Another attack on moral subjectivism
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
28-06-2015, 07:42 AM
RE: Another attack on moral subjectivism
Values = behavior
Beliefs = behavior
Symbols = related to language...a behavior"

-TBD

http://www.thethinkingatheist.com/forum/...#pid788630
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
28-06-2015, 07:44 AM
RE: Another attack on moral subjectivism
(28-06-2015 07:21 AM)TheBeardedDude Wrote:  
(28-06-2015 07:06 AM)Tomasia Wrote:  For the sake of clarity, it should be stated that TBD view of behavior, is far broader that what is normally understood by the term.

For TBD, Values, as well as Beliefs = Behavior, as he has stated in some of his older posts. He might not particularly understand how this results in a great deal of equivocation on his part. But he doesn't particularly seem able to draw distinction between these various terms.

"Behavior or behaviour (see spelling differences) is the range of actions and mannerisms made by individuals, organisms, systems, or artificial entities in conjunction with themselves or their environment, which includes the other systems or organisms around as well as the (inanimate) physical environment."

Dishonest prick. Drinking Beverage

I think most people would describe morality as a judgment of rightness or wrongness of behaviors, not a behavior itself.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
28-06-2015, 07:45 AM
Another attack on moral subjectivism
(28-06-2015 07:44 AM)Matt Finney Wrote:  
(28-06-2015 07:21 AM)TheBeardedDude Wrote:  "Behavior or behaviour (see spelling differences) is the range of actions and mannerisms made by individuals, organisms, systems, or artificial entities in conjunction with themselves or their environment, which includes the other systems or organisms around as well as the (inanimate) physical environment."

Dishonest prick. Drinking Beverage

I think most people would describe morality as a judgment of rightness or wrongness of behaviors, not a behavior itself.

Okay. And?

I see that as not very useful, as it treats human behavior as special when compared to other species.

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
28-06-2015, 07:47 AM
Another attack on moral subjectivism
(28-06-2015 07:42 AM)Tomasia Wrote:  Values = behavior
Beliefs = behavior
Symbols = related to language...a behavior"

-TBD

http://www.thethinkingatheist.com/forum/...#pid788630

I'm aware of what I said. Me calling you dishonest is based on your dishonesty that transcends this thread. Drinking Beverage

(I was directly responding to you calling it equivocation, moron)

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
28-06-2015, 08:01 AM
RE: Another attack on moral subjectivism
(28-06-2015 06:53 AM)TheBeardedDude Wrote:  Your views and opinions are so general, they aren't correct. For instance, if something isn't "entirely true" then it's false? Hogwash. The theory of gravity (Einstein or Newtons) isn't entirely true, but they aren't false either. Their applicability and level of "truth" are based on, you guessed it, the context of the way in which they are being used (don't work on the quantum level or instance or may produce inaccurate views of black holes, etc).

If a part of a theory is false, and someone claims that the theory is true, then they are making a false claim. This isn't my opinion.

For example, if I claim that water is made of hydrogen and oxygen, and that steel is made primarily of copper, then I'm making a false claim even though part of the claim is true. If I modify my claim to state that water is made of hydrogen and oxygen, and that steel of made primarily of iron, then I'm making a true claim. This isn't context dependent.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
28-06-2015, 08:05 AM
Another attack on moral subjectivism
(28-06-2015 08:01 AM)Matt Finney Wrote:  
(28-06-2015 06:53 AM)TheBeardedDude Wrote:  Your views and opinions are so general, they aren't correct. For instance, if something isn't "entirely true" then it's false? Hogwash. The theory of gravity (Einstein or Newtons) isn't entirely true, but they aren't false either. Their applicability and level of "truth" are based on, you guessed it, the context of the way in which they are being used (don't work on the quantum level or instance or may produce inaccurate views of black holes, etc).

If a part of a theory is false, and someone claims that the theory is true, then they are making a false claim. This isn't my opinion.

For example, if I claim that water is made of hydrogen and oxygen, and that steel is made primarily of copper, then I'm making a false claim even though part of the claim is true. If I modify my claim to state that water is made of hydrogen and oxygen, and that steel of made primarily of iron, then I'm making a true claim. This isn't context dependent.

You're adding claims together in order to make an example that is true. Does that make your whole example false or not true?

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
28-06-2015, 08:05 AM
RE: Another attack on moral subjectivism
(28-06-2015 07:45 AM)TheBeardedDude Wrote:  
(28-06-2015 07:44 AM)Matt Finney Wrote:  I think most people would describe morality as a judgment of rightness or wrongness of behaviors, not a behavior itself.

Okay. And?

I see that as not very useful, as it treats human behavior as special when compared to other species.

You're suggesting a definition of morality, which is not particularly clear. I'm not even sure how you distinguish between moral and non-moral behavior. Or whether you mean morality is judgement of a particular behavior, or merely a behavior itself.

And when you do this at the expense, of ignoring the common understanding, you just muddy the waters even more.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
28-06-2015, 08:07 AM
Another attack on moral subjectivism
(28-06-2015 08:05 AM)Tomasia Wrote:  
(28-06-2015 07:45 AM)TheBeardedDude Wrote:  Okay. And?

I see that as not very useful, as it treats human behavior as special when compared to other species.

You're suggesting a definition of morality, which is not particularly clear. I'm not even sure how you distinguish between moral and non-moral behavior. Or whether you mean morality is judgement of a particular behavior, or merely a behavior itself.

And when you do this at the expense, of ignoring the common understanding, you just muddy the waters even more.

If I thought you were actually reading to understand instead of reading to deny, I'd give a shit about your replies.

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
28-06-2015, 08:10 AM
Another attack on moral subjectivism
(28-06-2015 08:01 AM)Matt Finney Wrote:  
(28-06-2015 06:53 AM)TheBeardedDude Wrote:  Your views and opinions are so general, they aren't correct. For instance, if something isn't "entirely true" then it's false? Hogwash. The theory of gravity (Einstein or Newtons) isn't entirely true, but they aren't false either. Their applicability and level of "truth" are based on, you guessed it, the context of the way in which they are being used (don't work on the quantum level or instance or may produce inaccurate views of black holes, etc).

If a part of a theory is false, and someone claims that the theory is true, then they are making a false claim. This isn't my opinion.

For example, if I claim that water is made of hydrogen and oxygen, and that steel is made primarily of copper, then I'm making a false claim even though part of the claim is true. If I modify my claim to state that water is made of hydrogen and oxygen, and that steel of made primarily of iron, then I'm making a true claim. This isn't context dependent.

And your example still implies black and white, right or wrong, as if all choices are between two options and two options only.

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
28-06-2015, 08:14 AM
RE: Another attack on moral subjectivism
(28-06-2015 08:07 AM)TheBeardedDude Wrote:  If I thought you were actually reading to understand instead of reading to deny, I'd give a shit about your replies.

And you think Stevel, Matt, Tear are actually reading to understand as opposed to me? It's interesting all of us tend to repeat the same argument, while you tend to subscribe some level of dishonesty, a refusal to understand on my part? They all seems to raise the same objections I have to your views. Yet you believe that when it comes to me this rejection is based on an active refusal to understand your view.

It seems the only reason you're inclined to believe this is because I'm a theists, and they are all atheists. It seems that you suffer a bit too much for some anti-theistic bias, some prolonged chip on your shoulder.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: