Log in
Register
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
Forums
New posts
Forum list
Search forums
Leaderboards
Games
Our Blog
Blogs
New entries
New comments
Blog list
Search blogs
Credits
Transactions
Shop
Blessings: ✟0.00
Tickets
Open new ticket
Watched
Donate
Log in
Register
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
More options
Toggle width
Share this page
Share this page
Share
Reddit
Pinterest
Tumblr
WhatsApp
Email
Share
Link
Menu
Install the app
Install
Forums
Discussion and Debate
Discussion and Debate
Ethics & Morality
Moral absolutism as compared to the advancement of technology
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="zippy2006" data-source="post: 76469712" data-attributes="member: 342410"><p>Of course they are. If they are not then tell us what invalid inferences are being employed?</p><p></p><p>You pose as someone who knows logic and philosophy, but a cursory reading of your posts demonstrates that you have no idea what you are talking about. You just make counter-assertions that you never support, and then pat yourself on the back. The fact that you don't think those arguments are valid shows that you don't understand even the most elementary logical inferences.</p><p></p><p></p><p>Here are his arguments with the formal inferences identified:</p><p></p><p><strong>Epistemic Argument for Moral Realism (1)</strong></p><p>(1) If moral facts do not exist, then epistemic facts do not exist. {premise}</p><p>(2) Epistemic facts exist. {premise}</p><p>(3) So moral facts exist. {<em>modus tollens</em>; 1 & 2}</p><p>(4) If moral facts exist, then moral realism is true. {premise}</p><p>(5) So moral realism is true. {<em>modus ponens</em>, 3 & 4}</p><p></p><p><strong>Epistemic Argument for Moral Realism (2)</strong></p><p>1) epistemic realism is true; {premise}</p><p>2) if epistemic realism is true, then moral realism is true; {premise}</p><p>c) hence moral realism is true. {<em>modus ponens</em>, 1 & 2}</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="zippy2006, post: 76469712, member: 342410"] Of course they are. If they are not then tell us what invalid inferences are being employed? You pose as someone who knows logic and philosophy, but a cursory reading of your posts demonstrates that you have no idea what you are talking about. You just make counter-assertions that you never support, and then pat yourself on the back. The fact that you don't think those arguments are valid shows that you don't understand even the most elementary logical inferences. Here are his arguments with the formal inferences identified: [B]Epistemic Argument for Moral Realism (1)[/B] (1) If moral facts do not exist, then epistemic facts do not exist. {premise} (2) Epistemic facts exist. {premise} (3) So moral facts exist. {[I]modus tollens[/I]; 1 & 2} (4) If moral facts exist, then moral realism is true. {premise} (5) So moral realism is true. {[I]modus ponens[/I], 3 & 4} [B]Epistemic Argument for Moral Realism (2)[/B] 1) epistemic realism is true; {premise} 2) if epistemic realism is true, then moral realism is true; {premise} c) hence moral realism is true. {[I]modus ponens[/I], 1 & 2} [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Discussion and Debate
Discussion and Debate
Ethics & Morality
Moral absolutism as compared to the advancement of technology
Top
Bottom