We are arguing over whether moral subjectivism is a coherent position, or whether subjective truth is a coherent concept. If we change the rules of ch...
Okay, I see. I think this goes back to my voting example. If we all agree that X is morally wrong, does that agreement make X morally wrong? Either it...
See: Still, I think @"Michael"'s account of moral subjectivism is more plausible than any other account on offer in this thread, sans @"AmadeusD"'s. L...
In my estimation the account you gave in that post is the same account you gave in the post I responded to. I decided to respond to the earlier post b...
I think such a consequentialist would say that (3) is self-evidently true, because to feel pain is to suffer; suffering is undesirable; and what is un...
I think everyone has consistently maintained that it is not a moral fact! ...lol When I said, "I don't think it is," I was saying, "I don't think it i...
The point here was not that you must believe it, but rather that Banno is not presenting it as a brute moral fact. He is presenting it as an obvious m...
Where? That one ought not kick puppies for fun is an obvious moral truth, not a brute moral truth. I don't think you've grasped Banno's line. That's n...
Yes, that's right. The position is not, "Every moral statement cannot be reduced to deeper facts." It is that, "Moral statements cannot be reduced to ...
I'm with @"Banno" again (doh!). "Subjective truth" is chimerical, and has been a consistent problem in this thread. From what I can tell, only Michael...
If the "deeper fact" is itself moral, then this is not a rebuttal. If the "deeper fact" is non-moral, then this is a response to ethical naturalism, w...
And the person in my analogy perceives no difference between himself and those who claim they can see. For those who can see the difference is enormou...
I think oughtness correlates to motivation. So your word 'prove' made me think of the limit correlation: necessary action. But if that's not what you ...
Nah. This fiction is somewhat believable on an individual level, but if you draw out the timeline and look at cultural moral beliefs and cultural mora...
Aye, you can say that again. And I'm sure you will. :grin: I'm more with @"Banno" on this one. Obligation and motivation can't be fully separated. If ...
- I think there are a number of different interrelated questions at play, but I will try to stick to the course you chart on the first page of the thr...
Then I will just end the conversation with an analogy. Consider the case of a fellow who, for whatever reason, does not currently engage in the act of...
@"Michael", I saw you pointed to this thread in A Case for Moral Anti-realism (). Has your position on this remained the same over the intervening yea...
Because this is a philosophy forum, and when you critique someone else's definition of a term such as 'moral' or 'truth' while simultaneously refusing...
- I do appreciate these long and detailed posts of yours, but if I tried to engage them in detail I would soon run short on time. I cannot responsibly...
They do not hold that tastes can be imposed on other people, and that is what you have consistently held. You're obviously begging the question. No, b...
Actually, as I already noted, I have never encountered someone who believes it is rationally justifiable to impose tastes. "I have never heard anyone,...
Your argument seems to be, "Moral realism is false, therefore I can do whatever the heck I want! If moral realism is false, then I'll impose my tastes...
It's pretty rare for someone who is deeply committed to some position to reverse themselves in a short time, such as the lifespan of a thread. In this...
I think your toes are much stickier than you realize. If someone thinks imposing tastes is justifiable, then in my estimation the conversation is at a...
You're not following. A chess claim is true, but not because it follows from an arbitrary system. And without the taxonomical system that makes the ap...
How does caring about a taste make it imposable? This makes zero sense. There are people in this thread making real arguments, so this conversation is...
Well, that's because nobody gets out of bed "because I ought to fulfill my goals." You are floundering in abstractions. People get out of bed because ...
Okay. Well the first thing I want to say is that your system/claim distinction is somewhat arbitrary. For example, you say that Kant's categorical imp...
Hypericin, I hope to respond to your posts tomorrow, but let me ask a preliminary question. You have given an argument against the truth of moral clai...
Now that @"Banno" has introduced me to existentialcomics.com I should be able to avoid dialogue altogether! Here's one for your thread: "On the Useful...
Quite right. Your post about chess-deductions made me thing of something similar, where any restrictions on the movement of the pawn depend on whether...
I can see how chess would be a useful example to hypericin's position. I think the problem is that chess is a voluntary activity, whereas morality is ...
I think he might say that a game like chess involves voluntarily abiding by stipulated rules, and that deductions can be formed in light of these stip...
- Thanks for that. Yes, this is interesting. I was just pulling an example that hypericin gave in the other thread (). I want to say that the case dep...
Even if the rules of chess cannot be true, it would not thereby follow that no rules or systems can be true. We are apt to speak about the truth of an...
I would put it this way: there are truths that we do not arrive at. Not everything that is true is known to be true. Part of the difficulty here is th...
Comments