Basically, what Seer is saying here, is that the atheist can say this or that is immoral, but in essence, all they are doing is uttering words expressing their emotional reactions.
Stoic maintains that Seer is doing the exact same thing, just one level back.
It seems this argument hinges on how your ideas of "sense of justice" and "emotions" are configured within your map of reality. How are these two things separate, and where do you draw the line between the two. Or are they one in the same and depending on how they are accessed determines how they are labeled out of convenience for the sake of argument.
This is an extremely intriguing dialogue.
Stoic maintains that Seer is doing the exact same thing, just one level back.
It seems this argument hinges on how your ideas of "sense of justice" and "emotions" are configured within your map of reality. How are these two things separate, and where do you draw the line between the two. Or are they one in the same and depending on how they are accessed determines how they are labeled out of convenience for the sake of argument.
This is an extremely intriguing dialogue.
Comment