RE: What would be the harm?
December 1, 2018 at 11:32 am
(This post was last modified: December 1, 2018 at 11:34 am by The Grand Nudger.)
A primer on mind dependence as it relates to moral theory.
Mind dependence, in moral theory, is not a comment on whether or not some proposition x exists in a mind. It is a comment on whether or not the thing to which it refer exists -solely- as an artifact of the mind that possesses it.
All propositions are "mind dependent" in a sense meaningless to moral theory, in that all moral propositions exist in our minds. This brute fact does not establish that they are neccessarrily subjective as a moral theorist is referring to subjectivity. Any moral proposition that exists in our minds but -also- refer to some fact of a matter beyond that mind is, in moral theory, an objectivist fact of the matter x.
So, two propositions. X is bad because I don't like it. X is bad because it hurts people. Both propositions exist as a product of minds, but only one of them is necesarrily subjective (again, as moral theorists are discussing it, it's objectively true that the first persons opinion is that they don;t like something). The other may be, insomuch as the person proposing it has gotten that fact wrong...but if that thing x does hurt people..regardless of whether or not our subject was aware of it or cared, it would still hurt people.
Mind dependence, in moral theory, is not a comment on whether or not some proposition x exists in a mind. It is a comment on whether or not the thing to which it refer exists -solely- as an artifact of the mind that possesses it.
All propositions are "mind dependent" in a sense meaningless to moral theory, in that all moral propositions exist in our minds. This brute fact does not establish that they are neccessarrily subjective as a moral theorist is referring to subjectivity. Any moral proposition that exists in our minds but -also- refer to some fact of a matter beyond that mind is, in moral theory, an objectivist fact of the matter x.
So, two propositions. X is bad because I don't like it. X is bad because it hurts people. Both propositions exist as a product of minds, but only one of them is necesarrily subjective (again, as moral theorists are discussing it, it's objectively true that the first persons opinion is that they don;t like something). The other may be, insomuch as the person proposing it has gotten that fact wrong...but if that thing x does hurt people..regardless of whether or not our subject was aware of it or cared, it would still hurt people.
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!
