I don't think it's just simply about goals. It's about conditioning as well, about one's attitude towards these matters, about one's ideals, and so on.

I ought not to steal someone else's wallet for one of many potential reasons including (1) I would feel like shit if I were to do so (2) I'll be worried that karma will bite me in the ass one day and someone else will steal my wallet (3) if I get caught, I'll be arrested and taken to jail, my reputation will go down, my employer will fire me, my fiancee will hate me, other repercussions that may result from doing so, (4) I have an ounce of empathy (5) I had my wallet stolen once so I know how it would feel to have someone else's wallet stolen (6) I stand for property & intellectual rights and other human rights, etc.

Yeah, sometimes we include the consequences of a world full of behavior x, rather than the immediate instance of x, in our evaluative premises.

(August 1, 2019 at 12:04 pm)Gae Bolga Wrote:

(August 1, 2019 at 12:02 pm)onlinebiker Wrote: Every once in a while a thief gets shot in the act.


That alone ahould give ya reason enough to not do it...

Rational self interest. That’s a pretty common realist premise, for sure.

---

(August 1, 2019 at 12:02 pm)Acrobat Wrote: Okay some may be some may not be.

How about I ought not do wrong, or I ought not steal, is that a subjective goal? How about for you? Do you believe you ought not steal? If so, Is this a personal/subjective goal of yours? To avoid doing wrong things.

Meaning that it might apply to you, who personally subscribe to it, but not to someone like me who doesn’t personally subscribe to it?

No, none of those are my evaluative premises. I’m a moral realist, not a moral absolutist.

So do you subscribe to any sort of moral rules? Or do you but, just don’t view them as oughts?

Sure I do, I just told you that I was a moral realist. Though, honestly...I don’t have to employ much moral reasoning day to day.

I mostly don’t do nasty shit because I don’t want to, it would be deceptive to say that I’m “following rules” 99% of the time.

It’s that 1% when a commitment to realism kicks in and helps me not to be the worst possible version of myself, lol...sometimes.

(August 1, 2019 at 12:07 pm)Grandizer Wrote: I don't think it's just simply about goals. It's about conditioning as well, about one's attitude towards these matters, about one's ideals, and so on.

I ought not to steal someone else's wallet for one of many potential reasons including (1) I would feel like shit if I were to do so (2) I'll be worried that karma will bite me in the ass one day and someone else will steal my wallet (3) if I get caught, I'll be arrested and taken to jail, my reputation will go down, my employer will fire me, my fiancee will hate me, other repercussions that may result from doing so, (4) I have an ounce of empathy (5) I had my wallet stolen once so I know how it would feel to have someone else's wallet stolen (6) I stand for property & intellectual rights and other human rights, etc.

All of that indicates to me how you derived the ought here, but not about the nature of the ought.

I might say that using the same bases, I perceive an ought, that I see as an objective truth.

I’m just trying to understand whether someone like yourself, sees it more as assigning yourself a subjective goal/ought.

I might explain to you why I don’t like eating crabs, ie because I’m disgusted by the texture, it makes my throat itch, I had a bad experience with it when I was a kid, but I can indicate that my dislike of it is subjective.

Can you identify the non subjective ought justifications in that compound premise, Acro?

The one you just quoted.

(August 1, 2019 at 12:11 pm)Gae Bolga Wrote: Sure I do, I just told you that I was a moral realist. Though, honestly...I don’t have to employ much moral reasoning day to day.

I was under the impression given our discussions that moral realism only requires a recognition of the existence of objective moral truths, which you indicated are descriptive elements.

So this is not the only requirement, I would need to subscribe to moral rules as well? But these rules are not objective truths, unlike the descriptive elements?

Quote:I mostly don’t do nasty shit because I don’t want to, it would be deceptive to say that I’m “following rules” 99% of the time.

It’s that 1% when a commitment to realism kicks in and helps me not to be the worst possible version of myself, lol...sometimes.

Can you explain this to me? How does your moral realism kick in when you break your own moral rules?

Is it reminding you of something objectively bad that perhaps you didn’t think of when you broke your rules? Is it your moral realism that’s saying you shouldn’t have done that gae?

Are these rules particularly the ones you broke, ones that you subjectively subscribe to, like the rules I have for where shoes go, how the closest is to be organized, etc..?

---

(August 1, 2019 at 12:18 pm)Gae Bolga Wrote: Can you identify the non subjective ought justifications in that compound premise, Acro?

The one you just quoted.

I would think they’re all subjective, particularly given what Grandizer has said in the past about oughts.

But I would like to hear him confirm if this is the case.

But they aren’t? 2 is something he’s worried really will happen, 3 he knows will happen, and 6 probably has a long sub list of realist propositions undergirding it.

I know you asked me other questions, but seeing your response here I can tell you right off the bat that no answer to any question is going to help you understand moral realism if you see things like factual consequences as subjective.

Just as realism contends that something about x makes it “really bad”., not an opinion, factual consequences will really happen, they’re not just an opinion.

(August 1, 2019 at 12:36 pm)Gae Bolga Wrote: But they aren’t? 2 is something he’s worried really will happen, 3 he knows will happen, and 6 probably has a long sub list of realist propositions undergirding it.

I know you asked me other questions, but seeing your response here I can tell you right off the bat that no answer to any question is going to help you understand moral realism if you see things like factual consequences as subjective.

Just as realism contends that something about x makes it “really bad”., not an opinion, factual consequences will really happen, they’re not just an opinion.

I would like to here Grandizer take on his oughts, but the way I see it they’re all based on his own personal fears, insecurities and hangups, fear of getting caught, fear of feeling guilty etc...

They are subjective because these are subjective to him, but not those of us who don’t share the same fears and anxieties here. The risk of getting caught are so slow, a fear of getting caught, going to jail, jeopardizing my reputation are nonexistent for me.

(August 1, 2019 at 12:14 pm)Acrobat Wrote:

(August 1, 2019 at 12:07 pm)Grandizer Wrote: I don't think it's just simply about goals. It's about conditioning as well, about one's attitude towards these matters, about one's ideals, and so on.

I ought not to steal someone else's wallet for one of many potential reasons including (1) I would feel like shit if I were to do so (2) I'll be worried that karma will bite me in the ass one day and someone else will steal my wallet (3) if I get caught, I'll be arrested and taken to jail, my reputation will go down, my employer will fire me, my fiancee will hate me, other repercussions that may result from doing so, (4) I have an ounce of empathy (5) I had my wallet stolen once so I know how it would feel to have someone else's wallet stolen (6) I stand for property & intellectual rights and other human rights, etc.

All of that indicates to me how you derived the ought here, but not about the nature of the ought.

I might say that using the same bases, I perceive an ought, that I see as an objective truth.

I’m just trying to understand whether someone like yourself, sees it more as assigning yourself a subjective goal/ought.

I might explain to you why I don’t like eating crabs, ie because I’m disgusted by the texture, it makes my throat itch, I had a bad experience with it when I was a kid, but I can indicate that my dislike of it is subjective.

I don't like the objective vs. subjective question because the cutting line between them can be fuzzy as hell.

The selection itself, I would say, is subjective to the person. The reasons, however, are based on predictions or observed facts.