Bartricks

More good points. You're coming along well.

Your claim that the one making the claim has to do the work. Citation please. I won't respond to you until you provide a citation.

Back that up. Provide a citation in support of your claim.

All good points. Your point?

Just put it in the internet. You know, the thing you're on now. Stop being tedious.

And no, it isn't. I was just being nice. And that's a claim. The claim that I have to back it up is a claim. One you made. Back it up. And when you ba...

Here, I've done some for you: here's a quote from an academic article by Jonathan Danahar entitled "Necessary Truths and Theistic Ethics": "But there ...

Stop focussing on me and focus on the arguments. And read charitably.

You have the internet. Do some research.

Good, I consider that a compliment.

But just saying something doesn't make it so. Well, sometimes it does. But not in the main. I know most of you think that if you say something it does...

Yes, I know.

The argument in the OP says "a subject". The Euthyphro criticism applies to all subjectivist views. All of them. It is you who has decided that becaus...

There wouldn't be a dent there if the ball wasn't on it. The ball is the cause of the indent - at every point in time the ball is the cause of the ind...

I won't. Not until you justify something - say something that addresses my argument. And don't just blankly state things as if you're saying them make...

Do you mean "Ciao!"? I have literally no idea what 'Ciao' means. 'Ciao!' yes. But Ciao? Nope. I can't see how we're going to communicate effectively w...

Hahaha, coward. You mean I reason and you stipulate? Bartricks said "causer" rather than "cause". So I have literally no idea - no idea - at all what ...

'Causer' no more implies an agency than 'cause' does. I mean, it is just cause with an 'r' on the end. As for the rest - you are just stipulating. Not...

You haven't answered my question. The cushion is being indented. If we were to take the ball off the cushion, and someone asked us the cause of the in...

I ask you to read charitably. That was clearly a mistake on the OP's part. But even if you refuse to be generous in your reading, it does not - not - ...

Causer, cause. Whatever. Means the same and doesn't "entail a psyche".

I think that is simply false. What, right now, is causing the cushion to be indented? Are you seriously saying that the answer to that question is "no...

Ah, that was a mistake on my part, it should have said 'uncaused cause' as the OP's did. But you were addressing the OP, not me. So it is what they sa...

This is just incompetent. It is intuitively obvious that the ball is causing the indentation. if I showed you the ball on the cushion and asked you th...

What are you talking about? The OP's argument doesn't at any point state that there are uncaused events. Where?

Yes, and that's prima face evidence that they are false. It is clear to the reason of most that if A is bigger than B, and B is bigger than C, then A ...

Er, no. The whole point of the argument is to establish that some events - so, some happenings, occurences, whatever - must be caused by things that a...

That's just what an event is. Stop digging. That's counter-intuitive. If we saw the ball on the cushion we would say that the ball was causing the ind...

So you didn't read the OP, just trotted out the standard stuff. So, by 'God' you mean a mind who, if he is valuing X, is incapable of valuing Y? A min...

no, you were incorrect. The OP is correct in what they say. There must be an event - so, an occurrence, a happening - that is uncaused. That does not ...

What makes you think I'm not judging you based on what you say? I am. That's precisely what I am doing. Where - where - did you say anything at all th...

So, not addressing the problem in the OP. A problem that doesn't mention God (note too, the original didn't either). Once more then, here is the probl...

I outlined the argument - the argument this thread is about - and here it is: Now, which premise are you denying?

I don't believe you. Teaching intro to philosophy - hahahahaha. Yeah, to your bathroom mirror. The dialogue is not called 'the Euthyphro'. It is calle...

No, you said this: Which is just wrong. It is not what the argument implies. the argument implies the exact opposite. You learn to read - learn to rea...

I do not think that's true. I think this example is Kant's, but I am not sure. But imagine there is a cushion with a lead ball on it. The lead ball is...

What I do not understand is why something cannot be the cause of itself.

No, it really isn't. Anyway, it doesn't matter. This thread is not about Plato's dialogue, despite the name. It is about a famous objection to divine ...

No, the exact opposite of what you say! The whole point of the argument is to establish that not all causation can be by events. If all causation was ...

I think the argument is correct, except that the conclusion is narrower than it should be. What we can conclude is that every event has a first uncaus...

Well, that's just false. But do you have anything to say that actually addresses the argument of the thread? For either you agree with my argument's c...

I do not think that's quite right. We can make sense of the idea of fixed values and prescriptions - fixed values and prescriptions that are as practi...

As ever, I do not know what you are talking about. I think you run everything you say through a filter of prejudices about the nature of reality and t...

So the idea that if morality is objective, then somehow the Euthyphro does not apply to you, is a total and utter myth. Regardless of whether moral pr...

Note, I am not saying that sometimes it might be right to give money to a beggar, sometimes not (for obviously that is true). I am saying that, for al...

I do not follow your point. I am a subjectivist about moral values - a divine command theorist about them - and so I am clearly my view is targeted by...

No, not an it - a subject of experiences. Like me. Like you. We're not 'its'. We are persons. I just plumped for 'her' because I think historically Re...

I mean, if you ask me who I am, all I can really say is 'me'. I'm me. The one who wrote this and thought the things it expresses. Likewise, she is the...

Not really sure I understand the question. She's Reason, the one whose values are moral values and among whose prescriptions are to be found moral pre...

Hm, no, when I say that something is wrong with the objection, I mean this objection: 1. If moral values are the values of a subject, Reason, then the...