RE: My views on objective morality
March 12, 2016 at 8:33 pm
(This post was last modified: March 12, 2016 at 8:43 pm by Catholic_Lady.)
(March 12, 2016 at 8:24 pm)Whateverist the White Wrote:(March 12, 2016 at 8:18 pm)Catholic_Lady Wrote: No. It is true that objectively immoral acts are very bad, but what it means specifically is that the act is immoral, period. It is not a matter of opinion. If someone says "oh I think rape is good", that person would be incorrect. It's different from your opinion of what the best tasting food is, for example, where there is no correct or incorrect answer, but is merely just a matter of personal opinion and taste.
I don't think so. Wouldn't he just disagree? He dissents from God's opinion/rule/call-it-what-you-will. Given free will his morality merely does not coincide with God's. He is only 'wrong' if he was in fact attempting to predict God's rule. Perhaps he wasn't?
Yes, he would disagree, but he would be incorrect. It's like if I disagreed that 2+2=4. I could disagree all day, but I'd still be wrong. What we believe is that the person who thinks rape is good is wrong because we believe rape is objectively immoral. That's what objectively immoral means.
"Of course, everyone will claim they respect someone who tries to speak the truth, but in reality, this is a rare quality. Most respect those who speak truths they agree with, and their respect for the speaking only extends as far as their realm of personal agreement. It is less common, almost to the point of becoming a saintly virtue, that someone truly respects and loves the truth seeker, even when their conclusions differ wildly."
-walsh
-walsh