unenlightened

True by definition. If it's justified, it's not evil.

I think this is a strong, and moral position. Nothing can justify evil, no amount of good. This is the death knell of utilitarianism, at least. Yet Go...

How fortunate it is, (unless it is God's will), that we philosophers are all of good character and do not have murderous and violent desires.

Maybe She has. "Fuck yourselves up as much as you like, in your solar playpen, but the rest of the universe is on a high shelf 'til you grow up."

Because 99% would add in other things like tax dodging, queue-jumping, petty theft, flaming, driving without due care and attention, fracking, droppin...

That 'if' just means you want to be the omnipotent dictator.

Well sure, that's why we have a justice system. But you really want an omnipotent dictator to make the decision about what you are allowed to be free ...

It turns people into automata. I'm all in favour of locking them up out of harm's way, but eliminating everyone's freedom is a very high price to pay.

A Clockwork Orange.

If society was omnipotent to the extent that every crime was invariably punished, then indeed every arsehole would find it expedient to be compliant. ...

When my children were little, I used to prevent them from running into the road, from fighting each other, and so on. But now they are all grown up, t...

Lucifer the light bringer is akin to Loki; teacher and trouble-maker. I can't speak for the orthodox, but the myth makes sense to me as a psychologica...

I think what all this points to, and rather contra Aristotle, is that even in the case of a well defined class like 'triangle', the essence turns out ...

Depends what you mean by 'objective'. You're not part of my family for definite, but the dog is, and so is the urn of grandpa's ashes. One can know wh...

Well I have my mother's nose, and my father's eyes, but my sister has my father's nose and my mother's eyes; so we have nothing in common, but are the...

Interesting word, 'essence'. Sometimes it just means 'being'; sometimes it means more like 'what makes a thing that kind of thing' - a waggly tail is ...

I'm not here to defend an argument against someone who makes exactly the same argument and then calls me a solipsist. Buddy.

I got it too.

Glad we agree. But what's with the name calling all the time. It's really pathetic, and timewasting

The smell is of your misunderstanding. Rather than ground value in being, I ground being in value. First I give a shit, and then I value truth and rea...

I'm not interested in ridiculous inventions. I'm talking about the fact/value distinction, and saying that value is primary. That's nothing to do with...

Can you state in a more positive fashion why it seems fair?

I don't recollect mentioning dualist, idealist or mind, and I'm fairly confident Hume is neither dualist nor idealist. But sure, Hume is primitive; th...

For Hume, values are primary. So I explain the value of children in terms of the value of survival. But an anti-natalist denies that survival has posi...

Only in terms of another value - in this case species survival. But as Darwkin explained, the aim of the selfish gene is to go extinct, and most of th...

Here's a curiosity. Hume points out the limits of logical reasoning, hence the term 'fallacy'. He does the exact same thing for predictive science, an...

The point being that if all are consigned to the flames, then Hume's job is done and his treatise is not needed. But you appear to want to follow his ...

It's not a bigger deal than his other dictum: you can't get a will-be from an is. "One ought to do good and one ought not do evil." I take this to be ...

... is indeed a weak one, that works just as well backwards as forwards. Try instead the argument from freedom. Moral good (distinguished from aesthet...

Unprovable, certainly, improbable perhaps, but I have to wonder how it could be improved?

I think Benkei has it covered. Tragedy replayed as farce, I'd say.

I don't know how it is in Lala land, but here in the land of propriety it is always the peasants that are revolting because the toffs have more effect...

And politicians are never inconsistent, let alone their supporters.

I fear you may have the polarity of your horse reversed.

When the cat is on the mat, is the 'on' in the mat or in the cat, or is it somewhere between them? I can find the cat, on the mat, and the mat, under ...

I think it was the people on the plane they were upset about, rather than the flag on the tail. There's a special section of the education department ...

Ooh I know, I know! People roll their eyes at you and then shrug and smile.

I do, but I'm glad you are not opposing that.

Well if God wanted to intervene in this discussion, to get His message across perhaps, He might do it by inspiring one of the participants to post som...

I'm not qualified to comment on the nature of God. It doesn't look like it's intended analogically though. But I seem to recollect that it was said th...

One can make objective claims about bodies. I have not talked about definitions, that was you. Whenever I ask about persons you point to bodies, becau...

I might, but I won't. Your boiling is a straw man. Science can study causes, mechanisms, bodies, and jolly good it is for doing so. It does so by meth...

What is a person? But this is where I came in, and so this is where the argumentative circle is complete, and since you nor Dawkins have an answer, th...

This is a herring the colour of ripe strawberries in good light. Whether Julius Caesar existed or not is an entirely separate issue from what it means...

I'm not interested in Dawkins' beliefs, but in his writings. There is no science of persons, because science is concerned only with mechanisms. You su...

“We are survival machines – robot vehicles blindly programmed to preserve the selfish molecules known as genes. This is a truth which still fills me w...

Well If one is going to attack the notion of a personal god, it is reasonable to ask what a person is. Now if it turns out that a person is nothing bu...

What is a person, according to Dawkins et al? Do they believe in a personal person? I find myself struggling to defend the notion of personhood at all...

Looking up from the screen, through the window I can see the daffodils.

In this case, medical ethics would be relevant. What is a person, what is consciousness, that sort of thing. What is a vocation? My recollection is th...