You are viewing the historical archive of The Philosophy Forum.
For current discussions, visit the live forum.
Go to live forum

Bartricks

Comments

No, you are a derailer who prefers to address me than anything in the OP. So, try again without- without - expressing your view about me. See if you c...
April 22, 2021 at 01:00
Tedious. Stop focusing on me and address the op.
April 22, 2021 at 00:53
This is partial reply because I am about to go up mountain. OMG! i am not denying they're 'compatible'. Sheesh. I am saying that subjectivism does not...
April 21, 2021 at 23:04
Well that's false. The arguments I have made show that God's existence implies antinatalism. That's quite significant, as anyone with an inquiring min...
April 21, 2021 at 23:01
You're just confused. Realism in ethics, like I say, is the view that moral statements are truth apt and some of them are true. You are conflating rea...
April 20, 2021 at 21:46
More from the Hugh Janus. Nothing you just said was correct or addressed the op.
April 20, 2021 at 20:23
Exactly what I'd expect to come out of a Hugh Janus. Here is how I defined naturalism: Note, then, metaethical naturalism broadly construed does, or c...
April 20, 2021 at 00:52
No it isn't. That isn't what the quote said. The quote said what I said. Do you have any expertise in this area, Hugh? Or do you not have the first id...
April 19, 2021 at 14:59
It's just the definition of moral realism. Moral realism 'just is' the view that moral statements are truth apt and some of them are true. Moral reali...
April 19, 2021 at 14:55
Yes. The point is that whether God's existence is compatible with the truth of antinatalism does not depend on whether or not God exists. For example,...
April 19, 2021 at 01:40
No, you are simply misunderstanding naturalism. The view that moral prescriptions come from individuals is individual subjectivism, not naturalism (as...
April 18, 2021 at 21:43
Address the op or go away Hugh.
April 18, 2021 at 21:00
Turn your brains on and think. Why does possession of the omni properties imply God created everything?? Put down your bibles, dust off your reason an...
April 18, 2021 at 20:40
So, Hugh, if I tell myself to do x, it is necessarily right for me to do x? Look, this thread isn't about individual subjectivism about morality. For ...
April 18, 2021 at 20:29
Just argue something. Stop lamely declaring - without argument - that my case is 'garbage'. If you can't argue anything, at least insult me better
April 18, 2021 at 20:22
An argument. That was not an argument. Explain why the omni properties imply that their possessor created everything.
April 18, 2021 at 10:36
Present an argument for that.
April 17, 2021 at 21:38
You're too confused.
April 17, 2021 at 19:32
Just read the OP and address something argued in it. Simple. Now, in the OP I argued that the existence of an omnipotent, omniscient, omnibenevolent b...
April 17, 2021 at 19:31
Yes, I know. But I didn't say 1 was false, did I? I said 2 was false. You're building a commitment to moral realism into individual moral subjectivism...
April 17, 2021 at 19:25
Question begging.
April 17, 2021 at 18:52
Oscar Wilde look out! Well, that's question begging.
April 17, 2021 at 06:25
Er, what?
April 17, 2021 at 06:16
Well, you haven't thanked me. But okay, yes - you were wrong. That's what I said before and then again and then again. Here again, for the slow witted...
April 17, 2021 at 06:15
Ah, some wit. No though. I'm well paid.
April 17, 2021 at 03:45
First thank me for explaining the blindingly obvious to you thus far. Like I say, I explain things for a living, but I'm not going to give you free le...
April 17, 2021 at 03:33
It is not unsolvable. That does not follow. Obviously we did not create ourselves (nor did God create himself). But it does not follow from God's omni...
April 17, 2021 at 03:32
Yeah, that's false. Is the existence of a unicorn compatible with antinatalism? Yes. Does that mean unicorns exist? Er, no.
April 17, 2021 at 03:28
Oh dear, and things were going so well between us, and with apologies to Frank Sinatra, "then you go and spoil it all by saying something stupid like:...
April 17, 2021 at 03:22
Then we agree. And thus presumably you would agree that God and antinatalism are compatible? Or do we need to go through why you should?
April 17, 2021 at 03:03
Assuming the truth of that which one was trying to show is not the same as assuming too much, for one can do the latter without doing the former. I ex...
April 17, 2021 at 02:56
You think there are more?
April 17, 2021 at 02:47
Those aren't the same. And it is 'too' much, not 'to' much.
April 17, 2021 at 02:43
Er no. Cast your mind back to when you were doing philosophy at woodwork college in 1812 with the 'respect philosopher' and try and remember what 'que...
April 17, 2021 at 02:37
Question begging.
April 17, 2021 at 02:29
Hmm, by my calculations you were at college (presumably woodwork) in the 1970s, so that would make you in your 70s today, or perhaps your 60s. Yet you...
April 17, 2021 at 02:26
Er, no. That's valid. This was the form your first argument took And that's invalid because it is invalid. Yet you don't know it. Not a good student t...
April 17, 2021 at 01:53
The same reason the first isn't. It doesn't conform to any of the 9 rules of inference that you don't know but are currently looking up. Now, do you h...
April 17, 2021 at 01:07
Yes, unfortunately I did waste time doing that. And you asked to be shown why your arguments were not 'valid'. We did not mention their soundness. But...
April 17, 2021 at 01:06
No, 'you' need guidance. You do not have to show that an argument's premises are 'false' to establish invalidity. An argument is invalid when its conc...
April 17, 2021 at 00:47
Oh, change the record you whiny creep. You're the bully. You're obsessed with 'me' and getting me - so far as I can tell the only proper philosopher o...
April 17, 2021 at 00:35
Included in the definition of a troll, according to the internet anyway, is "someone who intentionally....tries to instigate arguments in an online co...
April 17, 2021 at 00:27
I bloody do.
April 17, 2021 at 00:18
No, that's not correct. 1 is true. But 2 is false - you are not committed to realism. I mean, admittedly it'd be quite odd to be a subjectivist and th...
April 17, 2021 at 00:16
So? I am interested in whether an omnipotent, omniscient, omnibenevolent's existence is consistent with antinatalism, and whether it positively implie...
April 16, 2021 at 23:50
Yes, you're a troll. You - like most of the others above - are not remotely interested in anything in the OP. Oh well, ho hum. Haha, nobody, but nobod...
April 16, 2021 at 03:11
'God' denotes an omnipotent, omniscient, omnibenevolent being. There's no dispute over that. And anyway, I stipulated that this is how I am using the ...
April 16, 2021 at 01:19
The clue to why lies in the conclusion of this valid argument: 1. If someone thinks Sir2u's arguments are valid, then that person is too dumb for fun ...
April 16, 2021 at 01:17
God. Water is made of tiny molecules, yes? That doesn't mean 'water' means 'tiny molecules'. This thread isn't about divine command theory, but the st...
April 16, 2021 at 00:28
To be honest, replying to you isn't worth the hassle as no matter what I say, you seem hell bent on telling me that I've said something else, and then...
April 16, 2021 at 00:14