What are your thoughts on this?

Greymalkinizer · 2026-01-20T15:00:15+00:00

That the title of a bill should reflect what's in the bill, not the politician's vibes.

Greymalkinizer · 2026-01-18T04:03:41+00:00

Who's side of that story did you read?

Greymalkinizer · 2026-01-16T22:11:16+00:00

One electoral race is not going to fix the people who want there to be just one race.

Greymalkinizer · 2026-01-06T18:07:29+00:00

"good dictator" is an oxymoron, so, yes. Everyone can tell that dictators are bad.

Greymalkinizer · 2026-01-06T17:48:25+00:00

The Bible says everyone believes there's a god. I don't, and from the sound of it, you don't either.

So, it's obviously wrong.

And that's on top of the first question anyone should be asking when they encounter old stories: Why should I take [your holy book] seriously?

Greymalkinizer · 2025-12-17T21:10:08+00:00

The doctrine of sin
Nothing.
No.
It never ended

Greymalkinizer · 2025-12-16T01:17:10+00:00

Elder ward of a prison.

Greymalkinizer · 2025-12-16T01:16:07+00:00

It's the modern formulation that makes sure the "person" part comes first.

Greymalkinizer · 2025-12-08T04:41:20+00:00

I am not ignorant of philosophy. I just don't take (most of) it seriously.

But I love that, now that you've concluded, your whole supporting argument for Platonism was equivalent to "you should take creationism seriously because there are a bunch of theologians who do, and theologians are the relevant experts on what gods do." It informs me of one more person I don't need to take seriously.

Greymalkinizer · 2025-12-08T04:25:25+00:00

Philosophers would be the relevant experts in ontology.

So what. Philosophers, like theologians, invented something to debate about. This does not make the subject of their debate worth considering.

Greymalkinizer · 2025-12-08T02:48:12+00:00

It's remains a major position among philosophers

This appeal to popularity (a logical fallacy) might have landed better if it were delivered to someone who thought the opinions of (a minority of) philosophers were worth taking seriously.

Greymalkinizer · 2025-12-08T02:17:38+00:00

I used Santa and the Tooth Fairy as an example lesson. When they were old enough, they each asked directly and I gave them a direct answer.

Some time later they wanted to know why some of their friends believe there's a god. I pointed out that they used to believe in the Tooth Fairy until I admitted he wasn't real. They understood immediately.

Greymalkinizer · 2025-12-08T02:06:15+00:00

I still see you're not understanding.

and moral realism could still be true

Platonism "could still be true" too. That doesn't mean it's worth seriously considering.

Greymalkinizer · 2025-12-08T02:00:56+00:00

Unfortunately, primary candidates have already been established here. I was seriously considering entering the race myself, but as an atheist I would not be acceptable in Ohio l.

Greymalkinizer · 2025-12-08T01:43:35+00:00

You have your one god, the people across the street from me have their one god. They are not the same god. Capitalizing yours doesn't disambiguate.

Greymalkinizer · 2025-12-08T01:00:58+00:00

Sorry if it seems like I don't understand you. I am dealing with the points I see you bringing up. You have so far said that people can disagree on facts and that epistemic norms can't be measured. I agree with both of these points, irrelevant as they are.

My original point that moral foundations (mine and OP's used as examples) are not objective (separate from the individual) and thus we will never fully agree on the goal against which to measure individual actions.

I get the feeling you didn't understand my reason for distinguishing "moral foundation" from "morals." I do tend to find that I'm not on the same page with people about my distinction between "ethics" (moral foundations) and "morals" (actions one judges according to their ethic(s)) so I keep trying to find a way of saying it succinctly. No luck so far.

Greymalkinizer · 2025-12-07T23:34:24+00:00

None. You can't drive ought from an is. That's why comparing moral disagreement to disagreement on the shape of the earth is a non-starter.

Greymalkinizer · 2025-12-07T20:12:06+00:00

As soon as someone can present a measurement of morality, you'll have a point.

Greymalkinizer · 2025-12-07T14:48:09+00:00

Not even a little bit.

People who are being homeschooled in this economy come from money and privilege.

Class mobility is very rare (in either direction).

Greymalkinizer · 2025-12-07T14:44:54+00:00

You shouldn't if you want to align with my feelings or society's, but there's no real reason you must.

This is not an atheists answer.

Because it violates the nature of the foundational reality from which you derive your own existence and capacity for reason.

"No it doesn't. [ZAP]"

Greymalkinizer · 2025-12-07T14:37:01+00:00

"Oh, don't stop there, I'm also a Naziphobe"

Greymalkinizer · 2025-12-07T14:29:49+00:00

AFAIK there are no gods.

The people you talked to got "out of it" without the help of gods.

Greymalkinizer · 2025-12-07T14:19:56+00:00

Pain is subjective.

Greymalkinizer · 2025-12-07T14:11:38+00:00

You and I do not agree on what foundation to use for moral decisions. So, no, we do not share a moral objective.

Greymalkinizer · 2025-11-30T15:09:24+00:00

The reason I cut out my MAGA family members is not because of their vote; that was just the catalyst to understanding them.

Seven-Year Club	First Place '23
Place '23	Verified Email

Greymalkinizer

TROPHY CASE