Another attack on moral subjectivism
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
26-06-2015, 09:54 AM
RE: Another attack on moral subjectivism
(26-06-2015 09:48 AM)Kestrel Wrote:  
(26-06-2015 09:40 AM)tear151 Wrote:  Facepalm you really aren't understanding this

In lieu of a facepalm, explore another way to explain your position.

I will act in way that supports my interests

Other people can act in a way that supports their interests
they can also act in a way that supports others interests

none of these options are inherently better than any other, there is no contradiction in trying to lower taxes or heighten them whilst also maintaining that it's not a case of they ought to be raised (Lack of an ought =/= ought not it simply is)

"A witty quote means nothing"
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
26-06-2015, 09:56 AM (This post was last modified: 26-06-2015 10:10 AM by tear151.)
RE: Another attack on moral subjectivism
(26-06-2015 09:53 AM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  
(26-06-2015 09:44 AM)tear151 Wrote:  Why do you support fair taxes for everyone?

Because without the majority of the members of a society perceiving that they are being taxed fairly, anarchy ensues, and no one will buy into the system. Are you 12 ?

If the taxation system led to mass anarchy then it wouldn't benefit me, so if the people would slavishly pay unfair taxes and you were sure they wouldn't do anything about it you'd be ok with super low taxes and exploiting the poor?

Ok then "I support a taxation system that's as biased towards me as possible without damaging social stability".

Or to put this in the most basic terms that you can't tangentially miss the point again

"I support what benefits me the most, and that takes into account the reactions of other people." If people murder me as a response to doing something THEN IT DIDN'T FUCKING BENEFIT ME DID IT BUCKY?!?

This argument is just a merry go round of

I support what benefits me

yeah but I'm going to try and explain how the example you gave might not benefit you.

"A witty quote means nothing"
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
26-06-2015, 09:56 AM
RE: Another attack on moral subjectivism
(26-06-2015 09:41 AM)TheBeardedDude Wrote:  Saying that atheism leads to nihilism is akin to saying that conservatism leads to fascism. Or that liberalism leads to communism. It is a moronic reductionist argument that oversimplifies things to make a preconceived conclusion work.

I don't think atheism leads to nihilism, any number of atheists can delude themselves and believe in moral realism, objective morality etc... The arguments here is that an intellectually honest atheism subscribes to moral nihilism.

Atheism no mores leads to moral nihilism, than it leads to intellectual honesty.

Quote: Your opinion (as a theist who clearly doesn't care about understanding the arguments being presented to you

I think I understand the arguments of others atheists like Tear, Stevel, Matt Finney when it comes to morality quite well, it doesn't seem like you and others here do. In fact I think their arguments are sound, which makes it a bit more amusing when others atheists such as yourself attempt to reject it, with a series of bad arguments.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
26-06-2015, 09:57 AM
RE: Another attack on moral subjectivism
(26-06-2015 09:47 AM)Tomasia Wrote:  
(26-06-2015 09:34 AM)DLJ Wrote:  Oddly enough, I had my wallet stolen last night (true story).

Whoever took it must have decided that, for them, it was something they ought to do.

If they didn't think that, why did they take it?

Or are you saying that stealing is wrong in an absolute sense and they knew they ought not but in this case hey why not?

If you saying that, you are going for that ol' universal morality argument again i.e. not nihilism.

Well, it could be true that the thief believed that stealing was morally wrong. That he believed he ought not steal, but he stole anyway. Just like a man may cheat on his wife, believing that he ought not to, and yet cheat anyway.

An ought implies some form of obligation or duty. Just because a thief recognizes that stealing your wallet would allow him to buy some item that he wanted, doesn't mean that he believed he was under sort or obligation or duty to take it, anymore so that I'm under obligation to eat a bowl of cheerios in the morning, merely because I like cheerios, and I want to have a bowl of them.

Your brain is SO fucking muddled, it's REALLY scary.
Maybe the person who stole his wallet has 3 starving children.
Eat your cheerios, and then get help.
Weeping

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein God has a plan for us. Please stop screwing it up with your prayers.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Bucky Ball's post
26-06-2015, 10:00 AM
RE: Another attack on moral subjectivism
(26-06-2015 09:56 AM)Tomasia Wrote:  
(26-06-2015 09:41 AM)TheBeardedDude Wrote:  Saying that atheism leads to nihilism is akin to saying that conservatism leads to fascism. Or that liberalism leads to communism. It is a moronic reductionist argument that oversimplifies things to make a preconceived conclusion work.

I don't think atheism leads to nihilism, any number of atheists can delude themselves and believe in moral realism, objective morality etc... The arguments here is that an intellectually honest atheism subscribes to moral nihilism.

Atheism no mores leads to moral nihilism, than it leads to intellectual honesty.

Quote: Your opinion (as a theist who clearly doesn't care about understanding the arguments being presented to you

I think I understand the arguments of others atheists like Tear, Stevel, Matt Finney when it comes to morality quite well, it doesn't seem like you and others here do. In fact I think their arguments are sound, which makes it a bit more amusing when others atheists such as yourself attempt to reject it, with a series of bad arguments.

