Originally posted by FetchmyjunkThis "you won't admit ..." thing seems to be one of your most commonly used rhetorical gimmicks.
...you won't admit ... you won't admit ...you won't admit ...you won't admit ...you won't admit ...you won't admit ... .
I note this post by Ghost of a Duke on page 15. You said to him, baout me, "He just doesn't seem willing to admit that 'morality' to him is merely a matter of personal preference." And Ghost of a Duke replied, in a post directly addressed to you as follows:
I understand clearly that 'YOU' want him to 'admit that morality to him is merely a matter of personal preference.' However just because 'you' want him to admit such a thing doesn't make it so.
Your tiresome tactic appears to be to repeatedly ask someone to admit something that 'you' have decided they believe, even when they have made their beliefs evident. (Perhaps in an attempt to 'wear them down' and win some kind of hollow victory).
I note that you completely blanked it out and did not address Ghost of a Duke's seemingly valid point.
Why was that?
3 edits
Originally posted by FetchmyjunkWhere did I claim this?
According to your beliefs so is almost everything else apart from rape [is a 'grey area'].
I explained my viewpoint on how moral sensibilities guide us to make the best decisions we can in given situations, but you ignored the posts in which I laid it out. It was maybe a couple of dozen pages ago.
Fetchmyjunk, your answer to this post of mine on the previous page...
OK, I understand what you have said. And, so, whatever the "it depends on the situation" aspect results in you doing ~ whatever decision you end up making about the situation, regarding whatever it depended on, and whatever you decide to do in those circumstances, even if it involves killing ~ it will be "objective" and "universally true" in your view, is that right?
...seems to me to have been a waffly dodge. Please have another go at it, and this time address the question that I asked you, which was... when you have to weigh up a situation and make a judgement call, do you actually believe that whatever you decide to do [regardless of what the decision and action you take is] will be "objective" and "universally true"?
Originally posted by FMFYou may think that your view is right but you can't know that based on the presupposition that there is no objective standard for right and wrong. Actually it doesn't even follow logically to even think that you are right since there would be no way of verifying it.
You have already asked about this several times and I have already answered it several times.
Originally posted by FMFThe ghost believes that there are no moral absolutes. You believe there are because you believe rape is always wrong. How do you know that you are right and the ghost is wrong?
This "you won't admit ..." thing seems to be one of your most commonly used rhetorical gimmicks.
I note this post by Ghost of a Duke on page 15. You said to him, baout me, "He just doesn't seem willing to admit that 'morality' to him is merely a matter of personal preference." And Ghost of a Duke replied, in a post directly addressed to you as follows:
[ ...[text shortened]... ely blanked it out and did not address Ghost of a Duke's seemingly valid point.
Why was that?
Originally posted by FetchmyjunkYou have simply dodged what Ghost of a Duke said yet again, just like you did on page 15.
The ghost believes that there are no moral absolutes. You believe there are because you believe rape is always wrong. How do you know that you are right and the ghost is wrong?
Originally posted by FMFBut you can't know that what you perceive to be the 'best decision' is in fact the right one unless you admit that there is an objective standard which allows you to make that decision.
Where did I claim this?
I explained my viewpoint on how moral sensibilities guide us to make the best decisions we can in given situations, but you ignored the posts in which I laid it out. It was maybe a couple of dozen pages ago.
Originally posted by FMFHow do I dodge a post that has no question addressed to me? You have dodged a question that was directed at you on this very page. The question was, how do you know that your moral view is right and the ghost's view is wrong?
You have simply dodged what Ghost of a Duke said yet again, just like you did on page 15.
Originally posted by FetchmyjunkI have already addressed this and even if you demand that I "admit" something a hundred times more, as long as it's just about the same old self-aggrandizing terminology you attach to your opinions that I have explained my take on repeatedly, it's going to have no effect.
But you can't know that what you perceive to be the 'best decision' is in fact the right one unless you admit that there is an objective standard which allows you to make that decision.
1 edit
Originally posted by FetchmyjunkDo you have an 'objective standard'?
But you can't know that what you perceive to be the 'best decision' is in fact the right one unless you admit that there is an objective standard which allows you to make that decision.
Is it God?
Are you somehow trying to get FMF to admit an 'objective standard' is required, therefore equating that to God?
Where are your questions going?
Originally posted by FMFThe ghost will not admit that there are any moral absolutes because his atheism doesn't allow it. You believe that 'rape is always wrong'. So how do you know that you are right and the ghost is wrong?
What is it you are claiming I think Ghost of a Duke is wrong about? Copy paste what I said about him, what topic you are talking about, what he said, etc.