That is true. ONLY through demonstration can you show that something is not what it seems thereby CHANGING what it seems to be to come in line with this new information.
Not if the demonstration is in death.
Your the one that’s so hellbent on arguing my beliefs, if you really feel like discussing an afterlife is irrelevant than just say the word and I’ll gladly turn the floor to you.
If I accept that argument are you willing to defend your beliefs?
So what empirical data did you perceive to come to your understanding of subjective meaning (whatever that is)?
It is the human conception of morality.
We do observably have conceptions of morality.
differ and therefore are subjective by definition.
You can’t conceive something that you don’t know,
what is subjective morality?
Observable things aren’t subjective.
It is called imagination.
It is whatever we imagine morality is in the absence of any observable objective morality.
the opinions themselves are still subjective.
the opinions themselves are still subjective.Yes, but that observation isn’t.
We can observe (share through dialogue) opinions about right and wrong even if there is no right and wrong.
I can say "right = wellbeing and wrong = harm"
We can observe (share through dialogue) opinions about right and wrong even if there is no right and wrong.That makes no sense, you can’t put something into existence and acknowledge it doesn’t exist that’s fundamentally impossible.
I can say "right = wellbeing and wrong = harm"For the THIRD time what is subjective right, subjective wrong, subjective well-being, and subjective harm.
Voldemort is ugly.
I don't remember saying subjective harm or wellbeing. I remember saying in as much as we can determine harm and wellbeing.
if we can agree to a goal for human behavior and attitudes (known colloquially as morality) then we can say if the attitudes and behaviors are right or wrong in that context.
Voldemort is a character in a movie and considering that movies exist and you can watch him in that capacity he in fact does exist but in that sense alone.
Great, so if we can determine it then it’s objective. Would you agree that something such as I don’t know murder is objectively harmful?
I don't remember saying subjective harm or wellbeing.
about that subjective standard.
Murder is a legal distinction.
Now your just contradicting yourself because one minute your saying it’s objective and the next your saying it’s subjective, which one is it?
You can make objective statements based on a subjectively chosen standard.
For the THIRD time what is subjective right, subjective wrong, subjective well-being, and subjective harm.
I don't remember saying subjective harm or wellbeing.
Again this is a really important concept so if you still don't get it we can try again.
I don't remember saying subjective harm or wellbeing.
