(July 1, 2017 at 6:56 am)RoadRunner79 Wrote:(June 30, 2017 at 9:03 pm)Thumpalumpacus Wrote: That's a lot of syllables for a dodge. "Cool story, bro" is much more compact and efficient.
Or, you could actually address my point, which is that setting your god's actions in a different moral context than the actions of humans is quite plainly practicing moral subjectivity -- the morality of an action (in this case, killing) being dependent on who is doing it.
Over to you. Hopefully you'll have a higher syllable-to-content ratio.
Ok.... What you are describing still doesn't make it subjective ontologically. This could be a problem with equating objective with absolute, or subjective with relative. For instance if we are talking about hair color of a particular person. The color of the hair is objective. It does not change even if you and I disagree on what that color is. It is also relative, as it depends on the person, that we are talking about.
Why are you talking about hair? I'm talking about moral subjectivity. Do you really not grasp that?
If you are using different value judgements for the same act based on who the actor is, you are practicing moral relativity. This horseshit about ontology is irrelevant.
