So what would be something that you believe it would be physically impossible to positively or negatively value? — Terrapin Station
As I said, it's not 'impossible' to ride a neutrino, — Isaac
Here it is again with a subset:
1. If moral values are what-I-value-when-I-am-sitting-on-the-toilet, then if I value something when I am sitting on the toilet, necessarily it is morally valuable.
2. If I value something when I am sitting on the toilet it is not necessarily morally valuable
3. Therefore, moral values are not what-I-value-when-I-am-sitting-on-the-toilet. — Bartricks
mean? Eurgh. Just use English. If you can't express your meaning in that language I will never ever understand you.sensu lato — Isaac
Yeah, whatever. I'm gradually learning I feel much better about my involvement here if I just stop responding when it gets to this kind of crap. "You don't know what you're talking about" is kind of a red flag. Happy to resume when you've calmed down, otherwise not. — Isaac
From here I can't see the connection with God. If reason determines morality why have a god at all? After all reason has the upper hand right?
Isn't this Euthyphro's dilemma?
Does god determine what's right or does reason determine what's right? — TheMadFool
And moral prescriptions are among the prescriptions of reason, are they not? For instance, if an act is morally prescribed, then we necessarily have some reason to do it, don't we? Well why? Because for an act to be morally prescribed just is for it to be being prescribed by reason, and what it is for us to have reason to do an act is for reason to be prescribing it. — Bartricks
Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.