Bartricks

No divine command theorist in their right mind would say that 'good' 'meant' 'commanded by God'. It is an analysis of what a moral goodness is, not wh...

Then describe your view in a way that does not make it susceptible to the criticism I have just made. That is, read the OP. See what I said about expr...

Labels. Don't cavil over labels. Call your view a version of tomatoism if you want, my criticism applies. If you don't care about the credibility of a...

Potato potarto. Labels don't matter. Prescriptivism is a form of expressivism, at least as I would use the term, for a prescription, to qualify as a p...

No it wouldn't. It wouldn't be a hell if it was better than a paradise, would it? What's heavier - a ton of feathers or a ton of gold? You: 'a ton of ...

Stop being tedious. "Appears" to be false, then. The next line says Appearances provide evidence in support of what they represent to be the case. The...

Er, no. I didn't say any of that. If something appears to be the case, that is prima facie evidence that it is the case. That doesn't mean it 'is' the...

If you're view is that saying "Xing is wrong" is just a strange way of saying "don't do X", then you're an expressivist. And the view is clearly false...

Yes. You've failed.

If individual subjectivism is true, then if I tell myself to do X, then necessarily it would be right for me to X (for by hypothesis the rightness of ...

On such a view, who or what is the source of the prescriptions? It is not clear to me, as it stands, exactly what the view is.

You're talking about the content of morality, not its nature. That is, you're engaging in a matter that is the concern of normative inquiry, not metae...

Once more you demonstrate your inability properly to understand the English language.

No, of course they're not valid. And you didn't know that, did you?

Oh, and you know your stuff do you? Based on your deep understanding of contemporary metaethics, you think what I wrote was misguided? Okaaaay.

No, there is clearly such a thing as stupid (though it is not a thing, but a property of a thing). For instance, see anything posted by 180Proof. Or, ...

Well, I doubt very much you possess the subtlety of mind needed to understand what I am about to say, but here goes. The rational intuitions of philos...

Thought so. And you sound like grudge central to me. Yes, some professional philosophers are metaethicists. And if this discussion was among professio...

By ratiocination. And yes, I have read such books. Is this going anywhere?

Yes, I think that most professional philosophers would find the arguments I made in the op pretty interesting. But I have not said anywhere that I thi...

My mind has my thoughts.

You're quite a crude thinker, aren't you? You don't do philosophy by consensus. You assess a position based on the evidence.

I think God exists. I don't think God is a figment of my imagination at all. My imagination has not been involved at all. So I still don't know what y...

Has a professional philosopher annoyed you or been mean to you or something? Professional philosophers are expert reasoners. They're ignorant of the a...

I still do not understand your point. Do you think the argument is valid? Do you have anything philosophical to contribute, or are you also another bu...

I don't need therapy to reason like you do. I need a head injury. You have not shown how my case is "bullshit" (incidentally, you don't know what bull...

You don't know what 'begging the question' means, clearly. Look, I have already explained why 'X is just' does not mean "X is permitted" or "X is wron...

What?

No, if 'you' say so. If you can't see that it is deductively valid, then you're below the threshold level of intelligence needed to understand the pro...

Let that be my problem. I'm an extremely fast typist.

Dunning and Kruger. Your expertise? No they're not. Yeah, now I don't have the first idea what you're on about. I explained why even if everything tha...

You want me to prove God? Well, I don't think you're up to understanding it. So, a little test first before I waste finger-taps giving it to you. Is t...

You're doing things the wrong way around. Moral goodness and badness exist. Moral goodness and badness are valuings and disvaluings of things. Valuing...

Again, just a series of non sequiturs. I have literally no idea why you think the compatibility of antinatalism and God should depend on whether God c...

It is easy to prove God exists. But your reasoning is bizarre. I explained why God's existence is compatible with antinatalism. Omnipotence does not e...

What the hell are you asking?

I am talking about what moral goodness and badness are, in themselves. And the conceptual truth (which doesn't really get us anywhere by itself, but j...

Er, so?

No, on the supposition that people are innocent, then the standard arguments for antinatalism now apply (we do not need to rehearse them here, as this...

If you are transferred from a worse prison to a better one, you're still in prison.

Good. Go randomly blurt elsewhere.

Potato potarto. It doesn't affect the point. It seems clear enough that our blameworthiness is determined by what we think we are doing, not what we a...

Okay officer. I mean, you won't find a more forthright defender of their positions anywhere on this site or, indeed, the world. But okay officer, what...

Shouldn't you be out chasing criminals? What? What? What? What? What? What? Ok. What? What?

I apprehended the criminal as he was perambulating the repository. So far as I can tell, what you were using that thicket of words to try and do was t...

In the interests of keeping this thread on the rails, my first argument is that God and antinatalism are compatible. Most theists believe that God cre...

They 'are' arguments, it is just that you lack the comprehension skills to see this. First I argued that God and antinatalism are compatible. Then I a...

Again, relevance? Did you read the OP? Nothing you've said there addresses anything in it. I think you have literally just seen the word 'antinatalism...

Why are you confused? I explained! Here: Then you say Er, no. Baby steps. They are doing wrong. Not right. Wrong. Wrong. Wrongy wrongingtons. Just bec...

Relevance? I do not understand what you are saying. Friend or foe - I do not know