Bartricks

Right. Well now that you've done what you needed to do, know that a 'fallacy' is an error in reasoning. You don't commit a fallacy just by asserting s...

no, that's false. I am 'concluding' that reason is the source of those things. Now, you don't know things. What is a fallacy? Say what you understand ...

So, what is the fallacy? Because, like I say, I don't think you even know how to use that word. I have made arguments. My reply to you contained argum...

I find that those who just label things fallacies turn out not to know what they're talking about. So, without invoking a label, say what you mean.

First, moral values are demonstrably - that is, provably - the values of a subject. If that subject values something, necessarily it will be morally v...

It is you - not I - who keeps mentioning God. My argument leads to the conclusion that moral values are the values of a subject, Reason. She is a god....

For two reasons, first communities can't value things (only the members of communities can). A community is a community of subjects. But it is not its...

And what the hell does mean? Eurgh. Just use English. If you can't express your meaning in that language I will never ever understand you. You say, in...

No, no 'charity', it is just valid. Anyone with basic English language skills understands that "if moral values are my values" or "if moral values are...

Oh I'm getting somewhere am I - blimey! You could power a small town with all the patronising condescension you're giving off. No, I am not getting an...

Not sure why you felt it necessary to bellow 'ITALICS MINE', but then I imagine you bellow things randomly quite a lot. How about addressing my argume...

Here's an argument. Is it valid? Don't categorise it. Resist the urge to use words like 'modal' and 'transitive'. Stick with proper English - by which...

I do not need the objections explained to me. When expressed in English, I understand them. And I understand that they are poor. Maybe stop assuming m...

i thought you'd read a lot of moral philosophy? Seems you haven't. It is the basis of the Euthyphro criticism.

I jolly well have! First, I don't want to prove a god exists, I want to establish what moral values are. Second, I have proved it and no-one has raise...

I have no idea what that might be, and I am not sure I want to know. Sounds like it will be second-rate philosophy combined with second-rate neuroscie...

I use the term 'continental philosophy' to mean 'bullshit' and 'continental philosopher' to mean 'failed analytic philosopher who has now decided to t...

What you've done there is change my argument to a different one to fit your agenda - the agenda of showing my argument is invalid at any cost. What wa...

So you are rejecting my argument as part and parcel of rejecting analytic philosophy - okay! The rest of what you said was ignorant gibberish. Contine...

I don't know what you mean. Define 'meaning' first, then perhaps I'll understand you - although I think I will probably be asking you for a definition...

I do not understand you, as ever. And what I am doing is not easy. If you think it is, just construct a refutation of my argument.

Why not test that thesis? Note, I don't just deny things, I argue them. Unlike you Argue!! Note too that for hundreds - literally hundreds - of posts ...

I don't understand what objection you're raising. I am not attacking a straw man - I am attacking moral objectivism, a view subscribed to by most cont...

At first I would charitably take you to be being dishonest, for someone who cannot see that the argument is valid is quite stupid in my opinion. I kno...

Question begging.

Question begging.

Same here. Exactly the same. It is necessary, as the argument demonstrates. Question begging. So, construct an argument in which the negation of one o...

You're telling me 'about' objectivists, but you're not actually explaining anything. For instance, look at what you say here: What sense? I mean, lite...

look up 'Socratic fallacy'

no, there's more than one way to be an objectivist. They could reject premise 1, or they could reject 2. Sheesh!! Not sanely - that's why the argument...

And I ask you again, what do you think a refutation of moral objectivism would look like? Or can't there be one? Is there nothing - no form of argumen...

Anyone who's read a fair bit of moral philosophy knows the name of that thesis, for it is one of the few theses in moral philosophy that nearly everyo...

No it doesn't, it looks like you haven't. What is the name of this thesis: If two worlds are identical in all non-moral respects, then necessarily the...

No premise does that. Wishful thinking on your part. Indeed, you've explained why it does not. An objectivist can, in principle, accept premise 1 and ...

Or do you think that moral values are not invariable across time and space? if so, what do you do with all those widely corroborated rational intuitio...

Okay, what do you say about it, then? If moral truths are invariable across time and space, how does identifying them with the emanations of a Form ex...

No, it is exactly how it is used in moral philosophy. You're the one using it incorrectly. Most moral philosophers think that if an act - let's pick a...

No, now you've made all syllogisms question begging just by dint of their nature, which is absurd. The first premise says only that to be valuable is ...

I have a lot in common with those who believe in the Platonic form of the good - far more than I have in common with individual and collectivist subje...

Why don't you just answer the question? If you value raping someone, is it necessarily morally good for you to do so? Yes, it is question begging to a...

I am using 'necessary' to mean 'cannot not be the case'. Most moral philosophers think that it is impossible for two worlds to be identical in every w...

No, it does not make any more sense to me. Perhaps you can just say if you consider this argument to be valid:

You and I can agree that some things are morally valuable. And I take it by 'inherent' moral value, we mean moral value that does not derive from the ...

I don't know about all this DeMorgan stuff. But what you've said seems plainly false. Q says "if I value something, necessarily it is morally valuable...

Still not seeing it. valuings are relations, so let's take an example that involves valuing relations, just not of the contentious moral kind. 1. If S...

1. If moral values are my values, then if I value something, necessarily it is morally valuable 2. I don't value something nor it is necessarily moral...

I think it is just as evident that my values are not moral values as it is that I am not superman. Do you think my values are moral values? Do you thi...

Well, I am aware that some people here seem to be working with different systems of logic. Yes, I have been collecting modal cars for years. Joke. No,...

so do you think a person does need a body to have a gender? You've asserted that minds cannot exist apart from bodies. I think that's false. And anywa...

yes, the argument is valid so the conclusion must be true if the premises are. Therefore a competent critic will take issue with a premise. And it has...