RE: Veganism
March 26, 2026 at 2:31 am
(This post was last modified: March 26, 2026 at 2:47 am by The Grand Nudger.)
Doing morality™ requires some kind of thinking, we agree there.
Moral realism isn't about who or what is making a judgement, though, those are the moral fact-making properties of subjectivism and relativism. A moral proposition being objectively true is determined by whether or not the inferences are valid and the premises sound. Just like any other statement. That's a state of affairs that (allegedly) obtains in reality regardless of who or what or even whether a given morality do-er has done that bit of thinking.
Similarly, the sum of 1 and 1 was 2 before any mind capable of comprehending addition had come into being. Or, if we prefer, we were harming animals and the environment before we ever did or even could realize it.
-just to get in front of this...it is possible that the allegedly up there is doing alot of work, and is in error. I accept that, though it would present a far greater problem than whether or not moral realism were true - it would present issues for any alleged fact statement we make...including all of your allegedly fact based objections to moral realism. I just don't think it is in error. I think that state of affairs does obtain in reality, and insomuch as a moral proposition satisfies (or fails to satisfy) the conditions of objective (as opposed to subjective or relative) truth, then it is true (or false) in a non-novel sense.
Moral realism isn't about who or what is making a judgement, though, those are the moral fact-making properties of subjectivism and relativism. A moral proposition being objectively true is determined by whether or not the inferences are valid and the premises sound. Just like any other statement. That's a state of affairs that (allegedly) obtains in reality regardless of who or what or even whether a given morality do-er has done that bit of thinking.
Similarly, the sum of 1 and 1 was 2 before any mind capable of comprehending addition had come into being. Or, if we prefer, we were harming animals and the environment before we ever did or even could realize it.
-just to get in front of this...it is possible that the allegedly up there is doing alot of work, and is in error. I accept that, though it would present a far greater problem than whether or not moral realism were true - it would present issues for any alleged fact statement we make...including all of your allegedly fact based objections to moral realism. I just don't think it is in error. I think that state of affairs does obtain in reality, and insomuch as a moral proposition satisfies (or fails to satisfy) the conditions of objective (as opposed to subjective or relative) truth, then it is true (or false) in a non-novel sense.
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!
