Page 1 of 1
The Philosophical Method of Exception
Posted: Thu Aug 14, 2025 2:19 pm
by Philosophy Now
Re: The Philosophical Method of Exception
Posted: Thu Aug 14, 2025 6:24 pm
by Martin Peter Clarke
Martin Peter Clarke wrote: ↑Thu Aug 14, 2025 2:17 pm
Belinda wrote: ↑Thu Aug 14, 2025 12:28 pm
Fairy wrote: ↑Thu Aug 14, 2025 12:16 pm
Atheist’s think.
Christians just believe.
It's an interesting claim but it needs to be quantified. Even before it can be quantified your claim needs definitions of 'Christians' , 'Atheists', and 'believe'.
Common sense will do. As in all the specious, complex, unreal objections to knowledge, morality and induction.
Peter Keeble spotlights and critiques a common philosophical technique.
https://philosophynow.org/issues/169/Th ... _Exception
You cannot reason your way to unwarranted, unjustified, untrue belief.
Re: The Philosophical Method of Exception
Posted: Sat Sep 13, 2025 10:55 pm
by Gary Childress
Not sure I understand Parfit's case AGAINST morality needing to harm someone in order to be immoral. It seems to me that if something doesn't harm anyone, then it's not immoral. Is Parfit trying to say that a 14-year-old girl having a child in and of itself doesn't harm anyone and yet is immoral if it doesn't harm anyone? If so, then at first glance it doesn't seem like a particularly strong case AGAINST the concept that immorality necessarily involves harming someone.
