RE: What would be the harm?
December 2, 2018 at 3:05 pm
(This post was last modified: December 2, 2018 at 3:22 pm by The Grand Nudger.)
-another way to express the above..is that I truly believe you can win this argument, just not in the manner that you've initially attempted to do so. The sooner you abandon those trivialities the sooner you arrive at something that I can't answer, rationally...even though I'll still be able to answer it sensibly.
-and yet another way to express the above. Ultimately, you need to decide whether your primary affinity in objection is to subjectivism, or that some realists moral schema x -may be wrong-.
Subjective things cannot -be- wrong. Wrong or false is not a property of subjectivism. Subjectivist propositions just flat out -are- brute facts..of the subject. They cannot even be in error, lol. If we demur to subjectivist objections we simply lose any ability to criticize the given standard as the wrong standard, or a standard built on sand. All standards are equally right, and all are equally valid and robust and rock fucking solid.
Ethical error theory rejects ethical subjectivism, fundamentally and by definition. Because of this, I can't give you a satisfying answer to two contradictory an disparate propositions, simultaneously..as a realist. Error theory asserts that there -is- a right answer, but we have it wrong.....,. subjectivist theory asserts that all answers are the right answer for the subject in question, there is no wrong answer. Error theorists and realists are both talking out of their asses.
-and yet another way to express the above. Ultimately, you need to decide whether your primary affinity in objection is to subjectivism, or that some realists moral schema x -may be wrong-.
Subjective things cannot -be- wrong. Wrong or false is not a property of subjectivism. Subjectivist propositions just flat out -are- brute facts..of the subject. They cannot even be in error, lol. If we demur to subjectivist objections we simply lose any ability to criticize the given standard as the wrong standard, or a standard built on sand. All standards are equally right, and all are equally valid and robust and rock fucking solid.
Ethical error theory rejects ethical subjectivism, fundamentally and by definition. Because of this, I can't give you a satisfying answer to two contradictory an disparate propositions, simultaneously..as a realist. Error theory asserts that there -is- a right answer, but we have it wrong.....,. subjectivist theory asserts that all answers are the right answer for the subject in question, there is no wrong answer. Error theorists and realists are both talking out of their asses.
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!
