Atla, Dick-for-brains, gnat, had been in my ignored list since a long time ago.Peter Holmes wrote: ↑Sun Apr 21, 2024 4:19 pmYep. Dick-for-brains, for sure. Note to everyone: don't bother with Atla any more.Atla wrote: ↑Sun Apr 21, 2024 4:10 pmStill more of the same routine, deliberately misunderstanding what I say (what I repeat), ignoring fields of science, ignoring psychology in general, playing the victim, running away etc.Peter Holmes wrote: ↑Sun Apr 21, 2024 4:06 pm
What? I'm a pathological liar. And Kant's distinction between noumena and phenomena is 'entirely consistent with both modern science and modern psychology'. And I don't want to admit that I exist.
Wtf are you talking about? Frankly, if this is what you've got, do one. Not interested.
This is weak. Will you tell us one day, what the actual reason is why you don't want to admit that you exist?
What do you expect from coming to such a philosophy forum? That people will assure you that you indeed don't exist?
What could make morality objective?
-
Veritas Aequitas
- Posts: 12679
- Joined: Wed Jul 11, 2012 4:41 am
Re: What could make morality objective?
Re: What could make morality objective?
Well at least you two finally agree on something. After all you both live in some kind of alternative reality.
-
Peter Holmes
- Posts: 3804
- Joined: Tue Jul 18, 2017 3:53 pm
Re: What could make morality objective?
I've been accused of failing to provide any rational argument for my moral anti-objectivism. So, picking up Flash's strategy of setting out an argument sequentially, here's part 1 of a paper I've published: 'Arguments against moral objectivism' - dealing with preliminaries. Any pushback would be welcome.
Preliminaries
What we call objectivity is reliance on facts, rather than beliefs, judgements or opinions. Often, the word objective just means ‘factual’.
Words and other signs can mean only what we use them to mean. And this applies to the words fact and objectivity.
What we call a fact is a feature of reality – sometimes called a state-of-affairs - that is or was the case, regardless of anyone’s belief, judgement or opinion.
An opinion held by everyone is still an opinion, whereas a fact acknowledged by no one is still a fact.
Lack of evidence may not mean a claim is false. But it does mean that to believe a claim is true is irrational.
A moral assertion is one that says something is morally right or wrong, or that we should or ought to do something because it is morally right, or not do it because it is morally wrong.
We can use the words right, wrong, good, bad, should and ought to morally or non-morally. For example, the expressions the right answer, a bad experience, and we ought to leave need have nothing to do with morality.
Preliminaries
What we call objectivity is reliance on facts, rather than beliefs, judgements or opinions. Often, the word objective just means ‘factual’.
Words and other signs can mean only what we use them to mean. And this applies to the words fact and objectivity.
What we call a fact is a feature of reality – sometimes called a state-of-affairs - that is or was the case, regardless of anyone’s belief, judgement or opinion.
An opinion held by everyone is still an opinion, whereas a fact acknowledged by no one is still a fact.
Lack of evidence may not mean a claim is false. But it does mean that to believe a claim is true is irrational.
A moral assertion is one that says something is morally right or wrong, or that we should or ought to do something because it is morally right, or not do it because it is morally wrong.
We can use the words right, wrong, good, bad, should and ought to morally or non-morally. For example, the expressions the right answer, a bad experience, and we ought to leave need have nothing to do with morality.