But remember that in your task, you're the one who believes that Hitler did nothing wrong. I wouldn't even want to associate with you if that was really your view. — S
Just don't understand the motivation for such comments. — Rank Amateur
goodness gracious of course i don't - you just couldn't resist one last ad hominem could you. Did that really add any philosophic significance? Just don't understand the motivation for such comments. — Rank Amateur
I don’t know S personally, but maybe he’s bad at sports and was always picked last in gym class. Philosophy is his forum for defeating others and winning. At least in his mind. — Noah Te Stroete
Whoosh.
I clearly wasn't accusing you of actually having that view. — S
ok - no worries - enjoy the rest of the day — Rank Amateur
How I wish I was still fourteen-and-a-half. But if anyone in this forum thinks they can move their case forward by quoting edicts from a dead philosopher rather than by advancing cogent arguments, they are in the wrong place. These are not the foothills of Mount Sinai, and no-one here is Moses.And I stopped believing something just because some old dead fart said it when I was 14.
— Herg
And now you're fourteen-and-a-half and brimming with wisdom. Step aside, Hume. Behold, Herg! — S
These are not the foothills of Mount Sinai, and no-one here is Moses. — Herg
How I wish I was still fourteen-and-a-half. But if anyone in this forum thinks they can move their case forward by quoting edicts from a dead philosopher rather than by advancing cogent arguments, they are in the wrong place. These are not the foothills of Mount Sinai, and no-one here is Moses. — Herg
I am not Moses, but I AM Noah, father of humankind. — Noah Te Stroete
Make an argument - absent of any objective moral standard to change my mind — Rank Amateur
How's that? Convinced yet? — Isaac
(and of course - hope it does not need to be said that IRL I know Hitler was an abominably immoral man) — Rank Amateur
no - sorry as a moral relativist i appreciate that is your subjective moral view, but it is not my subjective moral view. And as one believer in subjective morality to another we both know there is no objective answer on if Hitler was moral or immoral - so we will happily have to go on acknowledging that we are both right subject to our own views of morality. — Rank Amateur
Right, but how does objectivism help us with this kind of problem? If I was an objectivist about morals, you could just disagree with my reasoning. I mean, just take a glance over any of the posts on this website, are people being regularly persuaded by rational argument, or are people sticking to almost exactly what they started out saying regardless of any argument to the contrary? — Isaac
The trivial point is that some people won't be convinced, no matter what. And the illogical connection is that moral objectivism somehow magically has the answer. — S
In other cases, people are persuaded to change their mind. And again, this has nothing to do with moral subjectivism or moral objectivism. — S
I can still chose, as many do, to be outside the objective norm, but that is a very different position than I hold a different - but equally valid subjective view. — Rank Amateur
No one said the two subjective moral stances were equally valid. — Isaac
Isaac - I can help you with the right answer - here it is:
Rank - Me and a few million other relative morality believers all seem to hold 2 of the same subjective beliefs - the first one is we think Hitler is a monster, and the second one is we subjectively believe we are going to hang anyone who doesn't subjectively think he is a monster too.
Now I am convinced.
Wish there was kind of name we could use for such a widely and commonly held belief. — Rank Amateur
If all moral views are subjective, by definition none can be objectively better than any other. — Rank Amateur
The trivial point is that some people won't be convinced, no matter what. And the illogical connection is that moral objectivism somehow magically has the answer.
— S
Absolutely. — Isaac
To be honest I think subjectivism has the edge here and people are using it despite claiming to oppose it. Look at Tim's argument, or VS's. It's basically saying "I think x is wrong and I'm very clever, wouldn't you like to sound clever like me?" — Isaac
the objective realm is the entirely wrong place for doing that sort of work. — Terrapin Station
Judgments, by their very nature, are things that occur in the subjective realm, not the objective realm. — Terrapin Station
It didn't muddy the waters for me. You could say a similar thing about my analogy with meaning and an orange, but that would be to massively miss the point. In fact, this actually happened. It is what Banno did. He thought that I was suggesting that meaning is a thing like an orange. "Darling, grab me an orange from the fruit bowl. And whilst you're at it, could you pick me up a meaning? It's in the cupboard on the left". :lol: — S
That is my position that I have been arguing - not theirs. — Rank Amateur
How can one subjective moral view be better than any other subjective moral view - if the basis for both is purely the subjective view of the person who holds it? Any judgment on either view that does not employ some degree of objective morality as a standard to measure against is just one more subjective view. — Rank Amateur
If all moral views are subjective, by definition none can be objectively better than any other. — Rank Amateur
You've been arguing it? Are you sure about that? — S
So an argument from incredulity. You don't see how it is possible, so it's not possible. — S
Moral subjectivists don't claim or accept that, so it doesn't work as a criticism at all. — S
Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.