Truth and DLJ's manifesto
Post Reply
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
12-06-2014, 03:31 PM (This post was last modified: 12-06-2014 03:35 PM by Luminon.)
RE: Truth and DLJ's manifesto
(12-06-2014 02:52 PM)cjlr Wrote:  Presuppositionalism: not just for theists anymore.
Protip: things aren't objective just because you say they are.

But also, you cannot simultaneously say there are moral truths (objective ones!), but that all moral obligations are chosen. What is a moral truth but that which admits of a moral obligation? It's wholly incoherent.
Read the UPB, it contains an objective rational proof of secular ethics. It is of course a rational proof, so the principles that exist a priori are a part of the argument, just like in mathematics we recognize that a number can not be 0 and 1 at the same time and that is always our principle, our starting position.

Please note that this is different from the empirical method, where we start with designing a controlled environment that is supposed to be a blank slate. There is no naturally occurring blank slate or controlled environment in reality of the universe. This is why ethics can only be rational and principle-based, empiricism is just for corrections.

I do not say that moral obligations are chosen. There is a default standard of consistency of behavior in reality, just like all the natural reality is consistent. Any inconsistency must be positively proven with objective evidence, thus consistency is nonetheless maintained. Any inconsistency without evidence is a supernatural claim. Therefore consistency of reality is not presuppositionalism, it is the most basic position of all, most simple according to Occam's razor, it makes all rational research of reality possible.

With the ability of choice (altering behavior by internal impulse) comes the ability of inconsistent behavior. This is where the distinction between morality and immorality arises. Morality is a choice of consistency (plus taking into account objective biological differences), immorality is a choice of inconsistent behavior - such as corruption and special privileges, might makes right and so on. The reason why this is immoral, is because this can not be possibly universal, it can not be true for two people in a relationship simultaneously, much less for all humanity simultaneously. Special corrupt privileges can not be equally true for powerful and powerless people, thus they are inconsistent, unreal and immoral. Read UPB, you can find logical proofs like that in there. That's what you do if you want to talk to me.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: