Message from @Hector
Discord ID: 640226568085438475
I asked you how what you're saying solves is/ought
and you didn't answer
<:spurdo:640003428290134026>
you said 'god'
ok
I don't know it seems to have come full circle in his argument.
that doesn't mean anything to me
I tried to define grounding after that to answer the question.
That's because you're a mutant Nerth
okay, well I don't agree that if your argument is grounded than its true then
<:spurdo:640003428290134026>
I still am not certain what you mean by grounded
can I get a tldr of this "debate"
you just said 'its grounded by god'
Grounded means that there is something or someone the morality is ground in, enforcing it.
GO TO YOUR ROOM
"you dont convince me"nanananana im putting my fingers in my ears" - Nerthulas
YOU'RE GROUNDED
he needs to specify that as DNA lifeforms the matrix he speaks off is a result of genes and that variance even within human pop can lead to variance of perspective but i agree with nerths general points he's making i don't see what the arguments were just going on tangents about stuff
<:powerful:639994936070242315>
So @Nerthulas are you arguing everything is objective, but our human minds are subjective and therefore morality is decided by subjectivity dispite our obility to quanify the objective world with our senses and record it then make abstract and practical evaluations of that?
Its not black and white
there is a difference between positive statements about what is true, which describe reality, and statements of preference - when you say grounded, do you mean that it is something which would make statements about preference/normative statements true, descriptors of reality @Hector
?
We have subjective and objective lived experience
I am sorry @Deleted User its gonna be hard to address your because @Nerthulas can't see you
if one statement can be true for two people its objective.
All you need to disprove his argument is prove that more than one person can share a truth
simply more than one.
Well of course more that one person can share a truth @Deleted User
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mLdqKIj3-A0
I forgotted, there's good stuff on YT
Objective doesn't require universal agreement it requires agreement apart from the individual to more than one.
tbh, i behaved like an african my last year of trick-or-treating - 8th grade
i was better before that though, i swear
@StRexPowerColt I'm saying that the human perspective is the only one which can be taken, that there is no need to refer to a cosmic consciousness to explain the existence of numbers and patters, that reference to our own consciousnesses is the only thing which is required (and the only thing which can be said conclusively) as to why we observe these universal patterns
Thus objective can exist and coexist with the subjective.
Thats just not true @Nerthulas because if something besides humanity shared its perspective with us then what?