[split] Are Questions About God Important?

[The Grand Nudger]

I believe this can be tested out.  Present me with any ethical conundrum, and I will say what I prefer from a purely self-interested perspective, and it will be seen that it pragmatically ends up the same as anyone else who tries to justify their moral choices with appeal to some external source of constraint.

You could test it out internally.  Have you never been in the position of thinking that a/the right thing to do is something that you didn't want to do? Or thinking that something you very much did want to do, was not a/the right thing to do? Did you ignore your concerns in all of those cases and do what you wanted to do no matter how you felt about it's rightness or wrongness?

Subjectivism as an error from an error theorist is not subjectivism as a metaethical fact or from a subjectivist. Subjectivism as a metaethical fact allows that morality does exist, and is predicate on some fact about us, and this is the right way to "do morality". An error theorist might even allow that we could do morality some objective way, but we don't, we do it a subjective way. In every explanation of moral content or moral statements morality exists and is [insert our theory to explain it here].

End of the day, if we're all subjectivists now, we probably ought to get comfortable with the language and consequences of that, rather than contend that an error theorists criticism, objectively asserted..is subjectivism, which doesn't exist.