Message from @⚖G

Discord ID: 688159527870398559


2020-03-13 22:56:24 UTC  

Objective doesn't mean "all humans agree on it"

2020-03-13 22:56:29 UTC  

I know

2020-03-13 22:56:31 UTC  

But

2020-03-13 22:56:57 UTC  

Is the earth round? Some idiots thinking its flat doesn't refute the fact that the earth is objectively round

2020-03-13 22:57:07 UTC  

Objectivity would mean that it exists independently of us

2020-03-13 22:57:17 UTC  

yes

2020-03-13 22:57:30 UTC  

That doesnf make sense because there is nothing that states that doing something Is wrong or right

2020-03-13 22:57:33 UTC  

We put those labels

2020-03-13 22:57:35 UTC  

We decide that

2020-03-13 22:57:40 UTC  

No

2020-03-13 22:57:47 UTC  

Morality isnt independent of humans

2020-03-13 22:58:09 UTC  

@Sentient23 My question is what I should I say to those who do not necessarily use pornography, but who make a living off of it

2020-03-13 22:58:47 UTC  

I disagree. I'm a catholic, catholicism makes obvious assertions that moral absolutism is correct. I don't think that just because our perspectives on what's right and what's wrong wary, somehow means its subjective

2020-03-13 22:59:32 UTC  

@Sentient23 lol congrats you read james rachels

2020-03-13 22:59:33 UTC  

@Ater Votum If we agree that pornography is immoral, then promoting it is i would say even more immoral, since its making people indulge into more immoral things

2020-03-13 22:59:45 UTC  

I don't know who that is

2020-03-13 22:59:55 UTC  

He used the exact example u gave about the earth

2020-03-13 23:00:08 UTC  

Yes because its the most obvious example

2020-03-13 23:00:08 UTC  

But that's not a good example

2020-03-13 23:00:11 UTC  

Why?

2020-03-13 23:00:16 UTC  

Because that's a fact

2020-03-13 23:00:22 UTC  

It's not debatable

2020-03-13 23:00:25 UTC  

Morality is

2020-03-13 23:00:26 UTC  

No

2020-03-13 23:00:28 UTC  

Yes

2020-03-13 23:00:31 UTC  

You're missing the point of the example

2020-03-13 23:00:32 UTC  

let me explain

2020-03-13 23:00:33 UTC  

It's not the same statement

2020-03-13 23:00:41 UTC  

You dont need to

2020-03-13 23:00:53 UTC  

I understand that just because two people disagree doesnt mean that there is no truth

2020-03-13 23:01:02 UTC  

But I'm saying that your example is shit

2020-03-13 23:01:03 UTC  

thats part of the argument

2020-03-13 23:01:04 UTC  

let me explain

2020-03-13 23:01:09 UTC  

and ur explanation is garbage lol

2020-03-13 23:01:26 UTC  

How

2020-03-13 23:01:53 UTC  

"You cant derive that there is no objective truth from the mere fact that there is disagreement"

2020-03-13 23:02:03 UTC  

But also funny coincidence how everyhing that I believe in is objective

2020-03-13 23:02:40 UTC  

The point of the example is if your criteria for what's an objective fact, is that it must be believed by all humans, since if the perspectives on the issue wary, it means its subjective, then the earth being round is not a fact, since flat earthers do exist.

So
1. If the criteria by which you decide what's objective is that the perspectives on the issue MUST NOT WARY, then if the perspectives on something wary, it means its not objective
2. The perspectives on the earth being round do wary
3. Therefore, if we were to adopt this criteria, the logical consequence (absurdity) WOULD BE saying that the earth being round is subjective

2020-03-13 23:03:10 UTC  

That's what I said

2020-03-13 23:03:17 UTC  

And I dont disagree with that

2020-03-13 23:03:25 UTC  

I'm explaining why the example is perfect