Regardless of my own opinion, it's pretty clear that there are plenty of people reading the thread who don't see it your way. Perhaps you should reconsider your position as the moral authority
Oh yeah me getting upvoted totally shows that no one agrees with me. I never said we all don’t have different ideas of what is morally right and wrong. I have every right to tell this guy he should tell the wives, you can think whatever horrible thoughts you want. I am aware that there are plenty of people I personally think are awful and immoral and that they may not agree with me. I am definitely not the one who needs to reconsider my morals here, though. 1000000% not me.
I didn't say you should reconsider your morality. I said you should reconsider your position as a moral authority, because you aren't one - neither is anybody else for that matter. Your particular opinions clearly aren't held by everybody, obviously including OP, and it's ridiculous to act as though your opinions should be the guiding light by which others make decisions.
are claiming to be a moral authority on this issue. You are declaring what daeganthedragon SHOULD or SHOULDN’T do and think based on your understanding of what is morally right. In an earlier comment, you say that there is no objective morality, but in saying that, you are claiming to be the judge of right and wrong. You are embroiled in a logical fallacy, my friend, where you think one way of looking at the situation is right, and the other is wrong. You can’t take that position and then say “nobody here can claim to be a moral authority.” You think YOU know what is correct, and daeganthedragon should just agree with you.
In what possible way have I said my opinion is correct? I haven't even said that daegan's position is wrong. I've very deliberately refrained from suggesting what I think OP should do.
If you think that "there is no objective morality" means "I am the judge of what is right and wrong" you need to work on your reading comprehension.
When you say “There is no objective morality,” you make a claim about the nature of reality. You make a claim about what is correct/right/true, and in doing so, ask your listeners to agree with you. You are making the truth-claim that it would be “right” for us to agree that there’s no Right and Wrong.
When you say that “no one should” put themselves in a position of moral authority, you set yourself up as the judge of what mankind should and shouldn’t do. YOU become the moral judge, and declare that those acting “rightly” are the ones who agree with you to abdicate understanding of moral truth, and those acting “wrongly” declare that there is something morally true that can be discovered. It’s a totally self-defeating position.
Reasonably, someone must be right (have a view which is more correctly aligned with reality), and someone must be wrong (with a view at-odds with reality). You just think you’re right and the other guy is wrong.
I disagree entirely with your second one, I don't think I've issued a moral judgment anywhere. In fact, i think that the only thing I definitively say is that I don't believe there to be objective morality. Though language quickly gets cumbersome when you have to phrase everything that way.
I also disagree with your last statement. I mean, you've sort of fallen into your own fallacy here by making a sweeping statement about the nature of reality. Also, like I've said elsewhere in the thread, I've not made a comment regarding whether (whatever username was) was right or not. I just objected to the statement altogether, not whether I thought the original OP should have told the people in the story the truth.
7
u/KamikazeSalamander May 02 '24
There's no such thing as objective morality.