Yes, I know.

If moral values are the values of a subject, Reason, then they will be contingent, not necessary — Bartricks

The word "reason" makes no sense to me in that sentence by the way.

But just saying something doesn't make it so. Well, sometimes it does. But not in the main. I know most of you think that if you say something it does make it so, but that's because you seem to have the philosophical mentality of 6 year old brats.
Argue. It appears self-evident to the reason of most that moral truths are necessary, not contingent. How else do you explain why the Euthyphro is considered by virtually all contemporary moral philosophers to be such a damning criticism of subjectivist views???

The word "reason" makes no sense to me in that sentence by the way. — Terrapin Station

Good, I consider that a compliment.

It appears self-evident to the reason of most that moral truths are necessary, not contingent. — Bartricks

It might seem self-evident to you, but it doesn't at all seem to be the case to me or to many other people. So simply claiming that it seems self-evident does no good.

How else do you explain why the Euthyphro is considered by virtually all contemporary moral philosophers to be such a damning criticism of subjectivist views??? — Bartricks

Aside from the fact that that would be both an argument from authority and an argumentum ad populum, what's the source for the claim?

You have the internet. Do some research.

I have tried having polite discussions with you in this and other threads today, but you have promptly and persistently resorted to baseless assumptions and corresponding insults, rather than sticking to the substance of each matter at hand. Why is that?

I ask you to read charitably. — Bartricks

Right back at you.

Stop focussing on me and focus on the arguments. And read charitably.

You have the internet. Do some research. — Bartricks

If you're going to make a claim, it's up to you to provide citations. There's no way I'm doing your work for you. I couldn't care less if you do the work. But if you want anyone to accept the claim, it's up to you.

Here, I've done some for you: here's a quote from an academic article by Jonathan Danahar entitled "Necessary Truths and Theistic Ethics":

"But there is a problem with this commitment. The widespread view that moral truths such as pain is intrinsically bad or torturing innocent children for fun is impermissible are necessary seems to undermine it"

Widespread. Virtually all contemporary moral philosophers think moral truths are necessary truths. That's why they think the Euthyphro is a good criticism. Why do you think they think it is a good criticism? Because they like saying "Euthyphro"?

And no, it isn't. I was just being nice. And that's a claim. The claim that I have to back it up is a claim. One you made. Back it up. And when you back it up - and you won't - back up the backing. And when you do that, and you won't, back up the backing for the back. And keep doing that forever.

First off, the claim was about interpretations of the Euthyphro.

Aside from that, where is Danahar's citation?

If God is an agent, why can't he change his mind? — Bartricks

you saying being all powerful involves being able to do 'less' than I can do? — Bartricks

You have the internet. Do some research. — Bartricks

It is intuitively obvious that no mind values anything or prescribes anything of necessity. — Bartricks

It appears self-evident to the reason of most that moral truths are necessary, not contingent. — Bartricks

But just saying something doesn't make it so. — Bartricks

And no, it isn't. — Bartricks

No what isn't?

Just put it in the internet. You know, the thing you're on now. Stop being tedious.

All good points. Your point?

I explained this to you already. You want anyone to accept something, it's up to you to do the work. You're trying to sell me something. I'm not wanting to sell myself something.

Back that up. Provide a citation in support of your claim.

Back that up. Provide a citation in support of your claim. — Bartricks

What claim are you referring to?

Your point? — Bartricks

Stop being tedious. — Bartricks

Your claim that the one making the claim has to do the work. Citation please. I won't respond to you until you provide a citation.

More good points. You're coming along well.

Your claim that the one making the claim has to do the work. — Bartricks

It's a statement of how I approach people making empirical claims. I'm the source. I'm telling you something about myself.

It's a statement of how I approach people making empirical claims. I'm tye source. I'm telling you something about myself. — Terrapin Station

Citation please.

Again, it's a claim about me. I'm the source. It's not a claim about all or most philosophers or anything like that.

Again, it's a claim about me. I'm the source. It's not a claim about all or most philosophers or anything like that. — Terrapin Station

Citation in support of that please. It's a claim. Support it.

Citation in support of that please. — Bartricks

Were you only making claims about yourself? If so, then we don't need a citation other than you.

Were you only making claims about yourself? If so, then we don't need a citation other than you. — Terrapin Station

That's another claim. Citation please.

That's another claim. Citation please. — Bartricks

Why would we need a citation for something someone is saying about their view, how they feel or approach things?

You tell me. I'm living by your rules for a bit. I've just put some food up my nose.