I use the analogy with a map.Knowing that a correct map to our moral destination exists is of no help unless we can be sure we have that map
-
@PhilosophyExp But isn't the way we find out what the wrong moral maps are through agreed premises and argument?
@sjzara Trouble is, it isn't clear "agreed premises" amount to anything if there is no objective morality and/or moral claims aren't truth
-
-
@PhilosophyExp I'm not sure: there can be moral systems that lead to reduced suffering, and if we agree that suffering is 'bad'... -
@sjzara But why should we agree?@PhilosophyExp
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
@sjzara apt. To put it simply, the statement "the holocaust is wrong" has more force if we think there really are objective moral values, -
@PhilosophyExp so perhaps what is important is the belief, not so much the reality? -
@sjzara I don't think there is such a reality, but I think that has consequences (albeit most of the time we do okay by pretending). - End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.