(November 20, 2013 at 6:17 pm)Optimistic Mysanthrope Wrote: Nope. If you pick the first option then what is deemed to be good is determined independent of the individual human existence or knowledge.
That which is good could be determined for the most part by consensus and in specific instances by the individual. Which is weird, because that's how it seems to work in the real world.
Not in the real world the rest of us are living in, buddy.
For instance, if it were the consensus that rape were good, we know what you would do.
I, and I hope most of the others here wouldn't agree with the consensus, though.
This leads me to ask then: If you lived in Nazi Germany, where it was the consensus to annihilate the Jews. Or perhaps you lived in some society where it was the consensus that torturing people was morally good, would it be morally good to you?
In other words, Optimistic Mysanthrope, would you rape, torture and murder if society told you to?
(November 20, 2013 at 6:30 pm)Doubting Thomas Wrote: First you have to get a definition of "good things." I'm assuming you're using the definition of something that is generally perceived by humanity to be good or what benefits humanity. Which if you are using this definition, then good doesn't necessarily have to exist independent of human existence or knowledge.
Let's use a simple example:
Helping a friend move
Do you help a friend move because doing so is morally good, or is it good simply because you do it?
