Message from @Zach
Discord ID: 676792516548493314
Please present an argument against moral absolutism
15 “Have you allowed all the women to live?” he asked them. 16 “They were the ones who followed Balaam’s advice and enticed the Israelites to be unfaithful to the Lord in the Peor incident, so that a plague struck the Lord’s people. 17 Now kill all the boys. And kill every woman who has slept with a man, 18 but save for yourselves every girl who has never slept with a man.
Not an argument
Missing the point again
Why do people not listen
I asked for an argument against moral absolutism which basically implies moral objectivism. Your argument are biblical verses about genocide?
That in itself assumes a moral judgement, I'm saying you cannot make any moral judgements because your moral compass doesn't appeal to that which is unconditionally non dependent
Inb4 crusades
Now, present an argument
wouldnt surprise me tbh
holy jihads
Bro justify the crusades
<:depress:591181860420321280>
Its not like it was warranted already
Well you are obfuscating the point you made originally since it's intellectually bankrupt that no form of morality is valid without religion. I am showing the morality of your holybook. "17 Now kill all the boys. And kill every woman who has slept with a man, 18 but save for yourselves every girl who has never slept with a man." Your religions calls for genocide , rape and child murder
So what?
good rebuttal
in fact it is lol
My religion calls for genocide, ok, and? What grants you the moral authority to judge genocide if your moral compass is arbitrary and subjective
Because i can justify that genocide the same way, "it was arbitrary and subjective, just as your moral evaluation of it is right now"
What reasons
If its reason then provide a deductive argument
Instead of acting like its assumed
inb4 we would be extinct if we didnt do that
I can say gathering sticks on the Sabbath does not cause an offense to anyone. So it would not justify stoning a man to death. Morality based on reason like what the founding fathers asserted
Why should "offense" be the standard which transfers an action from an amoral one, to an immoral/moral one?
lol
Don't remember saying a joke, answer the question
Is this Humes is vs ought?
Hell femoids
No?
I never even indicated that its the is/ought lol
I'm asking why should that be the standard which makes something moral/immoral
Reason
<:ben:588490784576110593>
I have answered you
What reason
What reason concludes that offense is the standard which makes something moral/immoral
Present it
Who gave you that reason??