Our server costs ~$56 per month to run. Please consider donating or becoming a Patron to help keep the site running. Help us gain new members by following us on Twitter and liking our page on Facebook!
Current time: March 29, 2024, 10:15 am

Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
An argument from basis.
#31
RE: An argument from basis.
To the OP, this is a version of the Transcendetal Argument for God (TAG). My largest problem with any form of the TAG is that it tries to ascribe the property of objective to things that, to me, are clearly subjective. As Annik has been championing in this thread, there is no objective honor, beauty, morality, etc. because these things require judgement from subjective agents for them to have any meaning. Take this example:

Two rocks are out in woods on a hill and one rolls downhill due to erosion. On it's way down it strikes a flower and severs it at the stem.

Was that a moral occurance?
Without anyone there to see it was there anything beautiful about the occurance?
Was anything honorable in the story?

In my opinion these questions could only have meaning if the actors in the story had motives or were able to judge. As for the beauty question; I could see that occurance being beautiful were I there to observe it, because I like it when nature moves. Someone else might find it quite the opposite because a flower was destroyed.
Reply
#32
RE: An argument from basis.
I cannot accept any philosophical argument which assumes the certainty of objectivity in any way, because the very act of assuming objectivity effectively destroys it.

You can't come up with any meaningful answers if you choose to pretend that subjectivity is not a factor.
Reply
#33
RE: An argument from basis.
(October 6, 2012 at 4:35 pm)MysticKnight Wrote: 3. Objective honour exists.

nope
Religion is an attempt to answer the philosophical questions of the unphilosophical man.
Reply
#34
RE: An argument from basis.
(October 6, 2012 at 6:09 pm)Brian37 Wrote:
(October 6, 2012 at 4:35 pm)MysticKnight Wrote: 1. Honour to objectively exist in some degree must have a basis for all possible degrees of honour.
2. The most honourable possible being is the only possible basis for all possible degrees of honour.
3. Objective honour exists.
4. Therefore the most honourable possible being exists.
What the fuck is this other than mental masturbation?

"Honour" is nothing more than the hollow sense of self importance in an evolution that doesn't give a fuck. Doing nice things is nice and we all like it when others do nice things for us.

But you have just postulated hollowness in the unfortunate vein of human ignorance which our species has always been plauged with.

This loaded Halmark crap is hardly objective and there isn't one point in human history where a person or group didn't think the cure all for humanity convieniently matched their personal desires.

If this were more than " I can sound wordy and fancy" you could take this tripe to the patent office and win a Nobel Prize in science.

All this amounts to me is the same utopian crap I see from theists and polticians "I like shiney objects".

Your words speak truth to me. I like you, Brian.
[Image: 530586_4905425916384_11506356_n.jpg]
Reply



Possibly Related Threads...
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  The Spiritual Basis of The Republican Ideology Leonardo17 38 1859 September 30, 2023 at 10:33 am
Last Post: The Grand Nudger
  Does rationality work on an individual basis? I and I 5 1446 November 25, 2013 at 12:48 am
Last Post: Owlix
  the true basis of moral subjectivism? dazzn 14 8609 May 28, 2013 at 10:27 am
Last Post: Cato
  God as the hidden basis to our knowledge. Mystic 26 11209 May 31, 2012 at 12:00 pm
Last Post: Anomalocaris



Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)