Deconversion and some doubts

[Acrobat]

Nice strawman. I don’t believe in a rule maker, since I don’t view right and wrong as something created or made.

Are we next going to have a debate about what is meant by "created or made"? You've made it very clear in this thread that you believe in a Good that is akin to a rule-maker and that "explains" the moral oughts and ought nots. Without that Good, not even rape can be morally wrong.

It seems that’s exactly what I have to do.

Created or Made, implies something that didn’t exist at one point, that was later brought into existence. It’s not applicable to something that has always existed.

I indicated that I subscribe to a platonic conception of Good. I don’t view Good as something created or made, but as something eternal and always existing. So when you accused me of believing in a rule-maker, this isn’t true, because I don’t believe in any moral rule that was created or made.

I’m using ought in regards to what the term implies ie obligations and duties, unlike terms like should or wish.

Terms like "should" and "must" also imply obligations and duties. And society has been good at imposing these obligations and duties.

Society is good at imposing legal laws, and punishment for breaking them when caught. But legal and moral are not synonymous. There are things that we view as immoral that are not illegal, such as cheating on your girlfriend.

Outside of legalities, society opinions resemble that of the opinions of twitter. You probably don’t care about any of your behaviors that I might personally find distasteful, just like I don’t.

You might hope that society possesses a greater sense of reverence for it’s supposed moral authority, when in reality it’s pretty impotent . One only has to think of the Trump era to see what I mean.

You seem to have a problem with separating "X is wrong" from "One ought not to do X", and this paragraph shows it very well. If you can't, for a second, condition yourself to separate the two statements from each other to see my POV, you will never get it.

To say X is morally wrong, implies that one ought not do X. If I tell my friend its morally wrong for him to cheat on his girlfriend, I don’t need to add therefore he ought not cheat, that is already expressed in indicating that it’s wrong. In fact adding an ought when saying it’s wrong would be redundant. The meaning of something morally wrong is contingent on it being something that ought not have been done.

This is everyday moral language, the basis for why the is/ought dilemma exists, etc..

Now some atheists like yourself might be trying to invent some new moral language in which you can make moral statements that don’t imply an ought, but this attempt is barely even coherent.

Here we’ll try and show that incoherency simply.

You dropped your wallet, I’m about to take it, and will likely get away unscathed.

Stealing your wallet is morally wrong. This implies that I ought not steal.

Now if you think you can render stealing here, as morally wrong without implying that I ought not steal, I’d like to hear you do so?

What makes stealing here morally wrong?

Are you just trying to use the term morally wrong as synonymous with something like causes harms to others?

If so, what does calling it immoral add to what your saying here, that indicating that it harms others doesn’t?

And here, you do it again. So let's be clear here on what I'm saying. What I'm saying is that X may be intrinsically wrong, but that society generally creates the "oughts" and ought nots".

That’s silly, if things are intrinsically wrong, why would individual societies need to create their own individual ought and ought nots?

Shouldn’t you ought not do things that are intrinsically wrong regardless of what your society thinks? Societies can endorse and support things that are intrinsically wrong, ought I go along with society, or my conscious here?

No society thinks that you ought not do wrong, because of society imposes this obligation on you. This imposing transcends society, is seen as binding even on those that are not a part of ones society too.

When I tell my friend he ought not cheat on his girlfriend, what I am not saying is that he shouldn’t cheat because societies says you ought not do so. I’m appealing to some morality that transcends any sort of social authority