(December 7, 2017 at 6:57 pm)Grandizer Wrote:1) I'm an atheist. You're an atheist. Why do you keep bringing up what religious people think? It's like tourettes with you people on here.(December 7, 2017 at 2:28 pm)wallym Wrote: Do you think sharing a species designation is enough to objectively invest me in the well-being of 8 billion other humans?
This isn't about being emotionally invested in the well-being of all your fellow human beings. The discussion is about what morality should be like, regardless of whether you choose to invest in that or not.
Quote:Doesn't that seem silly? It seems silly to me. But you need that premise for harm being objectively bad.
Nah, I don't need that premise to be true. That's open to discussion. Just be real with me, and don't give me an explanation that involves a practically non-existent entity.
2) The discussion is about whether humans being harmed is objectively immoral. Which is tricky, because you're going to have a hard time pulling up morality in the lab. So right of the bat, if you are a believer in science and 'show me proof', objective morality probably isn't for you. But it sounds like you're just getting into this stuff. I think you'll find that most people here think objective morality is dopey idea. You just caught a bad break that the person you were taking the side of held such a lousy opinion.