:chin:I wouldn’t say that it’s internally contradictory, just that it’s factually incorrect. — Michael
Do you have examples of non-moral truth claims that are true in a supra-systematic way? Is any system true or false? Does your argument prove too much? Namely, that truth itself is always system-constrained? (This is the question that my initial responses have addressed.) — Leontiskos
Earlier I gave you an account of moral judgment, "To judge an action is to hold that it should have occurred or should not have occurred, with reference to the person acting." This can be pragmatic or psychological, but it is still moral. — Leontiskos
Is "The player with the white pieces commences the game" true, false, or not truth apt? — Banno
This thread has degenerated to imbecility. Have fun. :roll: — Banno
I don't look at the world in a binary way, everything is a form of gradient, statistical, or a matter of probability. You cannot be only honest or only not honest. — Christoffer
If it’s false then it’s not a brute fact. If it’s a brute fact then it’s true. — Michael
Yes, that would be moral subjectivism.
Although I would argue against moral subjectivism on the grounds that when we make moral claims we don't usually think of ourselves to be just expressing a subjective opinion. This is why there is such a strong disagreement. — Michael
I agree with that. It could be that error theory of moral subjectivism are correct. — Michael
For example, you got out of bed this morning because you believed that the proposition, "I ought to get out of bed," was true. On my reckoning that is a moral judgment, pertaining to your own behavior. — Leontiskos
That is the key question that moral realists need to answer. Kant, for example, believed that this could be done using what he called pure practical reason, leading him to the categorical imperative. — Michael
We are apt to speak about the truth of an artifact according to the goal of the artist. So if there is a horse drawing competition, the drawing that most resembles a real horse will be the winner, and will be deemed truest. Or a carpenter's square is true when it achieves an exact 90° angle. — Leontiskos
This is really the whole of your argument, and it is nothing more than an assertion. Moreover, it is an assertion I have already addressed (↪Leontiskos). Feel free to engage that post. — Leontiskos
You are saying that all truth is formal, deriving from axioms, and where axioms are not truth-apt so conclusions are not truth-apt (in the strong sense). — Leontiskos
At the end of the day you just think prescriptions cannot be true or false, no? It is not that R is systematic/doctrinal/axiomatic, but rather that it is prescriptive. If all you are saying is that prescriptions are not truth-apt, then all that talk about systems and axioms led me to misunderstand your position. — Leontiskos
This is about the "doctrine" of chess, which is itself a part of reality, and it is true.
I am simply saying that moral realists believe that there is some X such that "one ought not X" is a brute fact. — Michael
If all you want to say is that moral realists haven't proven that there is something that one ought not do then I won't object. — Michael
For example, we can call the Catholic doctrine of the Trinity a tautology (“truth” in the formal systems sense), but that is not how Catholics mean it. We do not mean, “If you accept our axioms then this follows tautologically.” We mean, “This is true, it correctly describes reality.” — Leontiskos
I'm not convinced that "being honest" can't be considered a verb phrase that takes the grammatical place of a verb, and functions in every way like a verb. — flannel jesus
Never "Jack honested to Jill about his gambling addiction.", — Vera Mont
Honesting is not something one can do — Vera Mont
Are these not just modes of touch? The sensations are all physically derived. If not, how do you separate 'touch' from these? — AmadeusD
I guess one way in which I could phrase a specific question would be what are emotions made of? — Jack Cummins
As outlined by Michael and others in the other thread (link), moral truth claims adhere to a basic sort of correspondence theory of truth. At least this is how I mean them. You are thinking in terms of a formal systems notion of truth. It’s an equivocation on what “truth” means. For example, we can call the Catholic doctrine of the Trinity a tautology (“truth” in the formal systems sense), but that is not how Catholics mean it. — Leontiskos
My understanding is that as lying perverts communication, a deontologist cannot, ever, lie, to be consistent. — AmadeusD
Yes. To lie would be to disrespect yourself to a degree that is unacceptable to a deontologist (is my understanding) — AmadeusD
What characterizes the mindset associated with honesty? — YiRu Li
I always thought the tendency to nounify something which seems more of an attribute, and adjective/adverb, was a little strange. Due to this nounifying tendency of English, honesty becomes something you can "have" or "not have", an object you carry around with you, and may lose one day. Due to this linguistic quirk, one may wonder, what is the "essence" of this honesty? What is it made of?Is 'honest' a noun or a verb? — YiRu Li
Can one still be deemed an honest person if they occasionally engage in deception? — YiRu Li
The best definition I have heard is someone doing the exact same thing in identical circumstances and expecting a different outcome.
This is why human stupidity has its benefits. Sometimes something different does happen. — I like sushi
Can you give an example that comports with what humans envisage morality to be viz. contemplated outcomes resulting in a judgement informing the decision to act with regard to other sentient beings? — AmadeusD
. I would say that to ask Israelis to behave like "civilized" westerners is about as sensible as asking why you personally aren't white. — tim wood
When it comes to a different people, e.g. Amalek, large scale destruction is on the table. — BitconnectCarlos
Yoni Saadon, one of the witnesses, recounts in the Times: "I saw this beautiful woman with the face of an angel and eight or ten of the fighters beating and raping her. She was screaming, 'Stop it - already I'm going to die anyway from what you are doing, just kill me!' When they finished they were laughing and the last one shot her in the head. I pulled her body over me and smeared her blood on me so it would look as if I was dead too. I will never forget her face. Every night I wake to it and apologise to her, saying 'I'm sorry.'" — BitconnectCarlos
If moral judgments could be traced back to biological aspects of our species, then, prima facie, that would count as a moral realist position. I just don’t think they can: I think it is entirely possible that I should resist my biologically wiring. — Bob Ross
I think it is entirely possible that I should resist my biologically wiring. — Bob Ross
...and now do you not see that the context is important? — Banno
If a moral realist were to demonstrate that there was a moral fact which was analogous to the above proposition, such that I just needed to understand the context of the words (within the language) being used (e.g., ‘pawn’) and it would be true that (1) it is factual and (2) true; then I would accept it. My problem is that I don’t think there are any moral facts, period. — Bob Ross
Some of the people here hold Israel to an impossibly high standard, — RogueAI
:up:It comes to mind that the unannounced objective could to make Gaza unlivable and then try to push the 2,2 million or so to Sinai. Perhaps for a 'temporary time', so it wouldn't be an act of genocide / ethnic cleansing. — ssu
You might have chosen a better example. — Banno