Philosophy Now Forum

Moral Relativists and Moral Skeptics claim there are no 'objective' moral facts, thus morality cannot be objective.
Whenever I claim there are[p] real Kantian objective moral facts and there are no[not-p] p-realists' moral fact, I am accused on defying the law of Non-Contradiction.

• In logic, the law of non-contradiction (LNC) (also known as the law of contradiction, principle of non-contradiction (PNC), or the principle of contradiction) states that contradictory propositions cannot both be true in the same sense at the same time.
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Law_of_noncontradiction

I believe the confusion is many are not aware of the 'same sense' condition, i.e. there is no contradiction of p and not-p are in the different sense even while they are the same time.

Here is the typical situation of the wrongful accusation of contradiction;

Peter Holmes wrote:

Veritas Aequitas wrote: ↑Tue May 28, 2024 11:05 am I believe you need to be very patient in untangling this very tightly knotted problem in your hand. You are facing a problem because you are relying on very primal and primitive thinking to untangle that knotted problem.

Here's the supposed knot that needs untangling.

1 VA: 'Antirealists [Kant] do not believe all of reality [all there is] is an illusion.'
2 VA: 'Antirealist proves the reality [p-reality] claimed in P1 [Reality is not an illusion] is actually an illusion.'

This is not a knot. It's called a contradiction - a 'speaking against itself'. So your argument is a mess.

You are ignorant of the precise definition of the Law of non-Contradiction??
I have explained to you a few times of your oversight.

In logic, the law of non-contradiction (LNC), states that contradictory propositions cannot both be true in the same sense at the same time
WIKI

Note the two senses below:

• 1 VA: 'Antirealists [Kant] do not believe all of reality [all there is] (Kantian Sense) is an illusion.'
  
  2 VA: 'Antirealist proves [FSERC-ed] the reality [p-reality] claimed in P1 [Reality is not an illusion] (p-realist sense) is actually an illusion.'

By definition of the LNC, there is no contradiction because the above are in two different senses, i.e.
1. in the Kantian Sense[/b])
2. (p-realist sense)
1 & 2 are not in the same sense.

In 1. in the Kantian Sense[/b]), reality is as-it-is of as contingent upon a human-based FSERR, the most credible and objective is confirmed by the human-based scientific FSERC.

In 2. (p-realist sense), your reality is a reification of an illusion. You are unable to prove the reality you claimed is real.

Notes: KIV