(March 27, 2012 at 4:08 pm)Rhythm Wrote: He's made claims to a lack of foundation for criticism or judgement of subjective opinions due to a lack of absolute standards (for morality in this case specifically). That's assuming that there are such things in the first place. His criticism of the OP is as weak as the OP. I can't stand that shit. What you've found and what I've found are not neccesarrily equivalent.
I'll call a con a con wherever I see it.
Again, going through his posts, I do not find any reference or assumption of absolute standard of morality. What was questioned was what was provided - morality as a subjective standard of judgment.
Subjective opinions actually have no place in a formal proof, since they cannot be shown to be objectively true. So, if someone claims evil to be determined by subjective opinion, then the usage of that concept as a logical premise is incorrect. Whether or not it is actually a matter of subjective opinion is irrelevant. As I see it, Chad stayed well within the boundaries of reason. He criticized the usage of subjective morality as a premise for proof of god's non-existence while neither asserting nor denying the existence of objective morality.
