Objections to Minimal Moral Realism

General philosophy message board for Discussion and debate on other philosophical issues not directly related to veganism. Metaphysics, religion, theist vs. atheist debates, politics, general science discussion, etc.
User avatar
Red
Supporter
Supporter
Posts: 2561
Joined: Wed Jul 09, 2014 8:59 pm
Location: White House

Re: Objections to Minimal Moral Realism

Post by Red » Sun Aug 26, 2018 3:38 pm

Sure, that all seems fair, isn't that what we usually apply to all members? This isn't the first time something like this has been brought up.

I'm not sure why your pinging me specifically though.
If the circumstances make it such that you can't fuck a man in the ass, then just peckerslap him. Better to let him know who's in charge than to let him get the keys to the car.
-Lyndon Baines Johnson

User avatar
brimstoneSalad
neither stone nor salad
Posts: 8948
Joined: Wed May 28, 2014 9:20 am
Religion: None (Atheist)
Diet: Vegan

Post by brimstoneSalad » Mon Aug 27, 2018 2:01 am

Red wrote:
Sun Aug 26, 2018 3:38 pm
Sure, that all seems fair, isn't that what we usually apply to all members? This isn't the first time something like this has been brought up.
I think I even tend to give carnap special treatment in terms of leniency (I'm inclined to be a lot harder on vegans than anti-vegans due to overcompensation for the biases I assume I have).
Red wrote:
Sun Aug 26, 2018 3:38 pm
I'm not sure why your pinging me specifically though.
Cause you're always online. :)
Just wanted a second opinion, I never like to do things unilaterally.

Logical Celery
Newbie
Posts: 15
Joined: Sat Jul 07, 2018 2:37 pm
Religion: None (Atheist)
Diet: Meat-Eater

Post by Logical Celery » Fri Aug 31, 2018 9:57 am

@Frank Quasar You working on anything new or planning to make future updates to that wiki?

Frank Quasar
Junior Member
Posts: 67
Joined: Tue Jun 05, 2018 10:10 am
Religion: None (Atheist)
Diet: Vegan

Post by Frank Quasar » Sat Sep 01, 2018 7:08 am

Logical Celery wrote:
Fri Aug 31, 2018 9:57 am
You working on anything new or planning to make future updates to that wiki?

Not really, I've been busy lately so I didn't have the time to think things through or do much stuff. So far I've got the two things that I mentioned in mind, but I feel like there could be a third possible point to cover.

Something in regards to "prescriptive VS descriptive" ideas of morality. The point is that people often say that since morality is in the prescriptive business that entails shoulds it therefore cannot be objective as there are no objective shoulds, or something like that. I'm not too sure, but this is an objection that I've seen and it gets thrown around, it could potentially be something to cover?

I only got this idea because I came across this video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qUzAKGdxHsE -- It gave me something to think about, and this sort of reminded me about a debate that @brimstoneSalad had with some person on Ask Yourself's video in the comment section (FrienED Fails Again video). That person was also making some similar claims and Brim was trying to point out that we can tell what IS moral.

(Here's the video, look for Philosophical Vegan's comment if you're curious to read: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-GPstBxHur4)

If you or somebody else could do a write up that covers this then I can just add it into the wiki later on. A relatively simple explanation that covers this objection would be good, it doesn't have to be excessively long. That is, if this is a genuine misconception that people have.

User avatar
brimstoneSalad
neither stone nor salad
Posts: 8948
Joined: Wed May 28, 2014 9:20 am
Religion: None (Atheist)
Diet: Vegan

Post by brimstoneSalad » Tue Sep 04, 2018 3:14 am

@Frank Quasar

There are a few levels of prescriptivism:

1. What you should do (categorically), which is what was mentioned here...

2. What "morality" should mean (whether you follow it or not) in a semantic sense (which is linguistic prescriptivism, based on certain axioms of what language is/what its purpose it; there you can easily derive shoulds in the context of useful language).

Frank Quasar
Junior Member
Posts: 67
Joined: Tue Jun 05, 2018 10:10 am
Religion: None (Atheist)
Diet: Vegan

Post by Frank Quasar » Tue Sep 04, 2018 3:23 pm

@brimstoneSalad And could a hypothetical norm fit in there too (If you want to be X therefore you ought to do...)?

I'm going to write up a little explanation for two new entries on this minimal realism wiki. The first being a short explanation behind the equivocation of "objective", and I found a clip that does a good job at explaining it. Here are the time-stamps (video link below) -- (2:15 - 4:58). Rationality Rules made a good covering (in my opinion) where he talks about the different distinct notions of the definition, and how an argument that interchanges between them is equivocating carelessly. He's not a lunatic like that Imendham dude, or controversial as he is.

