Message from @primarina

Discord ID: 633746557048455194


2019-10-15 19:17:39 UTC  

Well, I made an argument that it is

2019-10-15 19:17:47 UTC  

You made one that it isn't, and I'm really not buying it.

2019-10-15 19:18:00 UTC  

Just because one could possibly use a definition that no one has used before doesn't make it ambiguous

2019-10-15 19:18:12 UTC  

Again;

2019-10-15 19:18:17 UTC  

Your words have many other definitions also that you don't intend

2019-10-15 19:18:17 UTC  

Of or relating to the essential nature of a thing; inherent. (google)

2019-10-15 19:18:26 UTC  

Yes?

2019-10-15 19:18:38 UTC  

Do you know how essential and natural are used in philosophy

2019-10-15 19:18:48 UTC  

Have you read up on natural law or essentialism?

2019-10-15 19:18:52 UTC  

Look at the webster page

2019-10-15 19:19:55 UTC  

My model allows for both versions of the phrase to make sense, by explaining your version as involving an implicit omission.

2019-10-15 19:20:19 UTC  

You have no model, you called mine "not literal"

2019-10-15 19:20:23 UTC  

Which it clearly is

2019-10-15 19:20:34 UTC  

So, from websters intrinsic

2019-10-15 19:20:39 UTC  

And morality

2019-10-15 19:20:59 UTC  

Is saying objective morality ambiguous because objective can mean unbiased?

2019-10-15 19:21:08 UTC  

You described an argument for those definitions leading to "morality intrinsic to reality"

2019-10-15 19:21:49 UTC  

It is to some people who are uneducated, but we don't worry about that because both versions are so widely used, and are also closely related.

2019-10-15 19:22:14 UTC  

Now how about *the only use* of intrinsic morality

2019-10-15 19:22:33 UTC  

Arguably, the word can be taken to have the same meaning in both cases, and the differences explained with omission

2019-10-15 19:22:33 UTC  

We shouldn't worry about it

2019-10-15 19:23:07 UTC  

Non bias in a person's view, and being q real feature of reality isn't synonymous

2019-10-15 19:23:08 UTC  

The danger here is people are at greater risk of being mislead

2019-10-15 19:23:24 UTC  

Do you think people have an IQ of 2

2019-10-15 19:23:27 UTC  

My interpretation is likely the interpretation of the common man

2019-10-15 19:23:38 UTC  

I've never had anyone make that mistake before

2019-10-15 19:23:41 UTC  

You shouldn't use the intelligence of others as a crutch, rely on it when necessary

2019-10-15 19:23:55 UTC  

If someone doesn't know, they google intrinsic morality

2019-10-15 19:24:08 UTC  

Except, my version of the phrase is also valid

2019-10-15 19:24:20 UTC  

You clarfied what you meant, and I accepted that meaning

2019-10-15 19:24:35 UTC  

Sure, but that also means nothing at all in the context I used it, so to know more people will google it

2019-10-15 19:25:37 UTC  

Or they'd ask you for clarification

2019-10-15 19:25:45 UTC  

Because they don't assume you're without fault

2019-10-15 19:26:03 UTC  

Nor was I talking to you to begin with, why would your interpretation matter?

2019-10-15 19:26:05 UTC  

and / or possibly have a bad internet connection at the moment, ioi

2019-10-15 19:26:28 UTC  

Me and that person discuss this all the time, they knew what I'm talking about

2019-10-15 19:26:45 UTC  

You show up with zero context and assume you will have a good opinion

2019-10-15 19:27:48 UTC  

You clarified your point, I talked about I didn't read it that way, and how I took issue with the language

2019-10-15 19:27:56 UTC  

You then clarified that it was a term of art

2019-10-15 19:28:16 UTC  

And took issue when I tried to use the component words in other ways; morality intrinsic to the subject