Then to pretend otherwise is naked hair splitting and muddying the waters. The idea that you are communicating is prescriptive.The statement in its entirety is prescriptive
The term innocent is descriptive.
What is disagreed upon is when the killing of humans is justified. This is because it is subjective.
What constitutes haphazardly is entirely subjective.
That an idea is common or that you and I have it in common does not make it objective.
There is no number people who have a belief, opinion or idea that will tip the scales from subjective to objective. The number of people who agree is entirely uconnected with objectivity.
Any number of people are able to hold the same subjective opinions and standards.
Let me give you an example.The sun is hot.This may seem like an objective fact and indeed it is far hotter than you or I could survive, but as stars go the sun is very much average. Other stellar bodies make the sun seem down right cool.The objective fact is that the heat output of the sun would kill us. The subjective opinion is that the sun is hot.
Okay, be honest. If we were just casually talking and I said “haphazardly killing people is bad.” You’d be like “ummm yeah, of course. WTF!”, right? Or even if you were internally talking to yourself. That’s what I mean when I say a common Idea. It doesn’t have to be an exact thought process. It’s the same notion as a “common ancestor” if you know what I mean.
Common idea = an idea irrespective of any one individual.
So what you are saying is objectivity is irrespective of observation? Seems to me you’re putting objectivity on a pedestal, making it worthless.
They would be both subjective and objective. Opinions are multifaceted. Some aspects of a reasonable opinion are common, and some aspects aren’t.
What if you said the sun is hot, relative to humans
There is no number people who have a belief, opinion or idea that will tip the scales from subjective to objective. The number of people who agree is entirely uconnected with objectivity.
Do you mean is objective irrespective of our experiential awareness?
Quite possibly, our individual perception and memories have been shown to be unreliable and subject to bias. That is why peer reviewed science is so important. We may actually be incapable of objectivity but science is our best attempt.
I think there is a genetic component and also that it is a learned behavior. The ideas reached are not necessarily universal however.
You keep bringing up haphazard killing which I take to mean unjustified. So you have put a modifier on killing. This is tacit admission that some killing is justified. Killing humans is not therefore in your opinion immoral only killing them under certain circumstances. What constitutes a justifiable killing is not going to be the same for everyone. That is subjective by definition.
Pectin is the key ingredient that encourages growth of good bacteria and reduces "bad" bacteria
Sovereign Silver ONLY kills the BAD bacteria and strengthens the good!
7 but you must not eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil; for in the day that you eat of it, you will surely die.
Common does not equal objective. Us sharing an idea does not make it objective. It must be objective despite us outside of us irrespective of us. We are not a part of the equation at all. I'm not sure how else to put this. What you are talking about, common ideas, that is not objectivity it is agreement.
