RE: Deconversion and some doubts
July 31, 2019 at 7:06 pm
(This post was last modified: July 31, 2019 at 7:06 pm by GrandizerII.)
(July 31, 2019 at 6:31 pm)Acrobat Wrote:(July 31, 2019 at 6:20 pm)Grandizer Wrote: Actually, I don't know what I am exactly. And intrinsic may have been the wrong term to use here. I guess objective is more like it. The overall argument I'm trying to make here is that whatever morality is in essence, we set the rules, not some Entity out there.
I was initially answering the question of where oughts come from, not why we ought to do something. My plan wasn't to act like some amazing moral philosopher, just to set things straight with Acrobat, remind him of reality.
I also believe I said "may" before stating intrinsic. But could be wrong.
If wrong is objective, and we ought not do things that are wrong? What rule is society setting, “we ought not do wrong”? It’s just one rule here, that is required if wrong is objective.
It's not simply this one general rule, it's a set of more specific ones. Remember, I said the rules are unwritten, and they are often implied (not explicit). And in some cases, quite circumstantial and malleable.
I gave you a few examples already of social powers setting oughts and ought nots.
Now you tell me where are you getting the oughts and ought nots, if it's not from human beings employing reason (or even not employing it well). If (as you say) we ought not to steal because stealing is wrong, what is making stealing wrong? Sure, you have an inner voice that tells you stealing is wrong, but is it wrong just because your inner voice says so?
