Tuesday, April 9, 2024
"A"
I feel compelled to not the use if "a" instead of "the". When one posits that one's opinion is one of (potentially) many valid opinions on a topic, then one has essentially said nothing. One has merely offered an opinion of one possible outcome while not even beginning to suggest that that one, of many, is inherently superior or more utilitarian, than any other option.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
5 comments:
https://winteryknight.com/2024/04/09/william-lane-craig-lectures-on-the-moral-argument-at-georgia-tech-12/
I default to Scripture for any and all arguments for "human rights" and especially "morality". It takes a real spin doctor to pretend that Scripture isn't the basis for either, when even in such a person's imaginings, Christian teaching is ostensibly at its heart. But where it errs is when it strays from a strict adherence to Scripture while pretending to be a Christian. One can assert that it's uncool to "force" Christian teaching down the throats of others. But to pretend a given principle or proposal can't be considered universally beneficial simply due to its source is outright crap and nonsense...typical of the modern progressive, but not in the least a true measure of concern for humanity.
Thus my point. There are multiple options for a standard for morality. Various religions offer standards, "Science" (naturalism/materialism/Darwinism) offers a standard, Dan offers a standard, and so on. Dan's problem is in assuming that he can apply his standard to others who don't agree with his standard.
y"...the (no doubt)(subjective) majority (subjective) of rational (subjective) moral(subjective) adults find that appalling (subjective) and actually vulgar (subjective) and evil (subjective) in the extreme.
The number of subjective qualifiers in this one partial sentence is amazing. It's almost like piling on subjective qualifier after subjective qualifier somehow magically makes the underlying claim more objectively True.
I'll grant that the "majority" claim is most likely to be objective, but the rest are all glaringly subjective. Which is the point. I was not aware that morality was decided by "majority" rule.
Apparently redefining terms is a significant part of the process. As long as you can define "univerals" as "not universal", then it's easy.
Post a Comment