Becoming the Right Person vs. Doing Right for Right Reasons

[seer]

Moral values.

Whose moral values?

[JimL]

Jim, let me try again - you only get into logical trouble if you claim that what goes on in your mind corresponds to an external reality.

Well let me try again as well seer - what difference does it make? Our minds correspond to the reality, whether that reality be external and concrete, or not. Whether the world of our perception, the earth, sky, trees, birds, etc etc. is concrete or not, what difference does that make as to whether our minds correspond with it or not?

[seer]

Well let me try again as well seer - what difference does it make? Our minds correspond to the reality, whether that reality be external and concrete, or not. Whether the world of our perception, the earth, sky, trees, birds, etc etc. is concrete or not, what difference does that make as to whether our minds correspond with it or not?

Jim, again, it is ONLY a problem IF you claim that what goes on in your mind corresponds to an external reality.

[Charles]

Yes we are taking action, making decisions, etc... But that would be equally true in the Matrix, or if you were a brain in a vat - all these experiences and sensations would seem real to us in the life of the mind. But even when you said this: I am reluctant to by into the idea that all aspects of our reality can even be copied in a matrix like reality. You are begging the question.

To just claim that it is equally possible in a matrix world is to beg the question as well.

[Charles]

Whose moral values?

Those based on universal moral truths.

[seer]

To just claim that it is equally possible in a matrix world is to beg the question as well.

What? If I say it could be A or B how is that begging the question.

[Charles]

What? If I say it could be A or B how is that begging the question.

But that was not what you said.

[seer]

But that was not what you said.

Charles, it is in the context of our discussion. You said: I am reluctant to by into the idea that all aspects of our reality can even be copied in a matrix like reality. But if we were in the Matrix that would be the reality that you be questioning whether we could reproduce or not. I did not make a claim either way.

[seer]

Those based on universal moral truths.

Charles, can you show me these universal moral truths?

[Charles]

Charles, it is in the context of our discussion. You said: I am reluctant to by into the idea that all aspects of our reality can even be copied in a matrix like reality. But if we were in the Matrix that would be the reality that you be questioning whether we could reproduce or not. I did not make a claim either way.

You did make the claim that it is possible it can be copied. By thinking so in all regards you are begging the question we cannot know whether it is real or not unless you can qualify the claim.

[seer]

You did make the claim that it is possible it can be copied.

No Charles, I did not say that. How do you know that the reality that can not be copied is the actual reality and not the world of the Matrix?

[JimL]

Jim, again, it is ONLY a problem IF you claim that what goes on in your mind corresponds to an external reality.

Okay, but the question you originally asked was "logically prove that what goes on in our minds corresponds with reality. Thats what I am answering to. Whether the world we perceive is an external concrete reality, or whether it exists only in our minds in the form of thought, in either case it is the reality and it corresponds with what goes on in our minds. Whether the tree in my back yard is an existing, concrete, external reality, or if it is just the thought in our minds, it is the same tree to all of us and corresponds with all of our perceptions. In other words, the external reality, whether a concrete perception, or a perception of thought, it still corresponds with our minds.

[Charles]

No Charles, I did not say that. How do you know that the reality that can not be copied is the actual reality and not the world of the Matrix?

Of course you said that. If not it would not make any sense to claim that suggesting the opposite would be question begging. I never said I know it is not possible. I only said I am reluctant to by into the idea that it is possible. That is quite different. It is fair and often very wise to be a little reluctant before concluding in these cases, seer.

[Charles]

Charles, can you show me these universal moral truths?

As Nietzsche pointed out Christianity is often nihilism but for Christ. It takes nihilism as the alternative to justify Christian "moral" teachings. We have discussed ethics before and in your mindset universal moral truths would undermine the authority you hold that a God you cannot prove the existence of would have if he existed. Thus you go for circular ideas about goodnes and accept ideas about killing people because they are homosexual. That, luckily enough, makes no difference regarding the existence of moral truth. Anyone interested can read the discussion here: http://www.theologyweb.com/campus/sh...tion-of-ethics

[seer]

Okay, but the question you originally asked was "logically prove that what goes on in our minds corresponds with reality. Thats what I am answering to. Whether the world we perceive is an external concrete reality, or whether it exists only in our minds in the form of thought, in either case it is the reality and it corresponds with what goes on in our minds. Whether the tree in my back yard is an existing, concrete, external reality, or if it is just the thought in our minds, it is the same tree to all of us and corresponds with all of our perceptions. In other words, the external reality, whether a concrete perception, or a perception of thought, it still corresponds with our minds.

Except one tree would be real, the other make believe, and if you want to claim that the tree is real, rather than an illusion, then that is where the logical problem comes in.