RE: Ben Shapiro vs Neil deGrasse Tyson: The WAR Over Transgender Issues
January 28, 2025 at 6:56 pm
(This post was last modified: January 28, 2025 at 7:19 pm by The Grand Nudger.)
I don't think it must, either, in fact I think it rarely does.
From an objectivists viewpoint, that people would live happier and more contented lives might be true, and if so would be a happy coincidence - but is not the reason that murder, rape, enslavement etc are wrong. Consider this. It might be the case that some group of 100 people might have happier and more contented lives if they enslave some group of ten people. Most people, in this formulation..are the slavers. It may be the case that trying to end this practice or stand up to it, even as a member of the 100, gets you killed, or tossed in with the ten.
In an objectivists understanding, we can suffer from doing right - as we see it, and we can be satisfied in doing wrong, as we see it. There is daylight between these things, between our self interest and our moral assertions or principles. This observation also does double duty against the idea that moral content is only or can only be subjectivist, as a self evident truth. So while I think a great deal of moral content is or is influenced by subjectivity, that gap, those disparities, establish that there is additional content not covered by explicitly and exclusively subjectivist groundings. IOW, no, not all moral assertions are or even can be based on subjectivism..objectively or empirically speaking.
From an objectivists viewpoint, that people would live happier and more contented lives might be true, and if so would be a happy coincidence - but is not the reason that murder, rape, enslavement etc are wrong. Consider this. It might be the case that some group of 100 people might have happier and more contented lives if they enslave some group of ten people. Most people, in this formulation..are the slavers. It may be the case that trying to end this practice or stand up to it, even as a member of the 100, gets you killed, or tossed in with the ten.
In an objectivists understanding, we can suffer from doing right - as we see it, and we can be satisfied in doing wrong, as we see it. There is daylight between these things, between our self interest and our moral assertions or principles. This observation also does double duty against the idea that moral content is only or can only be subjectivist, as a self evident truth. So while I think a great deal of moral content is or is influenced by subjectivity, that gap, those disparities, establish that there is additional content not covered by explicitly and exclusively subjectivist groundings. IOW, no, not all moral assertions are or even can be based on subjectivism..objectively or empirically speaking.
I am the Infantry. I am my country’s strength in war, her deterrent in peace. I am the heart of the fight… wherever, whenever. I carry America’s faith and honor against her enemies. I am the Queen of Battle. I am what my country expects me to be, the best trained Soldier in the world. In the race for victory, I am swift, determined, and courageous, armed with a fierce will to win. Never will I fail my country’s trust. Always I fight on…through the foe, to the objective, to triumph overall. If necessary, I will fight to my death. By my steadfast courage, I have won more than 200 years of freedom. I yield not to weakness, to hunger, to cowardice, to fatigue, to superior odds, For I am mentally tough, physically strong, and morally straight. I forsake not, my country, my mission, my comrades, my sacred duty. I am relentless. I am always there, now and forever. I AM THE INFANTRY! FOLLOW ME!
