I translate that as: it’s better to talk about “moral values” than “moral facts” (moral facts being facts about what moral values are, I guess), and moral values are (approximately) reasonable principles a person can figure out that prevent their immediate desires from stomping on their well-being, and/or that includes in their “selfishness” a desire for the well-being of others.
Something like that? If not, could you translate for me instead?
I take this to mean that, other than that, you agree.
(This is the charitable reading, however. You seem to be sending strong signals that you do not wish to have a productive discussion. If this is not your intent, be careful—I expect that it is easy to interpret posts like this as sending such signals.)
If this is true, then I think the vast majority of the disagreements you’ve been having in this thread have been due to unnecessary miscommunication.
I translate that as: it’s better to talk about “moral values” than “moral facts” (moral facts being facts about what moral values are, I guess), and moral values are (approximately) reasonable principles a person can figure out that prevent their immediate desires from stomping on their well-being, and/or that includes in their “selfishness” a desire for the well-being of others.
Something like that? If not, could you translate for me instead?
I think the the fact that moral values apply to groups is important.
I take this to mean that, other than that, you agree.
(This is the charitable reading, however. You seem to be sending strong signals that you do not wish to have a productive discussion. If this is not your intent, be careful—I expect that it is easy to interpret posts like this as sending such signals.)
If this is true, then I think the vast majority of the disagreements you’ve been having in this thread have been due to unnecessary miscommunication.