[Serious] An Argument Against Hedonistic Moral Realism

[SenseMaker007]

OFC many philosophers deem divine command theory subjectivist, it is. 

You're still equivocating, then.

Knowledge and truth aren't the difference between realism and subjectivism.  Both of these directly contradictory positions have precisely the same commitments made for knowledge and truth.  They are both cognitivist positions on moral propositions.

Both of those directly contradictory positions? So you think realism is also directly contradictory? That doesn't make sense, because if you're a moral realist then you surely don't think the view that you hold is contradictory.

Or do you mean that moral realism and moral subjectivism contradict each other?

A moral proposition's truth reducing solely to some true comment on our subjective state is the definition of mind dependence.  I'm telling you not to do something.  That's why you shouldn't do it.  -God.

Now you're jumping back to using the definition of mind-independence I have a problem with, the one in the OP, again. Do you really not see the term as problematic? Can you not see that you so easily jump back and forth from independent of opinion and independent of mind?

If God is both omniscient and capable of lying then so what that his subjective state determines its truth. just because his state is ontologically subjective does not mean that it is also epistemically subjective. It's clear that his state is not epistemically subjective because he's omniscient. However he comes to know what he states, if he really is omniscient, and really is stating the truth, then it's impossible for his statement to be false ... you can't get any more epistemically objective than something that can't possibly be wrong.

If we stick to the term independent of opinion then this confusion never occurs ... as it's easy to see that when somebody is omniscient their knowledge isn't "mere opinion".