(April 10, 2019 at 9:37 am)Gae Bolga Wrote: Neither of us thinks that moral property making and moral compulsion are the same thing. We both agree that moral compulsion is inherently and inexorably subjective. If you are interested in these sorts of things, take the time to learn the terms.
Since I’m not sure what you mean by moral property making or moral compulsion, I’m not sold that we agree.
You seem to conflate oughts, moral obligation with moral compulsion. You claim ought are subjective agreements among people, where as I hold that moral obligations, are a product of external reality that possess moral aims, a transcendent moral order.
I also indicated it is moral “oughts” moral obligations, that make a statement a moral statement, and not harm. Absent of an ought harm is harm, not good or bad.
Quote:God isn't the belief that life has meaning...you think that god is the source of that meaning,
Yet how often do fundies and other theists argue against atheism, because atheism to them implies a universe absent of intrinsic meaning, while their belief is theism is seen as belief in such meaning.
So yes, to many theist god is a belief that life possess intrinsic meaning, the idea of any sort of atheism that believes in such a thing, would be incoherent to them.
You continue to tell theist what god isn’t, yet refuse to provide your definition of what you think god is.