFERENT from what you have come to understand.
Peter Holmes wrote: ↑Wed Dec 22, 2021 3:29 pm
So, for me, it'd be better if you set out your premises and conclusion - rather than just ask questions - so that I/we can see if your argument is valid and sound.
But I am NOT arguing for, NOR against, ANY thing here.
I just ask 'you', posters, CLARIFYING and/or CHALLENGING questions, just to SEE if 'you' REALLY do KNOW what you are talking about. SEE, I ALREADY KNOW what thee ACTUAL and IRREFUTABLE Truth IS, which 'you', human beings, WILL and DO ALSO COME TO SEE, and KNOW.
Peter Holmes wrote: ↑Wed Dec 22, 2021 3:29 pm
For example - is this this one of your premises? : 'There are no facts, but only opinions'. If so, I can easily show you why this premise detonates itself.
Here we have a GREAT EXAMPLE of an ANOTHER ATTEMPT at DEFLECTION.
I have asked you are series of CLARIFYING QUESTIONS, of which NOT one of them was CLARIFIED, by you. But yet you want to ask me a CLARIFYING QUESTION now. Which, by the way, is only an ATTEMPT at FURTHER DETRACTION, but which ACTUALLY HIGHLIGHTS your INABILITY to back up and support YOUR CLAIM here in this thread of YOURS.
If you EVER get around to CLARIFYING the below, then we can PROCEED and MOVE FORWARD.
YOU CLAIM:
Nothing can make morality objective.
I ASKED YOU:
Is that an objective statement, or is that just your own subjective viewpoint, which is just you expressing your own beliefs, judgments, or opinions?
If it is the latter, then it therefore could be false, wrong, and/or incorrect, correct?
But if it is the former, then what, EXACTLY, makes that one an objective statement?
Oh, and by the way, the answer is 'No'.
Nothing can make morality objective, because there are no moral facts - no moral features of reality that are or were the case.
What we have here is a great example of when those people, "from the olden days", BELIEVED some thing was true then, as clearly demonstrated here, they were NOT OPEN to even LOOKING AT ANY opposing view from theirs, let alone DISCUSSING ANY thing other than that FIXED BELIEF of theirs.
I have ALREADY explained WHY they continually misbehaved in this Wrong and DESTRUCTIVE way.
What is even more laughable here is that this one also actually BELIEVES that it personally knows 'reality', and if any one else does NOT agree with and accept their OWN PERSONAL view of 'reality', then it is the "other" who does not know what they are talking about.
This one is so BLINDED by its OWN BELIEFS here that it could NOT YET SEE that its claim here is just ANOTHER 'opinion', and that is all it is. Of which, by the way, was NOT a feature of 'Reality', AT ALL.
Peter Holmes wrote: ↑Thu Dec 23, 2021 1:25 pm
The above is a factual assertion, with a truth-value - true or false - because it claims something about reality that may or may not be the case.
And here we have just ANOTHER OPINION, but which it is ACTUALLY True, this time.
That is what you wrote above here is an 'factual assertion' of yours, which OBVIOUSLY means that what you 'assert' is NOT necessarily true, right, nor correct at all. It is just an 'assertion', or an 'opinion', or YOURS, after all.
You are also right in that 'your assertion/opinion' is either true or false, or partly true.
And, again you are also correct in that 'your own personal assertion/opinion' above here is just you, personally, claiming some thing about 'Reality', Itself, which may or may not be the case.
And, OBVIOUSLY, your claim is NOT the case AT ALL.
As ALREADY evidenced AND proved IRREFUTABLY True.
Peter Holmes wrote: ↑Thu Dec 23, 2021 1:25 pm
In my opinion, that factual assertion is demonstrably true. There are no moral facts, but only moral opinions, with no truth-value.
We KNOW what YOUR OPINION and BELIEF is here. You have been presenting YOUR BELIEF from the opening post.
You have just FAILED, so far, to demonstrate that your opinion and BELIEF here is true.
Peter Holmes wrote: ↑Thu Dec 23, 2021 1:25 pm
If you - or anyone - can produce an example of a moral fact, that would show that I'm wrong. END OF STORY.
Very simple and easy to do, and has ALREADY been done.
I have ALREADY explained, on numerous occasions, how 'you', human beings, can find and UNCOVER Facts, which are obviously IRREFUTABLE, and ever-lasting.
But of course some of 'you', posters, have not yet seen, or have not remembered this, explanation.