Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Fri Oct 20, 2023 3:22 pm
Aha! An admission. You haven't read what I said, obviously.
So you've found it convenient to tell yourself that my only critique of subjectivism is over the word "imperative,"
...
You've been...
Not relevant. You're still stalling, and not looking.
Nothing to look for, even smart 12 year olds can beat the objectivist arguments. If you want to see some of these boring refutations, you are welcome to read my comments on this forum.
Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Fri Oct 20, 2023 5:37 pm
Apparently you're so afraid you won't even look.
Already seen it, it's the same stuff that even some smart 12 year olds can beat.
I don't believe you. If you can, let's see you do it.
Of course you believe me. You're just into this objectivism-debate-business because you want to get into Heaven, but deep down you know it's all rubbish without God.
Atla wrote: ↑Fri Oct 20, 2023 6:18 pm
Of course you believe me. You're just into this objectivism-debate-business because you want to get into Heaven, but deep down you know it's all rubbish without God.
Frankly, I'll settle for any eternity. Heaven or hell - doesn't matter.
Atla wrote: ↑Fri Oct 20, 2023 5:42 pm
Already seen it, it's the same stuff that even some smart 12 year olds can beat.
I don't believe you. If you can, let's see you do it.
Of course you believe me.
Sorry, chum...no, no...I don't. And I have good reason: you haven't mentioned even one of my actual refutations of subjectivism. If you knew what they were, and could deal with them, you would have. But you've said nothing.
Which is a bit disappointing, actually...I'd like to know if anybody's got a comeback on those. But instead, all you do is insist you "already know" things you can't even discuss, apparently.
Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Fri Oct 20, 2023 6:00 pm
I don't believe you. If you can, let's see you do it.
Of course you believe me.
Sorry, chum...no, no...I don't. And I have good reason: you haven't mentioned even one of my actual refutations of subjectivism. If you knew what they were, and could deal with them, you would have. But you've said nothing.
Which is a bit disappointing, actually...I'd like to know if anybody's got a comeback on those. But instead, all you do is insist you "already know" things you can't even discuss, apparently.
Atla wrote: ↑Fri Oct 20, 2023 6:18 pm
Of course you believe me.
Sorry, chum...no, no...I don't. And I have good reason: you haven't mentioned even one of my actual refutations of subjectivism. If you knew what they were, and could deal with them, you would have. But you've said nothing.
Which is a bit disappointing, actually...I'd like to know if anybody's got a comeback on those. But instead, all you do is insist you "already know" things you can't even discuss, apparently.
I'm waiting: give your best argument
You have them. Look 'em up. Go read the conversation I just had with Harbal. Then we'll talk.
Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Fri Oct 20, 2023 6:26 pm Sorry, chum...no, no...I don't. And I have good reason: you haven't mentioned even one of my actual refutations of subjectivism. If you knew what they were, and could deal with them, you would have. But you've said nothing.
Which is a bit disappointing, actually...I'd like to know if anybody's got a comeback on those. But instead, all you do is insist you "already know" things you can't even discuss, apparently.
I'm waiting: give your best argument
You have them. Look 'em up. Go read the conversation I just had with Harbal. Then we'll talk.
You started this conversation, so why should I do the work?
Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Fri Oct 20, 2023 6:34 pm
You have them. Look 'em up. Go read the conversation I just had with Harbal. Then we'll talk.
You started this conversation, so why should I do the work?
It's not "work." It's all been written out already for you. I can't read it for you.
Do it, or don't. What do I care?
It's a 370 pages topic, I won't read it all. As I said if you want me to refute your best argument then present it. How should I know which one it is. It's probably not the latest.
Atla wrote: ↑Fri Oct 20, 2023 6:37 pm
You started this conversation, so why should I do the work?
It's not "work." It's all been written out already for you. I can't read it for you.
Do it, or don't. What do I care?
It's a 370 pages topic, I won't read it all. As I said if you want me to refute your best argument then present it. How should I know which one it is. It's probably not the latest.
Actually, it's in the last few pages. You won't have to go far back. So have a look.
Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Fri Oct 20, 2023 6:43 pm
It's not "work." It's all been written out already for you. I can't read it for you.
Do it, or don't. What do I care?
It's a 370 pages topic, I won't read it all. As I said if you want me to refute your best argument then present it. How should I know which one it is. It's probably not the latest.
Actually, it's in the last few pages. You won't have to go far back. So have a look.
Okay. Then show me a subjective moral imperative, instead.
Atla wrote: ↑Fri Oct 20, 2023 6:48 pm
It's a 370 pages topic, I won't read it all. As I said if you want me to refute your best argument then present it. How should I know which one it is. It's probably not the latest.
Actually, it's in the last few pages. You won't have to go far back. So have a look.
Okay. Then show me a subjective moral imperative, instead.
An admission. You haven't read what I said, obviously.
Sorry, chum...no, no...I don't. And I have good reason: you haven't mentioned even one of my actual refutations of subjectivism. If you knew what they were, and could deal with them, you would have. But you've said nothing.