0
   

A perfect god can not exist?

 
 
Extrain
 
  1  
Reply Sat 1 May, 2010 02:17 pm
@Night Ripper,
Night Ripper;159065 wrote:
They are both propositions that involve things which don't exist, a King of France and wrongness outside of all culture.


So wrongness both exists and does not exist, then, because it exists inside culture but does not exist outside culture? The KOF doesn't exist anywhere; the KOF simply does not exist. Moreover, moral "wrongness" and "rightness" are non-physical properties of actions or events, they are not things. So they do not typically function as subjects of sentences or entities designated in a proposition. They could, in principle, but then you would be talking about properties, not about propositions, actions, or events. Moral relativism is a thesis about the truth-status of of normative jugments with respect to culture.

Please formulate what you are saying into a truth-valuable proposition, otherwise it is useless discussing this. Like I said, I want to see an instance of it. If you can't give one, then you are talking nonsense.

I can give you a instance of a truth-valuable propositions about the non-existent King of France that is true. But you can't give me an instance of your claim that "all moral truths are relative." It is clear you can't give one because it is absurd.
0 Replies
 
Night Ripper
 
  1  
Reply Sat 1 May, 2010 02:49 pm
@kennethamy,
kennethamy;159066 wrote:
But a King of France can exist, but doesn't. Are you saying that absolute values can exist, but do not?


More pedantry...

I'm only saying that they both don't exist. End of story.

---------- Post added 05-01-2010 at 03:50 PM ----------

Extrain;159067 wrote:
So wrongness both exists and does not exist, then, because it exists inside culture but does not exist outside culture? The KOF doesn't exist anywhere; the KOF simply does not exist. Moreover, moral "wrongness" and "rightness" are non-physical properties of actions or events, they are not things. So they do not typically function as subjects of sentences or entities designated in a proposition. They could, in principle, but then you would be talking about properties, not about propositions, actions, or events. Moral relativism is a thesis about the truth-status of of normative jugments with respect to culture.

Please formulate what you are saying into a truth-valuable proposition, otherwise it is useless discussing this. Like I said, I want to see an instance of it. If you can't give one, then you are talking nonsense.

I can give you a instance of a truth-valuable propositions about the non-existent King of France that is true. But you can't give me an instance of your claim that "all moral truths are relative." It is clear you can't give one because it is absurd.


None of this has any relevance to your original objection. I've shown there there is no contradiction implied.
Extrain
 
  1  
Reply Sat 1 May, 2010 02:54 pm
@Night Ripper,
Night Ripper;159078 wrote:
None of this has any relevance to your original objection. I've shown there there is no contradiction implied.


It is perfectly relevant. You said wrongness exists in culture but not outside culture. I responded.

I have shown that your view is either contradictory or meaningless. You can't even follow through with an explication at all. And you never answer my questions. So I am convinced you don't even know what you are talking about.
Night Ripper
 
  1  
Reply Sat 1 May, 2010 02:59 pm
@Extrain,
Extrain;159081 wrote:
It is perfectly relevant. You said wrongness exists in culture but not outside culture. I responded.


Wow you responded. I guess that proves it's relevant huh? If you respond with some random garbage oh well then you responded so it must be relevant.
Extrain
 
  1  
Reply Sat 1 May, 2010 03:04 pm
@Night Ripper,
Night Ripper;159083 wrote:
Wow you responded. I guess that proves it's relevant huh? If you respond with some random garbage oh well then you responded so it must be relevant.


Oh, you said "my view is not contradictory" so it must be non-contradictory. You haven't shown a damn thing. You dogmatize; you don't think at all. You refuse to engage with your interlocutor, or answer any of his questions. You're responses are always short-handedly cheap and simple-minded. That's not philosophy. Why are you even here?
Night Ripper
 
  1  
Reply Sat 1 May, 2010 03:11 pm
@Extrain,
Extrain;159084 wrote:
Why are you even here?


I'm here for your charming personality.
Extrain
 
  1  
Reply Sat 1 May, 2010 03:15 pm
@Night Ripper,
Night Ripper;159086 wrote:
I'm here for your charming personality.


Wow. More mindless cynicism.

I guess I must be engaging with a non-philosophically imaginative short-sighted machine.

Good luck with things. Ciao.
Night Ripper
 
  1  
Reply Sat 1 May, 2010 03:20 pm
@Extrain,
Extrain;159087 wrote:
Good luck with things. Ciao.


You too. Take care.
0 Replies
 
kennethamy
 
  1  
Reply Sat 1 May, 2010 04:23 pm
@Night Ripper,
Night Ripper;159078 wrote:
More pedantry...

I'm only saying that they both don't exist. End of story.

---------- Post added 05-01-2010 at 03:50 PM ----------



.


Pedantry or not, it is a contingent that there is no King of France, but if wrong or right are relative, that is not contingent. I think that what you call pedantry is what others call philosophy.
Night Ripper
 
  1  
Reply Sat 1 May, 2010 04:37 pm
@kennethamy,
kennethamy;159094 wrote:
I think that what you call pedantry is what others call philosophy.


They aren't mutually exclusive.
kennethamy
 
  1  
Reply Sat 1 May, 2010 05:49 pm
@Night Ripper,
Night Ripper;159097 wrote:
They aren't mutually exclusive.


Well, I suppose that all that means is that you think that some philosophy is trivial. I guess that depends on what you believe, Not what is true.
0 Replies
 
walkingaround
 
  1  
Reply Mon 17 May, 2010 08:45 pm
@Alan McDougall,
perfectionism is regressive ( in the psychological sense)
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

How can we be sure? - Discussion by Raishu-tensho
Proof of nonexistence of free will - Discussion by litewave
morals and ethics, how are they different? - Question by existential potential
Destroy My Belief System, Please! - Discussion by Thomas
Star Wars in Philosophy. - Discussion by Logicus
Existence of Everything. - Discussion by Logicus
Is it better to be feared or loved? - Discussion by Black King
 
Copyright © 2022 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.05 seconds on 12/09/2022 at 07:23:02