Questions on morality

Originally posted by FMF
I'm pretty sure there are many, many people here ~ I'd hazard a guess that it's the majority ~ who'd think I've got it all wrong about morality [assuming they have read what I've written] and that you have got it right. But it's for them to decide for themselves, not me.

Well that's what you get from relativism, as long as you believe your beliefs are true then they are true for you. Can't argue with that logic.

Originally posted by Fetchmyjunk
..as long as you believe your beliefs are true then they are true for you.

But this is essentially what you have been saying about your own personal opinions regarding morality all along.

Originally posted by FMF
But this is essentially what you have been saying about your own personal opinions regarding morality all along.

Actually if I assume that moral absolutes and hence objective moral truth does exists, my personal opinions would have no bearing on them whatsoever.

Originally posted by Fetchmyjunk
Actually if I assume that moral absolutes and hence objective moral truth does exists, my personal opinions would have no bearing on them whatsoever.

And what bearing ~ in your personal opinion ~ does whatever you happen to "assume" have upon the moral reality in which I live?

Originally posted by FMF
And what bearing ~ in your personal opinion ~ does whatever you happen to "assume" have upon the moral reality in which I live?

I believe we share the same reality. Let me illustrate:

If I were to say that I am communicating to you, that would be true for both of us. If I were to say that 2+2 equals four, that would also be true for both of us. I am sitting in front of the computer. That is true. I am at work. That is true. Truth corresponds with reality. When a statement is made and it corresponds with fact, with actuality, it is said to be true. Likewise, truth cannot be illogical. To say 2+2 equals four is a logical statement. If I were to say 2+2 equals 6, that would not be true. It is counter to logic. So we could say then that truth is what corresponds to reality and or logic. In other words, truth corresponds to something else because truth is a statement that properly relates to something else. Now, I have offered you what I believe is a moral absolute truth. We could discuss whether or not it really is. If it is a moral truth, then to what does the moral truth correspond in order to obtain its truthness? Here's the offering of a moral absolute truth. "It is always wrong for you to torture babies merely for your personal pleasure. If it is a moral truth, then to what does the moral truth correspond in order to obtain its truthness? If something is morally true, it must correspond to something--at least, as far as the logic of what truth is that I presented so far would suggest. The funny thing about morals is that they are truth statements. For example, it is wrong morally to rape someone. But why? Against what do they compare by which they obtain their truth values?

I would suggest you read the following discussion if you wish to understand what I believe.
https://carm.org/morality-truth

Originally posted by Fetchmyjunk
I believe we share the same reality.

And what bearing do you think your personal opinion [that we share the same "reality" by which I mean all the supernatural stuff you believe in [none of which - by your admittance - you can prove to be real] has upon my life as I live it and perceive it, in your view?

Originally posted by Fetchmyjunk
I believe we share the same reality. Let me illustrate:

If I were to say that I am communicating to you, that would be true for both of us. If I were to say that 2+2 equals four, that would also be true for both of us. I am sitting in front of the computer. That is true. I am at work. That is true. Truth corresponds with reality. When a statement is ...[text shortened]... following discussion if you wish to understand what I believe.
https://carm.org/morality-truth

Thanks for the peculiarly editted copy paste. Which bit of it do you think adds to what you've already regurgitated over and over and over and over again. If you want to check out my stance on morality and my stance on your stance on morality, you should check out the "Hitler" thread.

Originally posted by FMF
And what bearing do you think your personal opinion [that we share the same "reality" by which I mean all the supernatural stuff you believe in [none of which - by your admittance - you can prove to be real] has upon my life as I live it and perceive it, in your view?

You have claimed that you believe in at least a few moral truths that are not only true for you but true for everyone. One such example was rape. I find the way you derive your morals doesn't explain why this has to be the case.

Originally posted by FMF
Thanks for the peculiarly editted copy paste. Which bit of it do you think adds to what you've already regurgitated over and over and over and over again. If you want to check out my stance on morality and my stance on your stance on morality, you should check out the "Hitler" thread.

I find that your stance on morality cannot explain the existence of moral truths that apply to everyone, which you happen to believe in.

Originally posted by Fetchmyjunk
I find that your stance on morality cannot explain the existence of moral truths that apply to everyone, which you happen to believe in.

I already know this.

Originally posted by Fetchmyjunk
I find the way you derive your morals doesn't explain why this has to be the case.

Yes you've said this kind of thing before. And I have responded already.

Originally posted by FMF
I already know this.

To be clear, do you admit that your stance on morality cannot explain the existence of moral truths that apply to everyone?

Originally posted by Fetchmyjunk
To be clear, do you admit that your stance on morality cannot explain the existence of moral truths that apply to everyone?

I am willing to "admit" that we obviously disagree about "moral truths" and I am quite simply not concerned as to whether you adjudge that I can or cannot "explain" my stance.

Originally posted by FMF
I am willing to "admit" that we obviously disagree about "moral truths" and I am quite simply not concerned as to whether you adjudge that I can or cannot "explain" my stance.

I just find it interesting that you believe rape is always wrong for everyone yet you don't want to agree that it a 'moral absolute'. I find that to be intellectually dishonest.

Originally posted by Fetchmyjunk
I find that to be intellectually dishonest.

I think you said this before. I acknowledge that you are saying it now. I understand what you mean by it. I "admit" that you have said it.