Moral Oughts

[Acrobat]

Caring about being a good dad and s husband are examples of subjective morality, then, according to you.

Caring is subjective being a good dad a good husband are not. Now if one subscribes to morality in which right and wrong are based on doing things they cared about, you can call that subjective. But that’s not the case here.

You’re just babbling about how everyone else’s whatever is subjective and yours is true.

Everyone else including yourself has indicated that they don’t see moral oughts as objective truth, unlike good and bad.

I indicated that I do.

You see, just because you don’t care about my wallet, doesn’t mean that my oughts, or grands oughts, aren’t true either. You don’t have to care about a wallet for the things he described to happen.

What are you suggesting here? Are you now indicating that moral oughts are objective truths as well, like good and bad are?

You might recognize that you have oughts, but you don’t see them as objective truths, according to your own words.

[The Grand Nudger]

Then there you have it, caring about being put in jail is subjective, being put in jail is not.

Or, you’re right, and your morality is subjective, because caring makes a morality subjective.

You’re only arguing with yourself. You don’t really have anything to say about my words, because you won’t unclog your ears....and none of my words matter when you’re arguing with yourself, anyway.

You see, unlike you I’m capable of intelligent self assessment. I’d love it if all of my oughts were inarguably objective, because I’m a moral realist. Thing is, I’m also a human being, and that presents a hard barrier to pure objectivity. Even this doesn’t matter, since none of my objective oughts would be made subjective in account of caring about them anymore than any of my subjective oughts would be made objective on account of how I didn’t care about them.

Caring is not the metric of objectivity or subjectivity in moral systems.

Do you understand?

[Acrobat]

Then there you have it, caring about being put in jail is subjective, being put in jail is not.

Duh. I’m not really sure what it is your trying to argue here?

You yourself have claimed that oughts are not objective truths, unlike good and bad which are.
So not sure what your actually trying to argue here?

That non-objective/subjective things can contain factual elements, while not being objective truths themselves. Sure, I’ve indicated that myself

Or, you’re right, and your morality is subjective, because caring makes a morality subjective.

No, I’ll say it slowly. Caring only makes morality subjective if right are wrong are based on whether we care or not. A position that you nor I hold, so quit with the strawman.

You don’t really have anything to say about my words, because you won’t unclog your ears....

Oh the irony.

Caring is not the metric of objectivity or subjectivity.

Do you understand?

Who said caring is the metric of objectivity? In fact I explicitly denied this, when I stated that I see “I ought not steal” as an objective truth, when I don’t care one way or the other.

[The Grand Nudger]

You have no idea what I’ve told you, because you won’t unclog your ears. I’m done trying to educate a pissy brick

What I want to know is whether you’re going to maintain this rule of caring making a moral system subjective, which would necessarily include your own.

Anything else is just buying time in the absence of that decision.

[Acrobat]

What I want to know is whether you’re going to maintain this rule of caring making a moral system subjective, which would necessarily include your own.

I don’t believe in a caring based moral system. Which I’ve indicated multiple times to you. So I’m guessing you’re just trolling at this point, lol.

[The Grand Nudger]

I didn’t ask you if you believed in a caring based moral system. I asked you whether or not you were going to maintain the rule you created which would necessarily make your own system subjective.

Looking like a hard no, so there goes your objection to grands oughts.

Any other brilliant comments on “moral oughts”, arising out of your expansive knowledge of the subject matter, that you’d like to share?

[Acrobat]

I didn’t ask you if you believed in a caring based moral system. I asked you whether or not you were going to maintain the rule you created which would necessarily make your own system subjective.

Looking like a hard no, so there goes your objection to grands oughts.

Any other brilliant comments on “moral oughts”, arising out of your expansive knowledge of the subject matter, that you’d like to share?

How so? How is my supposed moral system subjective? When I unlike others here see “oughts” as objective truth.

If this is not true, my belief here doesn’t become subjective, it becomes false.

[The Grand Nudger]

I didn’t say it was, you made it so with the rule you created by objecting to grands oughts in the manner that you did.

Why are you still arguing with yourself?

[Acrobat]

I didn’t say it was, you made it so with the rule you created by objecting to grands oughts in the manner that you did.

Why are you still arguing with yourself?

I didnt object to anyone’s objective oughts, I didn’t have to do any such thing, because no one here claimed to believe that moral oughts are objective truths.

[The Grand Nudger]

I guess the things you do and don’t do will just have to be added to the growing list of stuff you know fuck all about?

Either caring makes a moral ought subjective or it doesnt. It doesn’t make it subjective when other people care( or not) but not when you care (or not).

This isn’t even basic moral theory, it’s basic rational thought. Your objection holds in both cases, or it doesn’t. Always been your call.

At this point, you’re just stalling for time. You don’t have any explanation for how or why other people’s oughts aren’t objective, and you don’t have any explanation for how or why yours are.

You didn’t even create the thread to figure either thing out. Just an excuse to air your faith and grievances. You were given a list with explicitly objective justifications for a moral ought, and have spent every post since going full retard, yammering on about how you’re the only one with objective justifications, despite being the only person whose failed to provide one, while simultaneously reducing your own moral system to subjectivity as you object to those objective justifications offered.

Dude, you’re a train wreck.