Indeed. Should we reveal the big secret that in any valid deductive argument, there is nothing in the conclusion that is not already entailed by the premisses — aletheist
Here is what I actually said:Anyway, if you think that premise 2 has no support from our rational intuitions then, as far as you're concerned, 2 has nothing to be said for it. — Bartricks
Arguments cannot be settled solely on the basis of rational intuitions, because they are not uniform; different people have different rational intuitions.my rational intuition finds my #2 vastly more plausible than your #1, while your rational intuition apparently indicates exactly the opposite. — aletheist
Right back at you.Can you see why I am confused by you? No, probably not. Silly question. Look, l don't think you're in good faith. — Bartricks
Right back at you again.You have such a poor grasp of how arguments actually work ... And you're so confident you're right, you'll never be able to learn you're wrong. — Bartricks
Moral values = thought/belief;
Thought/belief = O and S things;
Moral values can be neither O nor S things of thought/belief;
Moral values /= thought/belief. — Mww
You may have been over this, but what standing do rational intuitions have compared to rational knowledge? — Echarmion
Right back at you one more time.Like I say, I can't argue with someone like you. — Bartricks
Laughably false, as I have demonstrated over and over. I will not bother to go back and quote myself again; as someone once said:You change your position in every post. — Bartricks
It isn't worth the keystrokes. — Bartricks
I submit it is a natural condition of being human that there exists a sub-system of intrinsic values necessarily incorporated into the cognitive apparatus — Mww
↪aletheist
Indeed. Should we reveal the big secret that in any valid deductive argument, there is nothing in the conclusion that is not already entailed by the premisses
— aletheist
Which, for you, means they're all question begging - right? You have such a poor grasp of how arguments actually work, that you think valid arguments are question begging by dint of being valid. That 's true isn't it - that's what you actually think. Be honest. And you're so confident you're right, you'll never be able to learn you're wrong. — Bartricks
I submit it is a natural condition of being human that there exists a sub-system of intrinsic values necessarily incorporated into the cognitive apparatus
— Mww
.........What does all that even mean?
.........A natural condition. All humans have it. Intrinsic values. "Intrinsic" seems redundant.
.........Remove it. — creativesoul
It would not be part of the cognitive apparatus required to have some moral value. — creativesoul
A proper report does not change the truth conditions of what it's reporting upon. — creativesoul
All thought/belief formation requires one thing to become sign/symbol, a different thing to become significant/symbolized, and a creature capable of drawing a correlation between different things. — creativesoul
Some moral value(thought/belief about acceptable/unacceptable behaviour) is prior to language acquisition. — creativesoul
I don't know what you mean by 'rational knowledge'. But a rational intuition is another name for a representation of the faculty of reason. — Bartricks
Well, how do we know it is valid? We don't see it with our eyes, or smell it, or taste it, or hear it, or feel it. Validity doesn't have an appearance, smell, taste, sound or texture.
So how do we know it? Well, because our reason represents it to be valid - that is our reason effectively tells us that if assumption 1 is true, and assumption 2 is true, then 3 must be true.
I don't decide it is valid and that makes it so. I don't believe it is valid and that makes it so (though I do believe it is valid, but it is not my believing it that makes it so). — Bartricks
It is via our rational intuitions that we are aware of morality. I mean, morality is not something that our senses give us insight into. That's why it is not studied by the empirical sciences. It is not an object of sense. But we - most of us - are aware of moral norms and values. And our fundamental source of insight into moral matters is our reason. — Bartricks
But a rooky mistake in this area is to confuse rational intuitions - especially those that have moral representative contents (so, moral intuitions) - with that of which they give us an awareness. That is, to confuse the intuition that X is wrong, with its wrongness. A mistake that leads many quickly and confidently to conclude that morality is made of their own subjective states - and due to the staggering arrogance and ignorance that infects most people they will then never, ever, ever, change their position. — Bartricks
I agree with the reason bit, but I think what makes moral stances a unique is that they are not just intuitions, which you can only assert, but are reasoned from principles. You can make arguments for and against them, so they aren't just intuitions — Echarmion
It seems to me getting the right answers would merely be a matter of having the right intuitions, no arguments required.
And if there are no arguments required, there is no way to test the rational intuition. There is no way to know, under this system, whether you actually have a rational intuition or just imagine it being so — Echarmion
would it interest you that I've never actually took a course in formal logic? — Happenstance
And it refutes all subjectivist views bar mine.
— Bartricks
But no-one claims that:
being morally valuable is one and the same as being valued by me,
— Bartricks
That would imply me liking cats more than dogs is a moral stance, but it clearly isn't. What this argument establishes is trivial. — Echarmion
By your own admission you never took logic 101. Here's that quote from you that I am currently having tatooed across my buttocks:
would it interest you that I've never actually took a course in formal logic?
— Happenstance — Bartricks
^ doesn't understand logic synbols. Shocker. I guess to someone like yourself, it would look like worms, much like a child's interpretation: 'Miss, them der writing looks like worms. Tee Hee!'But I wormed and squared it for you! No gratitude some people. — 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.