Are there .5% or 35 million Active Killers at Present?

[Skepdick]

The issues you're bringing up with these measurement devices are fine. There's no need to argue over them. Can we produce a measurement device for morality that has the same issues? If so, present it, and despite the issues you're bringing up, we'll accept that morality is objective.

The thing is, you are a Philosopher. And I know you will take every opportunity to drag the discussion into the mud of semantics/arguments and logical structure instead of substance.

And so rather than you making me jump, I am making you jump instead. Because you don't actually understand what measurement is, how measurement works and what purpose they serve.

So I insist that you produce a measurement device for "red".

Consider this a peer review of your understanding.

[tillingborn]

Yes.

So you didn't consider "No" and "Maybe" as alternative answers?

I did, but in your own words:

I keep pointing out that the most basic unit of measurement we, humans have is the Bit - the answer to one yes/no question.

So now you have one Bit, how do you make a maybe from it?

[Skepdick]

So now you have one Bit, how do you make a maybe from it?

It was a maybe. Until it became a "yes". Information resolves uncertainty.

[Terrapin Station]

So I insist that you produce a measurement device for "red".

Sure, then it's your turn to pony up or I'm not bothering with reading any more of your responses:

Here's a measurement device for colors:

[tillingborn]

So now you have one Bit, how do you make a maybe from it?

It was a maybe. Until it became a "yes". Information resolves uncertainty.

So thanks to me, the answer to a yes/no question is now the essence of dichotomised thinking.

[Skepdick]

Sure, then it's your turn to pony up or I'm not bothering with reading any more of your responses:

Here's a measurement device for colors:

You've told me nothing.

What inputs does the device take?
What output does this device produce?

[Terrapin Station]

Sure, then it's your turn to pony up or I'm not bothering with reading any more of your responses:

Here's a measurement device for colors:

You've told me nothing.

What output does this device produce?

And back to unread you go.

[tillingborn]

What output does this device produce?

It does what a scientific measuring device is meant to do:

Scientific measurements do one thing and one thing alone. They predict future human experience.

[Skepdick]

Sure, then it's your turn to pony up or I'm not bothering with reading any more of your responses:

Here's a measurement device for colors:

You've told me nothing.

What output does this device produce?

And back to unread you go.

Fucking dogmatist!

I am supposed to take your word that something measures what you claim it measures?
That's a black box! How does it work? What input is being mapped to what output?

[Skepdick]

What output does this device produce?

It does what a scientific measuring device is meant to do:

Scientific measurements do one thing and one thing alone. They predict future human experience.

Great. Stop beating about the sophist bush.

If I point this "spectrometer" at this picture, what will it say on the screen?

Is the output a unit of wavelength or a unit of "red" ?

red.png

[Terrapin Station]

It's a simple task. You want us to believe that morality is objective, show us a measurement device for it. The measurement device can have all of the issues that any measurement device has. That doesn't matter. Just show one, and it's sufficient. Should be easy if there's actually something to measure.

Oh well. I guess folks don't really want others to believe that morality is objective after all.

[tillingborn]

Is the output a unit of wavelength or a unit of "red" ?

No Skepdick, red is the human experience; as per your demand:

Scientific measurements do one thing and one thing alone. They predict future human experience.

[Skepdick]

It's a simple task. You want us to believe that morality is objective, show us a measurement device for it. The measurement device can have all of the issues that any measurement device has. That doesn't matter. Just show one, and it's sufficient. Should be easy if there's actually something to measure.

Oh well. I guess folks don't really want others to believe that morality is objective after all.

You are being a dumb sophist. You can't even meet your own challenge.

Spectrometers maps the visible spectrum to some numbers.
What a spectrometers measure is wavelength, not color.

I am asking you to produce the measurement device which maps light to colors.

[Skepdick]

Is the output a unit of wavelength or a unit of "red" ?

No Skepdick, red is the human experience; as per your demand:

Scientific measurements do one thing and one thing alone. They predict future human experience.

So a spectrometer measures my experience?

How? You are measuring the object, not my experiences.

Sophistry overdrive

[Terrapin Station]

Is the output a unit of wavelength or a unit of "red" ?

No Skepdick, red is the human experience; as per your demand:

Scientific measurements do one thing and one thing alone. They predict future human experience.

Red is actually an electromagnetic wavelength/frequency of a certain range. The waves are different than your experience of the waves, but that's a truism about everything. Nothing external to you is logically identical to your experience of it. The issue in this case (re morality) is whether we're talking about something external to persons at all. And it turns out that we're not. Hence why we can build no device to measure the extramental moral whatevers, because there are no such things.