"It does, at least in regards to an atheism that is consistent. Watching atheists argue against nihilism, is like watching fundies attempting to argue against biblical contradictions.

Atheists like Tear, and Matt Finney, along with Stevel, are among the handful of atheists who recognize this."


Just highlighting what YOU said.

Being nice is something stupid people do to hedge their bets
-Rick
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes TheBeardedDude's post
26-06-2015, 10:01 AM
RE: Another attack on moral subjectivism
Or to put it another way, atheism is consistent in only one point. So I have NO fucking clue what you think you are saying when you say atheism that is "consistent." I think YOU think you are saying something profoundly true, but you aren't.

Being nice is something stupid people do to hedge their bets
-Rick
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like TheBeardedDude's post
26-06-2015, 10:02 AM
RE: Another attack on moral subjectivism
(26-06-2015 09:47 AM)Tomasia Wrote:  
(26-06-2015 09:34 AM)DLJ Wrote:  Oddly enough, I had my wallet stolen last night (true story).

Whoever took it must have decided that, for them, it was something they ought to do.

If they didn't think that, why did they take it?

Or are you saying that stealing is wrong in an absolute sense and they knew they ought not but in this case hey why not?

If you saying that, you are going for that ol' universal morality argument again i.e. not nihilism.

Well, it could be true that the thief believed that stealing was morally wrong. That he believed he ought not steal, but he stole anyway. Just like a man may cheat on his wife, believing that he ought not to, and yet cheat anyway.

An ought implies some form of obligation or duty. Just because a thief recognizes that stealing your wallet would allow him to buy some item that he wanted, doesn't mean that he believed he was under sort or obligation or duty to take it, anymore so that I'm under obligation to eat a bowl of cheerios in the morning, merely because I like cheerios, and I want to have a bowl of them.

"could be" Consider

So you are, in this example, arguing for an intrinsic wrongness.

One could also argue that it was contextually a right thing to do given e.g. his or her need to feed their family was more important than my need to get a hooker for the night.

Incidentally, I carry more than one wallet so all needs were satisfied ... in this example.

Thumbsup

Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes DLJ's post
26-06-2015, 10:09 AM
RE: Another attack on moral subjectivism
"I think I understand the arguments of others atheists like Tear, Stevel, Matt Finney..."

But I do see what you are saying. You latch onto the few people with whom you think you agree or agree with you, and you think that qualifies your points as being true and that this somehow gets you off of the hook for having to actually explain or rationally defend them. It doesn't. You've been wrong before in thinking someone agrees with you and it qualifies your opinion (like when you thought FT agreed with you and it supported your preconceived conclusions).

Being nice is something stupid people do to hedge their bets
-Rick
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
26-06-2015, 10:10 AM
RE: Another attack on moral subjectivism
(26-06-2015 10:02 AM)DLJ Wrote:  So you are, in this example, arguing for an intrinsic wrongness.

Even though I believe in objective morality, in intrinsic wrongness, i wasn't arguing for either of these here. I was merely just trying to point out that a man can steal your wallet without believing he ought to.

Quote:One could also argue that it was contextually a right thing to do given e.g. his or her need to feed their family was more important than my need to get a hooker for the night.

One could also argue that it was contextually a right thing to do, that it was more important for you to find a hooker for the night, than for him to feed his family. And the persons making this arguments would likely be no less right or wrong, than you would be.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
26-06-2015, 10:12 AM (This post was last modified: 26-06-2015 10:17 AM by DLJ.)
RE: Another attack on moral subjectivism
(26-06-2015 09:56 AM)Tomasia Wrote:  
(26-06-2015 09:41 AM)TheBeardedDude Wrote:  Saying that atheism leads to nihilism is akin to saying that conservatism leads to fascism. Or that liberalism leads to communism. It is a moronic reductionist argument that oversimplifies things to make a preconceived conclusion work.

I don't think atheism leads to nihilism, any number of atheists can delude themselves and believe in moral realism, objective morality etc... The arguments here is that an intellectually honest atheism subscribes to moral nihilism.

Atheism no mores leads to moral nihilism, than it leads to intellectual honesty.

Quote: Your opinion (as a theist who clearly doesn't care about understanding the arguments being presented to you

I think I understand the arguments of others atheists like Tear, Stevel, Matt Finney when it comes to morality quite well, it doesn't seem like you and others here do. In fact I think their arguments are sound, which makes it a bit more amusing when others atheists such as yourself attempt to reject it, with a series of bad arguments.

Beats me how "an ... atheism" can subscribe to anything but no matter.

We get the argument, it's about morality as 'enlightened self interest'.

Note that I would be an 'is'-nihilist whether I was a theist or an atheist so yes, we agree on "Atheism no mores leads to moral nihilism, than it leads to intellectual honesty." As others have pointed out more time times than is worth counting, atheism is a one-topic position.

Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like DLJ's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: