Originally posted by Jim B.
View Post
Originally posted by Jim B.
View Post
Originally posted by Jim B.
View Post
Originally posted by Jim B.
View Post
ETA: These days, even providing that information doesn't do much to change entrenched mind-sets.
Originally posted by Jim B.
View Post
Originally posted by Jim B.
View Post
Originally posted by Jim B.
View Post
Look, Jim - we are discussing the nature of morality (ontology). I believe it is subjective and you believe it is objective. We are examining the issue and the arguments. I am giving you my reasons for why I think as I do, and I have been assuming you are doing the same. I have no vested interest in what you conclude when we are done. History on this site suggests your views will not be changed by anything I put forward. That is a matter of some indifference to me. Your belief that morality is objective will not make it so. You do not interact with me except on these pages, so your moral ontology and even your individual moral positions (which I don't actually know) will have little no impact on me.
This attempt, on your part, strikes me as the debate trick I once witnessed in a debate between a theist and an atheist, in which the theist claimed that all rationality springs from god, so the atheist had lost the debate simply by attempting to use logic to make his points. It's a bit of a "presumptive win," IMO. And, frankly, I don't care a great deal about "the win." I'm looking to see if you are offering any points I have not previously considered, and if they suggest an error in my own philosophy. What you do with your own philosophy is entirely your business.
Originally posted by Jim B.
View Post
Second, moral subjectivism does not create a "why do I care what you think mindset," for the obvious reason: we live in community and a significant number of our moral precepts have to do with how we interact with others and they with us. If I see a harm being done by the community to something I value/cherish, I will do what I can to influence the community to a) value/cherish differently or (if they already do) reason differently from what they value/cherish to their moral positions. Only when that fails will I resort to ignore, isolate/separate, or contend. There is no inconsistency with moral subjectivism and this dynamic.
Comment