RE: One sentence that throws the problem of evil out of the window.
November 7, 2017 at 3:23 pm
(November 7, 2017 at 3:09 pm)Khemikal Wrote:(November 7, 2017 at 2:59 pm)Mathilda Wrote: It's a falsifiable hypothesis. It takes just one person to think that raping and torturing children is not necessarily evil to show that there is a difference of opinion and therefore is subjective. But you ignore any posts where people mention groups like Nambla, or any mention of a society that may enforce it (e.g. Sparta)·That demonstrates moral disagreement, not moral subjectivity. Moral disagreement would (and does) exist regardless of whether or not morality is subjective or objective. One has to acknowledge moral disagreement, ofc, but it's not a sufficient objection to moral objectivity.
The moral objectivist simply replies that..yes, there are people who disagree with this moral statement x, and they are wrong...and here's why.
The important difference is though that there is no way for two people who disagree about a moral act to find out who is right.
Whereas two people who disagree about the causes of thunder for example, an objective fact, could in theory determine who if either are correct.
If morality was objective as well then two people who disagree could in theory find out for sure who was correct. But they can't.
