RE: If it wasn't for religion
January 29, 2019 at 11:06 am
(This post was last modified: January 29, 2019 at 11:16 am by The Grand Nudger.)
A god, at best, can only communicate the contents of some objective morality. It cannot set them or it ceases to be meaningfully objective and becomes the arbitrary whim of a subjective agent. Similarly, whatever a god -must- communicate to us, that we possess no means of certifying..even if it were objectively true, we would not have sufficient ground for concluding as much - as the relevant details would be unknown and unknowable to us.
Because there is no requirement of superstition to possess either a moral fact or an evaluative premise, the notion that the falsification of superstition would have profound consequences for moral realism is false, even if it had profound consequencs for that superstitions cultist's behavior (which it generally doesn't, either). Your thoughts on the matter are your own, and..frankly..a soup sandwich of every way that a god botherer can get moral realism wrong.
If you want to understand secular moral realism, the dominant moral paradigm even among the religious..... - then you have to spend less time asserting superstitious morality and more time listening to what people are telling you.
(January 29, 2019 at 11:06 am)Acrobat Wrote:Jesus christ you're dense................(January 29, 2019 at 10:40 am)Gae Bolga Wrote: You're arguing that we can't do something..that we do. Can you see why this is a futile argument?
No, that would just be a categorical error on your part. Keyword: argue
Quote:I understand that you think so....but your thoughts are not constraining remarks on the moral field. Wrong, if wrong is a fact, simply is....you cannot derive an ought solely from an is. Do you understand? In any ought, there is at least one evaluative premise. These evaluative premises are distinct from the moral fact, as they must be, in order to cogently derive that ought, from the initial apprehension of what is..the moral fact.Quote:Wrong only denotes some property of an act or object..it doesn't tell us that we ought not do that thing on account of it. true?
No, wrong tells us that we ought not do it. When you tell your child it’s wrong to hit their sister, you’re telling them they ought not hit her.
Because there is no requirement of superstition to possess either a moral fact or an evaluative premise, the notion that the falsification of superstition would have profound consequences for moral realism is false, even if it had profound consequencs for that superstitions cultist's behavior (which it generally doesn't, either). Your thoughts on the matter are your own, and..frankly..a soup sandwich of every way that a god botherer can get moral realism wrong.
If you want to understand secular moral realism, the dominant moral paradigm even among the religious..... - then you have to spend less time asserting superstitious morality and more time listening to what people are telling you.
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!
