For the discussion of all things philosophical.
https://canzookia.com/
You're right, we shouldn't point out wrong thing. Now give me 2 million dollars, and I'll also give you 1 million dollars, so you'll have more money in the end. This is going to be great for you.
Lucky for you I am a self-defeating altruist who doesn't pursue individual "greatness", so lets do the experiment in reverse to your advantage?
Hey, you noticed what's wrong with the exchange. Amazing isn't it.
I do understand and I totally believe you!
Why avoiding things like total chaos, total nonsense, and the collapse of civilization matters? If you think that's an interesting question then open a topic about it, I promise I won't show up.Skepdick wrote: ↑Sat Nov 28, 2020 11:47 amI do understand and I totally believe you!
Which is WHY you should be perfectly capable of providing an answer to my "WHY?" question; an answer that doesn't contain a moral dimension.
Your own, personal amoral answer as to why pointing out "wrongness" matters.
Surely you can do that? You suck at English way less than me.
The question sure is boring, but why did you load it with a moral dimension?
Again, if nothing matters to you then give me 2 millions and I'll give you 1 million.
Because I'm a human, maybe this is something you overlooked, I'd prefer to live well.
I am guessing this "living well" is also without a moral dimension?
outside of philosophy there are damned few moral anti-realists (truly misguided folks) , and -- once you scrape away irrelevancies -- most folks have a common root morality, one undergirded by recognized moral factAtla wrote: ↑Sat Nov 28, 2020 6:02 amThis one is a fact, not an opinion. Just because you can't grasp that many people do actually think that way, doesn't mean that they are making it up.
THAT's the point! If Atheism is true, then everything is unjustifiable...indeed, justification is not even possible. Whatever is, is good. Or rather, what is, is neither good nor bad; it simply is what is. There are no alternatives.
the common root morality is undergrirded by our intrinsic moral psychology, not by some objective moral fact, that's painfully obvioushenry quirk wrote: ↑Sat Nov 28, 2020 2:30 pmoutside of philosophy there are damned few moral anti-realists (truly misguided folks) , and -- once you scrape away irrelevancies -- most folks have a common root morality, one undergirded by recognized moral fact
the anti-realists, like the anti-free willies, are a clear example, and warning, to the world that one can become a prisoner of one's own navel
...in my opinion...
Boy are you are dense. You are realizing all this just now? And you actually thought that I didn't mean all this all along?Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Sat Nov 28, 2020 3:18 pm THAT's the point! If Atheism is true, then everything is unjustifiable...indeed, justification is not even possible. Whatever is, is good. Or rather, what is, is neither good nor bad; it simply is what is. There are no alternatives.
That's why subjectivism means amorality. All alleged morals are, from a subjectivist perspective, utterly unjustifiable, utter deceptions, utter fakes.
But now, the problem gets worse. For if all morals are simply unjustifiable, what does it mean that people still speak of morals? It can mean nothing other than this: that they use deceptive moral language to bully others, without justification, into following whatever actions the moral-language-users are advocating.
In other words, as Nietzsche said, all morality is simply a power-play. It has no legitimacy. We are on a morally-benighted plane, struggling in ignorant armies in the night. But it is all futile and deceptive. The deep truth is that there is no substance to morality, and no way to justify any at all.
No morality. Subjectivism is Nihilism. Nietzsche saw it. And now you do too.
But I think you always sensed it. That's why you were arguing against objective morality. In fact, that's why the OP asks, "What could make morality objective?" It's because the OP assumes it cannot be, because it assumes (without even trying to prove it) Subjectivism.
Peter Holmes has this much right: IF Atheism is true, so is moral subjectivism. What he's scared to do is to face the next part: so is moral Nihilism.
He chickens out, where Nietzsche boldly strides forward.
opinion...Atla wrote: ↑Sat Nov 28, 2020 3:32 pmthe common root morality is undergrirded by our intrinsic moral psychology, not by some objective moral fact, that's painfully obvioushenry quirk wrote: ↑Sat Nov 28, 2020 2:30 pmoutside of philosophy there are damned few moral anti-realists (truly misguided folks) , and -- once you scrape away irrelevancies -- most folks have a common root morality, one undergirded by recognized moral fact
the anti-realists, like the anti-free willies, are a clear example, and warning, to the world that one can become a prisoner of one's own navel
...in my opinion...
if anything, breaking free from the illusion of objective morality, is when we are no longer prisoner to our own navels
