Philosophy Now Forum

Assertion: there are no true assertions.

If that assertion is true, then it's false. And if it's false, then it's true.

So the assertion is self-defeating - given a classical logic based on a binary truth-value.

And, of course, two assertions can contradict or 'defeat' each other: there are no such things as facts; there are moral facts.

An argument for moral objectivism - the existence of moral facts - from the premise that there are no facts, is self-defeating.

Peter Holmes wrote: ↑Fri May 27, 2022 11:20 am Assertion: there are no true assertions.

If that assertion is true, then it's false. And if it's false, then it's true.

So the assertion is self-defeating - given a classical logic based on a binary truth-value.

And, of course, two assertions can contradict or 'defeat' each other: there are no such things as facts; there are moral facts.

An argument for moral objectivism - the existence of moral facts - from the premise that there are no facts, is self-defeating.

But in the absence of subjects of beliefs about facts any beliefs about facts either are absolutely absent or are absolute present.

Absolute is causeless and is therefore outside the circle of true and false.

Peter Holmes wrote: ↑Fri May 27, 2022 11:20 am Assertion: there are no true assertions.

If that assertion is true, then it's false. And if it's false, then it's true.

So the assertion is self-defeating - given a classical logic based on a binary truth-value.

Q.E.D

You keep confusing the self-affirming for the self-defeating.

The assertion exists!
Just because you are unable to determine whether the assertion is true or false doesn't in any way undermine its existence!

True; or false - the assertion still exists!

'Objective' morality means to me that if there was no consciousness in the world there would still exist morality.

Seems to me: like fire, morality has requirements.

Oxygen, heat, and fuel for fire: remove one and fire cannot be.

Free will, reason, and conscience for morality: remove one...

henry quirk wrote: ↑Fri May 27, 2022 12:34 pm

'Objective' morality means to me that if there was no consciousness in the world there would still exist morality.

Seems to me: like fire, morality has requirements.

Oxygen, heat, and fuel for fire: remove one and fire cannot be.

Free will, reason, and conscience for morality: remove one...

Those are pre-requisites for the making of choices, they aren't mind-independent but they don't need to be.
But this objective stuff that makes a choice morally right or wrong is a whole other thing.
For that thing to be objective requires mind independence.

FlashDangerpants wrote: ↑Fri May 27, 2022 2:13 pm For that thing to be objective requires mind independence.

For the slow kids in the classroom we keep re-explaining.

Morality is independent of my mind.
Morality is independent of your mind.
Morality is independent of anyone's mind.

Therefore morality is objective.

Morality is not independent of everyone's minds but it doesn't have to be. Because you can't seem to distinguish between mind (singular) and minds (plural) independence.

Did they teach you anything at that palce where they took your money in exchange for an "education"?

Skepdick wrote: ↑Fri May 27, 2022 2:21 pm

FlashDangerpants wrote: ↑Fri May 27, 2022 2:13 pm For that thing to be objective requires mind independence.

For the slow kids in the classroom we keep re-explaining.

Morality is independent of my mind.
Morality is independent of your mind.
Morality is independent of anyone's mind.

Therefore morality is objective.

Did they teach you anything at that palce where they took your money in exchange for an "education"?
Because you can't seem to distinguish between mind (singular) and minds (plural).

Why did you not add "Morality is not independent of minds" ?

Belinda wrote: ↑Fri May 27, 2022 2:25 pm Why did you not add "Morality is not independent of minds" ?

Because I didn't have to.

His own criterion for objectivity is mind independence - singular.
Not minds independence - all minds.

For that thing to be objective requires mind independence.

Is a mind independent of itself?

Is a person independent of himself?

Skepdick wrote: ↑Fri May 27, 2022 2:21 pm

FlashDangerpants wrote: ↑Fri May 27, 2022 2:13 pm For that thing to be objective requires mind independence.

For the slow kids in the classroom we keep re-explaining.

Morality is independent of my mind.
Morality is independent of your mind.
Morality is independent of anyone's mind.

And no matter how many times you say it - you are still wrong.

Skepdick wrote: ↑Fri May 27, 2022 2:26 pm

Belinda wrote: ↑Fri May 27, 2022 2:25 pm Why did you not add "Morality is not independent of minds" ?

Because I didn't have to.

His own criterion for objectivity is mind independence - singular.
Not minds independence - all minds.

Well I am not stupid and I'd rather you had been explicit.
I know people learn better when they work something out for themselves, but philosophy and logic are difficult.

Sculptor wrote: ↑Fri May 27, 2022 2:30 pm And no matter how many times you say it - you are still wrong.

Every time you think I am wrong you continue being wrong about me being wrong.

Belinda wrote: ↑Fri May 27, 2022 2:32 pm Well I am not stupid and I'd rather you had been explicit.

That is not possible in language.

Self-expression is always incomplete. There's always more to say.

So I said just enough to satisfy his own criterion for being persuaded.

Skepdick wrote: ↑Fri May 27, 2022 2:33 pm

Belinda wrote: ↑Fri May 27, 2022 2:32 pm Well I am not stupid and I'd rather you had been explicit.

That is not possible in language.

Self-expression is always incomplete.

Skepdick wrote: ↑Fri May 27, 2022 2:33 pm

Belinda wrote: ↑Fri May 27, 2022 2:32 pm Well I am not stupid and I'd rather you had been explicit.

That is not possible in language.

Self-expression is always incomplete.

By "explicit" I simply meant including the alternative, plural form of 'mind', as I suggested. This is logical language not expressive language; logical language is a closed system.

Belinda wrote: ↑Fri May 27, 2022 2:36 pm By "explicit" I simply meant including the alternative, plural form of 'mind', as I suggested. This is logical language not expressive language; logical language is a closed system.

No langauge (formal or informal) is a closed system.

If that were true communication would not be possible.