Originally posted by FetchmyjunkYou asked me this kind of question more times than I can remember on earlier threads. And I gave my answer. But you just ignored it.
So if someone made up their own mind and concluded that rape is morally acceptable, you would be ok with it?
Is there anything else you want to discuss?
06 Feb 17
Originally posted by FMFI asked you whether someone would be wrong if they believed rape is morally acceptable and you said yes. You are just dodging again as usual.
You asked me this kind of question more times than I can remember on earlier threads. And I gave my answer. But you just ignored it.
Is there anything else you want to discuss?
Originally posted by FetchmyjunkNope. Not dodging. In fact I have been both candid and clear. And consistent too. I have explained my stance in some detail. See the "Hitler" thread.
I asked you whether someone would be wrong if they believed rape is morally acceptable and you said yes. You are just dodging again as usual.
06 Feb 17
Originally posted by FMFYou have been candid and clear that you believe rape is always wrong. You have also been clear that you will never call it a 'moral absolute' even if your belief fits the exact description of a 'moral absolute'. I can agree that you have quite clear on that.
Nope. Not dodging. In fact I have been both candid and clear. And consistent too. I have explained my stance in some detail. See the "Hitler" thread.
Originally posted by FetchmyjunkYou have made it quite clear that you use the term "moral absolutes" in the context of some superstitious notions you happen to have about supernatural causality and divine entities you reckon to have been in communication with you. I suggest you just carry on bandying about the words - and the those fantastical notions of yours attendant thereto - in the way you have been and do so to your heart's content. You aren't doing any harm.
You have been candid and clear that you believe rape is always wrong. You have also been clear that you will never call it a 'moral absolute' even if your belief fits the exact description of a 'moral absolute'. I can agree that you have quite clear on that.
06 Feb 17
Originally posted by FMFBut that still does not explain why you refuse to use the word 'moral absolute' unless it is that you believe it does in fact have some attachment to the supernatural that you cannot explain.
You have made it quite clear that you use the term "moral absolutes" in the context of some superstitious notions you happen to have about supernatural causality and divine entities you reckon to have been in communication with you. I suggest you just carry on bandying about the words - and the those fantastical notions of yours attendant thereto - in the way you have been and do so to your heart's content. You aren't doing any harm.
06 Feb 17
Originally posted by FetchmyjunkI think, if the 'supernatural underpinning' you use works for you - and more generally speaking, your religious beliefs give you what you need - then I think you should just stick with them. I am unaware of any supernatural element in human morality other than in the imaginations of people like you. If you want to attach all manner of terminology to the way you perceive things and the resulting personal opinions you espouse, that's fine, but you can't expect me to use such labels in the same way as you do or for the same reasons.
But that still does not explain why you refuse to use the word 'moral absolute' unless it is that you believe it does in fact have some attachment to the supernatural that you cannot explain.
06 Feb 17
Originally posted by FMFIn essence you are saying what works for me doesn't work for you and if it does work for me then I should stick with it. If the beliefs of Nazi Germany 'worked for them' would you also encourage them to stick with it? If not, why should I stick with what works for me and Nazi Germany shouldn't stick with what worked for them?
I think, if the 'supernatural underpinning' you use works for you - and more generally speaking, your religious beliefs give you what you need - then I think you should just stick with them. I am unaware of any supernatural element in human morality other than in the imaginations of people like you. If you want to attach all manner of terminology to the way you ...[text shortened]... e, but you can't expect me to use such labels in the same way as you do or for the same reasons.
Originally posted by FetchmyjunkI have consistently said that t's fine by me for you to stick with what works for you (i.e. all your superstitious stuff) if it results in you in behaving in a morally sound way. If by "what worked for Nazi Germany" you mean the genocide that was carried out there mid-C20th, then I think the Nazis were wrong to "stick with it" because believe it was morally unsound. How is this any different from the dozens and dozens of times you've asked basically the same question before?
If not, why should I stick with what works for me and Nazi Germany shouldn't stick with what worked for them?
06 Feb 17
Originally posted by FetchmyjunkAnd there's plenty of scope for you and I to disapprove of each other's behaviour and to disagree about what is right and wrong.
In essence you are saying what works for me doesn't work for you and if it does work for me then I should stick with it.
06 Feb 17
Originally posted by FMFWhat you are saying only makes sense if there is a universally correct moral standard (that we can know about ) of what is 'morally sound'. Because from your perspective 'what is morally sound' depends on each individual's perspective. Which means means what you believe to be morally sound is different to what Nazi Germany believes to be morally sound. So you cannot say what they believe to be morally sound is wrong unless you are able to use an objective standard to do so. Unless of course you are claiming that your definition of what is morally sound is universally correct. This is your moral dilemma.
I have consistently said that t's fine by me for you to stick with what works for you (i.e. all your superstitious stuff) if it results in you in behaving in a morally sound way. If by "what worked for Nazi Germany" you mean the genocide that was carried out there mid-C20th, then I think the Nazis were wrong to "stick with it" because believe it was morally unso ...[text shortened]... y different from the dozens and dozens of times you've asked basically the same question before?