Argument from noncognitivism

[Silver]

Perhaps you should have thought twice before contending with reason.

[Losty]

I am an apathist really

[robvalue]

Me too. A don't-give-a-shit-either-way-ist

[ignoramus]

Kitan, stop being a cunt please.

[Losty]

Isn't that what a fucking dictionary is for?

If you are going to demean a debate by making the same useless claim such as "define it", then you have lost the debate through your sheer ignorance of not knowing what a dictionary is.

The only reason you would think there was a definition other than what has been defined, recognized, and accepted, is if you think there should be a different definition in its place.

[robvalue]

I know.

When you're debating morality from first principles, it's the very definition of words which is in question. If you just assume them to mean precisely what leads to whatever conclusion you want, then you've just completed a tautology.

[jenny1972]

isnt anarchy just basically everyone defining for themselves what is good and bad  and their own definitions of words imagine what would become of society if each person did that

[robvalue]

2RR

Sorcery

Destroy all white permanents

[GrandizerII]

If nothing is inherently good or bad, then it must be okay to own black slaves.  At least according to the logic you are attempting to put forth.

If you're talking to a slave-owner, then according to that person, it is okay to own slaves.

The way to counter such an attitude is not through trying to reason with such a person as to why you believe it is not okay, but to use force (if you have to) to stop slavery, hoping and encouraging similar others to think the same way as you do.

[Losty]

isnt anarchy just basically everyone defining for themselves what is good and bad  and their own definitions of words imagine what would become of society if each person did that

Anarchy is an absense or non-recognition of governments. Governments define what is legal. Only you can decide for yourself what is good or bad or moral.