For the discussion of all things philosophical.
https://canzookia.com/
Oh well. Mother always said I should get a proper job.Veritas Aequitas wrote: ↑Thu Jul 09, 2020 6:02 am You are destroying your own philosophical integrity with the above, i.e.
no justifications at all but merely by shouting from the top of a roof.
Is that statement a "fact"?
If there are no moral facts, saying so isn't 'rather vacuous'. It's to state an important fact, because then belief that there are moral facts is deluded and - as has often been the case - can be morally corrupting. Many atrocities have been committed by people who believe there are moral facts.Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Thu Jul 09, 2020 1:40 pmIs that statement a "fact"?
And do you intend it to have any "moral" implications, such as, "It's bad to believe there are moral facts," or "You ought not to believe in moral facts"?
In that case, you've just claimed a moral fact. So if you're right, you're wrong.
But if your claim has no moral import, then you're not saying we should not believe in moral facts. So the statement itself becomes rather vacuous.
Which would you prefer attribute to you: self-contradiction or vacuity?
Bingo!Peter Holmes wrote: ↑Thu Jul 09, 2020 2:47 pm ...then belief that there are moral facts is deluded and - as has often been the case - can be morally corrupting.
Yep. Why let a thoroughgoing refutation trash a cherished belief?
Bingo. The same old sophistry. Ignore the antecedent and beg the question. Sigh.Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Thu Jul 09, 2020 3:00 pmBingo!Peter Holmes wrote: ↑Thu Jul 09, 2020 2:47 pm ...then belief that there are moral facts is deluded and - as has often been the case - can be morally corrupting.
You made a moral condemnation, while insisting there are no moral facts.
You chose "self-contradiction!" Congratulations, player...thanks for playing.
Yes, Peter...and it's very morally bad of me not to grasp the fact that there are no moral facts...which means it's not bad at all.
If you insist. Not grasping a fact may or may not be consequential, morally or otherwise. But, to the point: your premise - if there are no moral facts, then there can be no moral judgements - is false.Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Thu Jul 09, 2020 3:24 pmYes, Peter...and it's very morally bad of me not to grasp the fact that there are no moral facts...which means it's not bad at all.
I don't. You do. I wasn't the one who called his own claim "The end."Peter Holmes wrote: ↑Thu Jul 09, 2020 3:32 pmIf you insist.Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Thu Jul 09, 2020 3:24 pmYes, Peter...and it's very morally bad of me not to grasp the fact that there are no moral facts...which means it's not bad at all.
Good thing that was never my premise, then. I did not say that. I would say that if there are no moral facts, then there are no moral factual judgments...and you obviously agree with that. Except that you make moral factual judgments, like the ones above.But, to the point: your premise - if there are no moral facts, then there can be no moral judgements - is false.