RE: Does anyone own "The Moral Landscape"?
October 16, 2018 at 2:28 am
(This post was last modified: October 16, 2018 at 2:42 am by vulcanlogician.)
(October 16, 2018 at 1:45 am)robvalue Wrote: (You also seem to have admitted that an agreement upon wellbeing as being a desired outcome is necessary before you can even begin to talk about comparing moral systems. You need to agree some sort of outcome or you’re talking about different things.)
I say we talk about math in the other thread. In regards to wellbeing, to me wellbeing is but one component of morality. I am an ethical pluralist. But that has no bearing whatsoever on the debate about moral objectivity. I could be wrong. That's what I was trying to tell you before. A lot of people get their facts wrong. That doesn't change the reality that there are still facts in the first place.
Because it is such a good example let's look at a basic scientific fact: the earth revolves around the sun. Some flat earther dude might say, "No, man. The sun revolves around the earth." So here we have a disagreement about facts. This is fine. These sorts of things happen all the time. But you would agree, wouldn't you, that one of us is right and the other wrong?
Now what if somebody said, "There are no scientific facts. Whether the earth revolves around the sun or the other way around depends on your subjective vantage point. If someone is on the earth, it would be true for them to say that the sun revolves around the earth. But for someone in outer space it would be true to say the earth revolves around the sun because that's how it would look from their perspective. You see... it's all subjective."
To this person I would say, "No, it isn't subjective. Regardless of your perspective or subjective vantagepoint, the earth revolves around the sun. If you say that the sun revolves around the earth, you are incorrect."
Now, what if this person said, "No, no. You are assuming the 'outer space' perspective from the outset. That's why you think it's objective." He would more-or-less be accusing me of trying to say my subjective view is "objective" when it is not. He might say that the only reason I think that it is objectively true that the earth revolves around the sun is that I am using the "framework" of the outer space perspective under which it becomes true (within that framework) that the earth revolves around the sun. It is only true under these conditions which I have established with my own prejudices.
How should I answer this person?