Atheism And Moral Progress

[carpedm9587]

I think I made my point rather well.

I know you do.

All your moral reasoning or true premises lead us no further down the ethical road of understanding.

It actually does - in a relative/subjective framework.

As a matter of fact all your moral reasoning and true premises are simply rationalizations to confirm your moral biases.

To you - because you cannot see outside your "absolute/objective" box.

Yet you pretend that somehow you are on a higher logical ground for understanding ethics, than those who rely on the herd or a book. But you are not.

We are not going to agree on this, Seer. But from the perspective of my worldview - anyone who "follows the herd" as their baseline argument for holding a moral position is simply not able to provide a rational moral argument. They can only say, "because the herd says so." Someone who is reasoning from premises (valuing) to moral statements is actually reasoning, so there is room for discussion/debate.

You're not going to agree - I understand. But I'm afraid you have no argument. As I've shown over and over and over again, all you can complain is "relative/subjective morality is not absolute/objective." As I have repeatedly noted - I've never disagreed with you on that. What I cannot seem to find a way to get you to see is that this is not an argument.

And with that - I'll leave it to you. Id love to continue the chat - but I have to admit that I don't see the point until you can get past your block.

[seer]

We are not going to agree on this, Seer. But from the perspective of my worldview - anyone who "follows the herd" as their baseline argument for holding a moral position is simply not able to provide a rational moral argument. They can only say, "because the herd says so." Someone who is reasoning from premises (valuing) to moral statements is actually reasoning, so there is room for discussion/debate.

But you don't get it Carp, you have no rational ground to say that your ethics are superior to the herd's, better or more enlightened. And all your reasoning is simply about justifying your preconceived notions of morality. Is something "good" because Carp says so? And there is no debate unless you start with the same premises, so we are to accept your premises because you say so?

[carpedm9587]

But you don't get it Carp, you have no rational ground to say that your ethics are superior to the herd's, better or more enlightened. And all your reasoning is simply about justifying your preconceived notions of morality. Is something "good" because Carp says so? And there is no debate unless you start with the same premises, so we are to accept your premises because you say so?

Oh I get it, Seer. never fear. You continue to attempt to argue against the position I've outlined from within your box - and (for whatever reason) you aren't seeing it. Continually repeating the same responses is not going to get us anywhere, so I'll let me previous responses stand.

ETA: But I have to admit, I am surprised to find even you defending "following the herd" as a mature way for any adult to make decisions.

[seer]

Oh I get it, Seer. never fear. You continue to attempt to argue against the position I've outlined from within your box - and (for whatever reason) you aren't seeing it. Continually repeating the same responses is not going to get us anywhere, so I'll let me previous responses stand.

ETA: But I have to admit, I am surprised to find even you defending "following the herd" as a mature way for any adult to make decisions.

No, I defend following the teachings of Christ... My point is that your moral reasoning gets us no place that following the herd wouldn't...

[carpedm9587]

No, I defend following the teachings of Christ... My point is that your moral reasoning gets us no place that following the herd wouldn't...

I understand, Seer. When/if you find you understand what I have been saying, we can pick this back up again. You'll know - a little "aha" will happen.

[seer]

I understand, Seer. When/if you find you understand what I have been saying, we can pick this back up again. You'll know - a little "aha" will happen.

The little "aha" happened long ago Carp. Your reasoning leads to your preference for pizza, the herd has an intuitive preference for steak. Nothing accomplished save repeating personal or collective preferences. The ethical road to nowhere...

[mattbballman31]

How do you show this premise to be true?



Or this one?



If you can show the premises to be true.



True by definition.



How do you propose to show this premise to be true?



As I noted before, Matt, I'm willing to engage. I'm just not interested in going down the rathole of philosophical double-speak. I have yet to encounter any discipline that cannot be be discussed in simple English terms. Let's keep it that way, please. I'm not a fan of cryptospeak.

Yea, this is how philosophical argumentation progresses. I have no idea what double-speak you're talking about honestly. And we've when over this multiple times. Pregnant philosophical terms can be broken down. Just ask and I'll break it down. It's that simple. Stop mentioning this. It's annoying.

Anyway, in philosophy, you go from arguments that are demonstrably valid to the question of whether they're sound. I realize the premises haven't yet been motivated. That's why I asked which one you want to go over first. Isolate one. That's it. That's all you gotta do. And we can go over it as slowly and as simply as you want.

[carpedm9587]

Yea, this is how philosophical argumentation progresses. I have no idea what double-speak you're talking about honestly. And we've when over this multiple times. Pregnant philosophical terms can be broken down. Just ask and I'll break it down. It's that simple. Stop mentioning this. It's annoying.

I will restrict my mentioning to places where it occurs.

Anyway, in philosophy, you go from arguments that are demonstrably valid to the question of whether they're sound. I realize the premises haven't yet been motivated. That's why I asked which one you want to go over first. Isolate one. That's it. That's all you gotta do. And we can go over it as slowly and as simply as you want.

I identified three that require establishing as true. Start where you will.

[carpedm9587]

The little "aha" happened long ago Carp. Your reasoning leads to your preference for pizza, the herd has an intuitive preference for steak. Nothing accomplished save repeating personal or collective preferences. The ethical road to nowhere...

In your worldview...

[seer]

In your worldview...

With all your moral reasoning and true premises what have we leaned about ethics besides what Carp morally prefers? Like I said the road to nowhere...

[seer]

I identified three that require establishing as true. Start where you will.

I would like to see Matt start with this one:

What do you say Carp?

[carpedm9587]

With all your moral reasoning and true premises what have we leaned about ethics besides what Carp morally prefers? Like I said the road to nowhere...

In your worldview....

In my worldview - I would never expect to share with you anything other than "what Carp morally prefers and why." After all, morality is relative/subjective. I can also share with you what has evolved interpersonally into a communal moral framework, which will be relative/subjective to that community. After all, morality is relative/subjective.

So your complaint is...yet again..."it's not absolute/objective." Which is still not an argument...

And you still don't see it...

[carpedm9587]

I would like to see Matt start with this one:

What do you say Carp?

Matt is free to start wherever he wishes.

[seer]

Matt is free to start wherever he wishes.

Well, I find that point rather interesting... But it is more about what you prefer. ; )

[seer]

In your worldview....

In my worldview - I would never expect to share with you anything other than "what Carp morally prefers and why." After all, morality is relative/subjective. I can also share with you what has evolved interpersonally into a communal moral framework, which will be relative/subjective to that community. After all, morality is relative/subjective.

So your complaint is...yet again..."it's not absolute/objective." Which is still not an argument...

And you still don't see it...

Right, so all your prattling about moral reasoning and true premises is about as meaningful as your preference for pizza. Got it, thanks...