(January 31, 2019 at 8:09 am)Gae Bolga Wrote:(January 31, 2019 at 6:10 am)Acrobat Wrote: Lol, you denied the existence of good and bad as “stuff”, unlike a cup, or two apples.
If you believe in some sort platonic conception of the form of the Good, it might make sense that when you say good, it’s referring to an existent referent out there in reality.
But you deny the very existence of the thing your mental designations are supposedly referring to out there.
I deny that you're capable of competently describing it. Try again you tedious moron, lol.
Honestly, it's not as if this is complicated. You spoke directly out of your ass. Own it.
Yet, moral realism faces a considerable amount of criticism, both among professional philosophers and laymen, and clearly your own fellow atheists don’t seem persuaded by the arguments for it, to ever get off the fence.
Your views are incoherent and contradictory.
You deny that goodness and badness exists as “stuff”, the when speaking about them as “mental designations” you say they refer to “stuff” out there in reality.
In reality what you done is likely persuaded readers here more to defend subjectivism and relativism than realism, so good job.
