View Single Post
  #312  
Old 02-01-2005, 06:07 AM
justaman's Avatar
justaman justaman is offline
Ich bin Schnappi das kliene Krokodil
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: MMDCCXCIV
Default Re: Nihilism vs. Existentialism

Sorry for cutting out so much stuff, but I think we'll just get bogged down if we don't focus on the important bits, and you know how fucking bad I am when I start waffling :P

Quote:
Originally Posted by Zoot
The term "objective morality" is just word play. Grammatically, the two fit together - an adjective and a noun. But it's not even an intelligible concept. What I mean when I say "that would only be intelligible if objective morality were intelligible" is "that notion is unintelligible for the same reasons as objective morality is unintelligible." You can't believe in objective morality - it's an incoherent non-concept.
We've discussed this before. God is an incoherent non-concept yet people believe in him, ergo the same possibility must also be true for objective morality.

Quote:
Sure, it can be true or false that something is preferable-to-someone-in-terms-of-some-value.
Something which is preferable is always preferable-to-someone-in-terms-of-some-value.

So preference is subject to a true/false critique.

Quote:
Evaluations of preferability do not return "true" or "false". They return varying degrees of preferability.
No. We are talking about decisions. In that case it is only ever "do it" or "don't do it" based on preference/belief. You cannot have varying degrees of preferability in this system.

Saying "I want X but I REALLY want Y" is just multiple binary systems.

Preference X against nothing - yes

Preference Y against nothing - yes

Preference X against preference Y - no

Preference Y against preference X - yes

Quote:
I'll try to think of an analogy. Try this. Is the sun true? Well, it's bright. It's true that it's bright. "The sun is bright" is true. But does that mean the sun is true? No.
This analogy fails because there are not multiple options. For action there is always an option of "act" and "don't act". Saying "sun" doesn't provide such a scenario, so it is nonsensical to call it 'true'.

Quote:
Is pleasure true? Well, it's preferable-to-me. It's true that it's preferable-to-me. "Pleasure is preferable-to-me" is true. But does that mean that plesure is true? No.
This doesn't work. Pleasure isn't 'preferable-to-me' it is 'preferable-to-me-against-some-other-value', probably that of pain.

The point is, the moment you start talking about belief, preference, action, whatever, you are introducing an evaluation which can then be judged to have a true or false outcome in relation to what it predicted and what occurred.
Reply With Quote
 
Page generated in 0.37690 seconds with 10 queries