Originally posted by LordOfTheChessboardThat is not how science works, and it is not how ethics works.
As you know, in science if you belief something you have to prove it. I am saying I do not know if morals exist. If you claim they do then prove it to me.
This is very important because if morals do not exist then your decission is based on a misunderstanding or even a lie.
Originally posted by ivanhoeAs I have said in the other thread, I am spiritually against abortion
I meant what is your position on abortion ?
because I believe in the concept of the soul (although St Thomas
Aquinas believed that the soul entered the fetus long after conception).
However, because law cannot be based on irrational matters of faith,
I cannot justify a law against it.
Which is why I am confused.
Which is why one of my first posts on RedHotPawn was to in response
to your posting a document from a Roman Catholic newspaper that
said 'Faith stems from Reason' which started a seemingly never-ending
series of refusals to answer questions which you continue today.
Nemesio
1 edit
Originally posted by NemesioNemesio: " .... which started a seemingly never-ending
As I have said in the other thread, I am spiritually against abortion
because I believe in the concept of the soul (although St Thomas
Aquinas believed that the soul entered the fetus long after conception).
However, because law cannot be based on irrational matters of faith,
I cannot justify a law against it.
Which is why I am confused.
Which is ...[text shortened]... mingly never-ending
series of refusals to answer questions which you continue today.
Nemesio
series of refusals to answer questions which you continue today."
C'mon ... you're exaggerating ... you perfectly know I answered a lot of your questions on many occasions .... however not always, as you will remember and hopefully will continue to remember.
Originally posted by bbarrNow if you'd only embrace Wittgenstein you would not have to write sentences like that one...
They don't proceed via deduction from putatively a priori premises, and the justification for empirical or ethical claims is not contingent upon being able to convince a skeptic.