Of course it's true that if you don't give me the hundred dollars and I beat the shit out of you, then you will know that the threat was sincere; and it is in this sense that it could said that threats are kind of negative promises; it is only if you don't do what I want that you will discover whether the threat was sincerely intended. In the case of the promise you discover its sincerity only if you do what we agreed upon; if I will honour the pact or not. In the case of threats it is only if you already "dishonour the pact" (I put that in scare quotes to indicate that there really is no honour or pact in the case of threats) that you discover whether I will "honour" it. There is always honour and virtue involved in promising; whereas there is no honour or virtue in threatening. — Janus
There is always honour and virtue involved in promising... — Janus
Not all promise making is good.
— creativesoul
This is just an instance of moral relativism. — Mww
Promising itself follows a procedure grounded in a law of willful choosing, which is always morally good. Just because promising is always morally good, it does not follow that which is promised must also be good, as measured by the relativism of the law chosen to ground it. This is what allows us to say, well, he did what he had to do, which would be true no matter what he actually did.
I meant what I wrote. — creativesoul
I cannot agree with that. — creativesoul
Is there anything - on this view - that counts as immoral? — creativesoul
Is there anything - on this view - that counts as immoral?
— creativesoul
So morality is opinion about the relative permissibility or recommendability or obligatoriness of interpersonal behavior that the person in question feels is more significant than etiquette.
S has an opinion that x is permissible. X is thus moral to S.
S has an opinion that x is not permissible. X is thus immoral to S. — Terrapin Station
So, on your view, all opinion about the relative permissibility or recommendability or obligatoriness of interpersonal behavior that the person in question feels is more significant than etiquette are moral opinions in kind(the kind we call "moral"), and none of them are capable of being true/false.
Do I have this much right? — creativesoul
Yes, that's right. — Terrapin Station
Is there anything - on this view - that counts as immoral? — creativesoul
So morality is opinion about the relative permissibility or recommendability or obligatoriness of interpersonal behavior that the person in question feels is more significant than etiquette. — Terrapin Station
S has an opinion that x is not permissible. X is thus immoral to S. — Terrapin Station
Morality is opinion-based. — Terrapin Station
In your opinion. — creativesoul
You've used the exact same definition for what counts as being moral in kind and what morality is. — creativesoul
You don't believe that "No moral stance is true or false" is a moral stance, do you? — Terrapin Station
Not all promise making is good.
— creativesoul
This is just an instance of moral relativism.
— Mww
Looks like a true statement about a particular kind of speech act to me. — creativesoul
So, promising to kill another's family is always morally good.
I cannot agree with that. — creativesoul
If they do not believe that they will do what they say, then sincerity is lacking. Insincerity is not equivalent to falsehood. On my view a promise is not the sort of utterance that can be true/false. — creativesoul
Do we say that those kinds of promises aren't promises, simply because we want to be able to say that all promises are honourable and virtuous? Or do we realize that not all promises are honourable and virtuous, and adjust our thought/belief and/or worldview accordingly? — creativesoul
So, being moral is being about the relative permissibility or recommendability or obligatoriness of interpersonal behavior that the person in question feels is more significant than etiquette, and being immoral is not? — creativesoul
If it is <an opinion> about the relative permissibility or recommendability or obligatoriness of interpersonal behavior that the person in question feels is more significant than etiquette, it is a statement reflecting a stance that is moral in kind — creativesoul
Why in the world do we have to keep posting the same thing over and over? — Terrapin Station
It's ridiculous that I'm having to explain any of this to you, by the way, because it would indicate a near-imbecilic level of reading comprehension, understanding and reasoning abilities. — Terrapin Station
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.