I'm not even sure how to cut/download this clip, but if you or somebody could cover that and put it into the "Equivocating Different Definitions of Objective" entry that'd be great. A

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tJSLvTN7pys

The final entry is just going to be a copy & paste of the "mind-independence" explanation that you provided on your Skeptic Straw-man article. There's really nothing else I could add, that explanation is great so I'll put it into this article.

By the time you're reading this the basic templates should be up, and if you have the clip downloaded (or someone else has) then paste it into the correct entry location.

Thanks.

User avatar
brimstoneSalad
neither stone nor salad
Posts: 8948
Joined: Wed May 28, 2014 9:20 am
Religion: None (Atheist)
Diet: Vegan

Post by brimstoneSalad » Wed Sep 05, 2018 1:41 pm

Frank Quasar wrote:
Tue Sep 04, 2018 3:23 pm
@brimstoneSalad And could a hypothetical norm fit in there too (If you want to be X therefore you ought to do...)?
We can talk about that as a kind of norm, sure.

There are also other norms based on something like presuppositions as in the linguistic example above, including assumptions that derive from psychology or the nature of a mind.
Frank Quasar wrote:
Tue Sep 04, 2018 3:23 pm
The first being a short explanation behind the equivocation of "objective", and I found a clip that does a good job at explaining it. Here are the time-stamps (video link below) -- (2:15 - 4:58). Rationality Rules made a good covering (in my opinion) where he talks about the different distinct notions of the definition, and how an argument that interchanges between them is equivocating carelessly. He's not a lunatic like that Imendham dude, or controversial as he is.
I don't know his views on everything, but I haven't seen anything very bad from Rationality Rules.
Frank Quasar wrote:
Tue Sep 04, 2018 3:23 pm
I'm not even sure how to cut/download this clip, but if you or somebody could cover that and put it into the "Equivocating Different Definitions of Objective" entry that'd be great. A

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tJSLvTN7pys
There are some online youtube clipping tools. If you Google "youtube clipping tool"
You should be able to find one that can clip and reduce the file size.

I gave you the power to upload files on the Wiki.

I'm not sure how good those tools are. I know @Red has video editing skills, so he might be able to do it too.
Frank Quasar wrote:
Tue Sep 04, 2018 3:23 pm
The final entry is just going to be a copy & paste of the "mind-independence" explanation that you provided on your Skeptic Straw-man article. There's really nothing else I could add, that explanation is great so I'll put it into this article.
Sounds good, I usually just summarize redundant stuff like that in slightly different more abbreviated wording and link to the other article for the full explanation. That can be done later as long as the link is in there.

Thanks for working on this!

Logical Celery
Newbie
Posts: 15
Joined: Sat Jul 07, 2018 2:37 pm
Religion: None (Atheist)
Diet: Meat-Eater

Post by Logical Celery » Sun Nov 11, 2018 1:49 pm

@Frank Quasar In that video I thought the "scientific" understanding of "objective" was the standard interpretation of what it means for something to be "mind-independent" in philosophy, no? That is something is objective (mind-independent) in the sense that it is independent of one's personal beliefs, attitudes and preferences.

Frank Quasar
Junior Member
Posts: 67
Joined: Tue Jun 05, 2018 10:10 am
Religion: None (Atheist)
Diet: Vegan

Post by Frank Quasar » Sun Nov 18, 2018 12:20 pm

Logical Celery wrote:
Sun Nov 11, 2018 1:49 pm
In that video I thought the "scientific" understanding of "objective" was the standard interpretation of what it means for something to be "mind-independent" in philosophy, no? That is something is objective (mind-independent) in the sense that it is independent of one's personal beliefs, attitudes and preferences.


Yeah, I think it is. That's at least my view of "mind-independence" at this point in time.

@brimstoneSalad Sorry for the inactivity on the wiki for minimal moral realism, I had to deal with some issues in regards to university (had to drop out this year, gonna attend next year). I'll try to come up with some new things that I can add to the list for the wiki, but my ideas could use some feedback. I'll let you know when I'm done in the coming weeks if you're able to review it alongside other people.

User avatar
brimstoneSalad
neither stone nor salad
Posts: 8948
Joined: Wed May 28, 2014 9:20 am
Religion: None (Atheist)
Diet: Vegan

Post by brimstoneSalad » Sun Nov 18, 2018 3:17 pm

Frank Quasar wrote:
Sun Nov 18, 2018 12:20 pm
@brimstoneSalad Sorry for the inactivity on the wiki for minimal moral realism, I had to deal with some issues in regards to university (had to drop out this year, gonna attend next year). I'll try to come up with some new things that I can add to the list for the wiki, but my ideas could use some feedback. I'll let you know when I'm done in the coming weeks if you're able to review it alongside other people.
Thanks, I'd be glad to see anything you can add.
Hope whatever is going on with your university issues gets sorted out. What were you studying again?

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests