Moral Oughts

[Acrobat]

Sure I do, I just told you that I was a moral realist. Though, honestly...I don’t have to employ much moral reasoning day to day.

I was under the impression given our discussions that moral realism only requires a recognition of the existence of objective moral truths, which you indicated are descriptive elements.

So this is not the only requirement, I would need to subscribe to moral rules as well? But these rules are not objective truths, unlike the descriptive elements?

I mostly don’t do nasty shit because I don’t want to, it would be deceptive to say that I’m “following rules” 99% of the time.

It’s that 1% when a commitment to realism kicks in and helps me not to be the worst possible version of myself, lol...sometimes.

Can you explain this to me? How does your moral realism kick in when you break your own moral rules?

Is it reminding you of something objectively bad that perhaps you didn’t think of when you broke your rules? Is it your moral realism that’s saying you shouldn’t have done that gae?

Are these rules particularly the ones you broke, ones that you subjectively subscribe to, like the rules I have for where shoes go, how the closest is to be organized, etc..?

---

Can you identify the non subjective ought justifications in that compound premise, Acro?

The one you just quoted.

I would think they’re all subjective, particularly given what Grandizer has said in the past about oughts.

But I would like to hear him confirm if this is the case.