RE: Atheists who announce "I'm good without god"
October 5, 2018 at 2:51 pm
(This post was last modified: October 5, 2018 at 2:53 pm by The Grand Nudger.)
(October 5, 2018 at 1:46 pm)RoadRunner79 Wrote:(October 5, 2018 at 1:33 pm)Khemikal Wrote: No, that's just something that many christians believe, lol.
Similarly, when they remark on the subjectivity of moral propositions they're not contending that their every moral position is, just...like..an opinion, man.
I've asked a number of times of moral subjectivist, what in the subject is the basis of morality. They normally dodge and change the subject (I don't believe that I have yet had anyone answer). Often when talking about something that is subjective, it is just a matter of preference or feelings. And I agree, that we have different opinions on what is moral, the same as their may be different opinions on some matters of science. That doesn't make either subjective though. And we do have rules that are not moral, but a matter of social convention. It doesn't make morals subjective. It seems that people want to go into moral grey areas in these discussions, rather than focusing on what is obviously immoral. Our knowledge or understanding of something doesn't make it subjective and this is just a red herring. If something is subjective, then I don't think that it is a moral truth, but rather something else.
Moral skeptics would better describe the people you're talking to. Arguing with moral subjectivists in the sense that you're thinking is going to lead to you arguing with yourself.
Are some moral statements subjective? Certainly. Are some moral systems fundamentally subjective, absolutely. Is it possible that morality is, itself..fundamentally subjective? Yup.
It's up to you, as the realist, to make the case. Yes, it helps to confront misconceptions about what does or doesn't competently address moral realism...but, ultimately, I think you'll get further with a positive case.
Take one of your obvious immoralities. Since they exist. Explain why it is objectively bad, and/or wrong..and how you've come to know this. You might find that they already agree. You might find that they agree on the objectivity of the statement, even. Poly, for example, is all about epistemic objectivity. That's a point of agreement between you. You could start there and show the obvious epistemology of whatever it is you hold to be immoral.
I am the Infantry. I am my country’s strength in war, her deterrent in peace. I am the heart of the fight… wherever, whenever. I carry America’s faith and honor against her enemies. I am the Queen of Battle. I am what my country expects me to be, the best trained Soldier in the world. In the race for victory, I am swift, determined, and courageous, armed with a fierce will to win. Never will I fail my country’s trust. Always I fight on…through the foe, to the objective, to triumph overall. If necessary, I will fight to my death. By my steadfast courage, I have won more than 200 years of freedom. I yield not to weakness, to hunger, to cowardice, to fatigue, to superior odds, For I am mentally tough, physically strong, and morally straight. I forsake not, my country, my mission, my comrades, my sacred duty. I am relentless. I am always there, now and forever. I AM THE INFANTRY! FOLLOW ME!
