(March 29, 2017 at 10:49 am)wallym Wrote: But the value of you {MK} riding your bike to school is based on your goals. Because you want to get to school and exercise, biking has value to you. But to me, I have no goals associated with you. So it doesn't matter to me if you get to school or get exercise. So your biking to school has no value to me.
That's the whole problem with MK's theses: He's taking what he considers valuable and declaring that everyone else should also value it.
I don't mind someone suggesting things (for example, biking) that I might or might not enjoy and find valuable. I could always get a bike, give it a try, and assess for myself whether it's love, hate, or *meh* and whether it's worth pursuing further.
In the end, we determine our own values. If we cannot do this, those values will never be ours and from a moral POV we are no better than puppets.
Where MK fails -- and fails hard, time and time again -- is when he combines with his suggestions various insulting assertions to the effect that we're lying, or that we hate his imaginary friend, or some other aspersion on our characters. That is not cool. That is not an appropriate form of discourse. I see it as profoundly disrespectful and arrogant, particularly as many of us came from theistic backgrounds, did give it a try, and now have solid reasons for our non-belief.
