(September 11, 2019 at 7:59 pm)Acrobat Wrote:

(September 11, 2019 at 7:32 pm)Grandizer Wrote: B and C aren't mutually exclusive.

I don't need to do deliberate calculations in my head to reach the position that torturing babies is wrong. but if you were asked to provide an elaborate explanation for what makes torturing babies, then you can't just say "it's because".

Why not, why can’t I say it’s wrong because it’s  dark? Like if someone asked why do you think the ball is yellow, with the response being that yellow is what I see, that’s why

What’s the purpose of the justification, if the perception is sufficient enough to recognize it was wrong?

Why do I think the ball is yellow is a different question from what makes the ball yellow.

I see the ball is yellow, and that's enough for me to conclude the ball is yellow.

But my perception won't explain why the ball is yellow.

(September 11, 2019 at 8:11 pm)Grandizer Wrote:

(September 11, 2019 at 7:59 pm)Acrobat Wrote: Why not, why can’t I say it’s wrong because it’s  dark? Like if someone asked why do you think the ball is yellow, with the response being that yellow is what I see, that’s why

What’s the purpose of the justification, if the perception is sufficient enough to recognize it was wrong?

Why do I think the ball is yellow is a different question from what makes the ball yellow.

I see the ball is yellow, and that's enough for me to conclude the ball is yellow.

But my perception won't explain why the ball is yellow.

Knowing the properties of yellow, isn’t required to justify the recognition that the ball of yellow. In fact you can be fairly ignorant of that,

It should also be said that none of the moral frameworks often espoused explains why the holocausts is perceived as dark. Sayings it’s because it’s detrimental to overall well-being is false.

(September 11, 2019 at 8:29 pm)Acrobat Wrote:

(September 11, 2019 at 8:11 pm)Grandizer Wrote: Why do I think the ball is yellow is a different question from what makes the ball yellow.

I see the ball is yellow, and that's enough for me to conclude the ball is yellow.

But my perception won't explain why the ball is yellow.

Knowing the properties of yellow, isn’t required to justify the recognition that the ball of yellow. In fact you can be fairly ignorant of that,

It should also be said that none of the moral frameworks often espoused explains why the holocausts is perceived as dark. Sayings it’s because it’s detrimental to overall well-being is false.

Why is it false? Well-being can be at least part of the answer as to what makes the holocaust wrong.

And dark is an expression of how you feel about the act, not a reason that the holocaust is wrong.

(September 11, 2019 at 8:41 pm)Grandizer Wrote:

(September 11, 2019 at 8:29 pm)Acrobat Wrote: Knowing the properties of yellow, isn’t required to justify the recognition that the ball of yellow. In fact you can be fairly ignorant of that,

It should also be said that none of the moral frameworks often espoused explains why the holocausts is perceived as dark. Sayings it’s because it’s detrimental to overall well-being is false.

Why is it false? Well-being can be at least part of the answer as to what makes the holocaust wrong.

And dark is an expression of how you feel about the act, not a reason that the holocaust is wrong.

No it’s not representing of how I feel about the act, anymore so than the darkness of my closet is a result of how I feel. Darkness isn’t something about my feelings but some thing about the nature of the holocaust.

Well-being isn’t part of the answer as to what makes the holocaust wrong for us, we recognize it’s wrong before we’ve even considered wellbeing. Wellbeing is what we use to justify it after the fact.

(September 11, 2019 at 8:56 pm)Acrobat Wrote:

(September 11, 2019 at 8:41 pm)Grandizer Wrote: Why is it false? Well-being can be at least part of the answer as to what makes the holocaust wrong.

And dark is an expression of how you feel about the act, not a reason that the holocaust is wrong.

No it’s not representing of how I feel about the act, anymore so than the darkness of my closet is a result of how I feel. Darkness isn’t something about my feelings but some thing about the nature of the holocaust.

Well-being isn’t part of the answer as to what makes the holocaust wrong for us, we recognize it’s wrong before we’ve even considered wellbeing. Wellbeing is what we use to justify it after the fact.

