Philosophim

That's a neat way of looking at it. Did you happen to read the OP entirely btw? Any comments, questions, or issues with what was stated? Thanks for st...

Ha ha! Thank you for the pleasant post Kizzy! To your reference to Janus, the current setup is a base, and we will tackle the idea that some existence...

I was not the one who introduced the idea of non-empirical existences, you did as a counter. So then your counter to me is noted by you as fiction. Fi...

You know, you have a vast knowledge of philosophy and a clever mind. I keep appealing to you because I feel if you ever got into a serious discussion,...

Existence is "What is". Lets say there's another form of existence that's not empirical. It exists right? Thus the question, "Should there be existenc...

That's irrelevant. Existence is "What is". I have the definitions at the top, let me know if there is any definition that needs more detail. Even if i...

Its not an opinion. You didn't address the arguments of the OP. No citation of the steps, nor refutation of the specific reasoning given. Its ok, not ...

You've given a personal opinion, but not a refutation of the OP. Its ok, I know not everyone reads and understands the OP. Its an establishment of a b...

The question was, "Should existence be?" Did you understand the logic that lead to the answer being "Yes"? Do you have some disagreement with it?

I've tried my best but I genuinely don't understand what you're trying to say. Have a nice flight, catch you another time.

Where in the OP do I go wrong when I show you what objective goodness must be?

If you want to claim I didn't, point out how. A repost of a few sentences that doesn't address my reply, nor attempt to clarify your position leaves y...

Well, take a look at the OP, think about it carefully, and let me know if you think it works as a start. :)

Let me break it down another way for you then. Let me translate what you said in terms of what the OP is saying. 1. If there is an objective moral goo...

An objective morality would be an analysis of what good is apart from culture, emotions, or subjectivity. How do you define "The Good"? I'm not using ...

No, I mean the steps that I go through on the OP to reach the conclusion. If good is "what ought to be" and there is an objective morality, it must ne...

That was just an intro sentence to sum up what you would read. Where do I note that objective morality is conditional in the argument? I feel the logi...

I'm not understanding the point. Can you quote the part of the OP you're talking about?

No worry on the delay, have a safe trip! 3 is incorrect. If there should be existence, then the absence of existence would be bad. We have nothing so ...

As long as you understand the answer to the fundamental question, you're ready for the next step. Its just a start. Compared to nothing, all existence...

Because it cannot answer the question, "Should there be existence?" in the negative without contradicting itself.

Lets continue. If its not good for the objective moral standard to exist, then according to itself, it ought not to exist. If we are to know that it o...

No, because the question is not, "is the objective system moral itself?" The question is whether there should be existence at all. If the answer is no...

No. There is one assumption that I noted in the OP. We are assuming an objective morality exists. If it exists, logically, what must the answer be to ...

How? I don't understand. Please give an example of the issue in another way so I can understand then. You can use the grandfather, the grandson, and t...

I wouldn't say that x should follow from y is the same as 'entails'. Should or ought in are words of intention or preference. If x should follow from ...

No worry. Feel free to chime in any time later if it hits something you feel like exploring.

Ah, it wasn't my intention to side step the issue. Let me take a look at it again. You might be missing context as the important factor. Within the co...

There is no question that we all suffer. You view morality as a methodology of easing human suffering and providing benefits to humanity. But that's n...

That's not coherent to my claim. I already mentioned if both could co-exist then both should as that's more existence. The only case in which we decid...

Can you drill into that more? If I claim good is "What should be" then note, "Existence should be", then existence is good. If I go to the next step a...

Correct. But how should I respond to my suffering? If I'm in constant pain, should I be on pain killers to the point that I become a blissful zombie? ...

That is fair as I have not delved deeper into it yet. I will have more time this weekend to do so. While nice, I still don't see it as objective. For ...

I agree, but I believe I can objectively show this to be true as well. Just starting with this part and writing the next part after if this part seems...

It has! I haven't had much energy to think about much else until about now. I hesitate to go more than what is currently in the OP at this time as I a...

Its not. That's not the argument. The argument is not about "I". We aren't talking about a subjective viewpoint. We're talking about an objective fact...

Simply present an ethical question that does not inevitably resolve to the underlying fundamental question I noted and you will have successfully refu...

I fail to see how this is chasing its own tail. If you're going to start typing like the Hulk, I think you've run out of justification and simply don'...

Not at all. If you are chained to a wall watching helpless as a person kills a baby for their amusement, it doesn't mean they shouldn't have done that...

I'm not sure I follow. "Should" is a question of whether a state should be. Its irrelevant to whether that state currently is. If a baby has been kill...

No disagreement there, but how does that effect the discussion in any way? This seems irrelevant.

Because we must first objectively establish what morality is. Then, after we do so we can examine objectivity itself and ask whether it is moral or no...

Me. Its not what I get, its that we get a foundation for an objective morality. How do we carry on from there? We build from there. That's what I do i...

I'm trying to demonstrate a snapshot versus existence over time. Existing only happens over time, as actions only happen over time. Do you have a coun...

Because most moral theories cannot answer that question. There is currently no accepted objective moral theory. They are all subjective at this point ...

Sure. Actions only happen over time. This apple on a tree at exactly 1.23 seconds after existence is an apple. An apple over time is aging. It is not ...

I'll focus on that part of the OP for you. a. Assume that there is an objective morality. b. This leaves two answers to the question, "Should there be...

If we are to take that good is, "What should be", then we can take at a base level that there should be existence over nothing. This is because any mo...

Well written Bob! I think the below hammers it home.

Welcome Gingethinkerrr! Are there any stupid questions? To other people maybe, but you are the ultimate judge right? If you don't know something, it d...