All this according to your opinion based on your intuition. If your intuition says this all points to God, fine. But this is just your intuition. It's not what the psychological sciences say.

(September 11, 2019 at 9:06 pm)Grandizer Wrote:

(September 11, 2019 at 8:56 pm)Acrobat Wrote: No it’s not representing of how I feel about the act, anymore so than the darkness of my closet is a result of how I feel. Darkness isn’t something about my feelings but some thing about the nature of the holocaust.

Well-being isn’t part of the answer as to what makes the holocaust wrong for us, we recognize it’s wrong before we’ve even considered wellbeing. Wellbeing is what we use to justify it after the fact.

All this according to your opinion based on your intuition. If your intuition says this all points to God, fine. But this is just your intuition. It's not what the psychological sciences say.

It doesn’t have to point to anything other than the existence of light and darkness. Which is a prevalent perception, acknowledged in variety of religious writings, including Plato: “ We can easily forgive a child who is afraid of the dark, the real tragedy of life is when men are afraid of the light." - Plato

Goodness is part light and evil is part of the dark.

I can recognize the holocaust is dark, and most people would understand what I mean by this, even if it’s undefinable in words.

(September 11, 2019 at 9:19 pm)Acrobat Wrote:

(September 11, 2019 at 9:06 pm)Grandizer Wrote: All this according to your opinion based on your intuition. If your intuition says this all points to God, fine. But this is just your intuition. It's not what the psychological sciences say.

It doesn’t have to point to anything other than the existence of light and darkness. Which is a prevalent perception, acknowledged in variety of religious writings, including Plato: “ We can easily forgive a child who is afraid of the dark, the real tragedy of life is when men are afraid of the light." - Plato

Goodness is part light and evil is part of the dark.

I can recognize the holocaust is dark, and most people would understand what I mean by this, even if it’s undefinable in words.

A question that is answerable by science is best answered by science not by religious writings.

(September 11, 2019 at 9:24 pm)Grandizer Wrote:

(September 11, 2019 at 9:19 pm)Acrobat Wrote: It doesn’t have to point to anything other than the existence of light and darkness. Which is a prevalent perception, acknowledged in variety of religious writings, including Plato: “ We can easily forgive a child who is afraid of the dark, the real tragedy of life is when men are afraid of the light." - Plato

Goodness is part light and evil is part of the dark.

I can recognize the holocaust is dark, and most people would understand what I mean by this, even if it’s undefinable in words.

A question that is answerable by science is best answered by science not by religious writings.

If it’s regarding what it essence is a non-natural reality that it can’t be answered by science, since
Science operates on conclusions formed on the basis of methodological naturalism.

Science can operate on the natural peripheral elements, but can’t take a position on this reality itself.

Scientist who are of the view that only a natural reality exists, would likely suggest it’s just an illusion, the position many of them like EO Wilson, Michael Ruse, Alex Rosenberg take on the objectiveness of morality.

(September 11, 2019 at 9:48 pm)Acrobat Wrote:

(September 11, 2019 at 9:24 pm)Grandizer Wrote: A question that is answerable by science is best answered by science not by religious writings.

If it’s regarding what it essence is a non-natural reality that it can’t be answered by science, since
Science operates on conclusions formed on the basis of methodological naturalism.

Science can operate on the natural peripheral elements, but can’t take a position on this reality itself.

Scientist who are of the view that only a natural reality exists, would likely suggest it’s just an illusion, the position many of them like EO Wilson, Michael Ruse, Alex Rosenberg take on the objectiveness of morality.

You should go back to the OP and reread. You posed a question that is clearly answerable by science.

And based on my understanding of the sciences, how we've evolved morally has a lot to do with wellbeing and flourishing and such. It's just not definitive yet and is far more complex than just one stock answer to the question of human morality.

(September 11, 2019 at 7:59 pm)Acrobat Wrote: What’s the purpose of the justification, if the perception is sufficient enough to recognize it was wrong?

because you won’t know if it is actually wrong without the justification.

Also, these are obvious moral choices. Have you never had to think about a situation about what was right or wrong? A lot of moral choices can be difficult and the only way to have confidence that your choice is moral is to have a justification.