Kenny wrote: RickD wrote: Kenny wrote:
RickD wrote:No. I'm not making any such argument.
Not exactly Ken. I believe those names listed before, Mao, Stalin, etc., didn't believe in God, therefore, didn't believe in objective morality.
Does that help?
Do you believe the Objective/Subjective morality issue was even a thought much less a consideration when they decided to commit those evil acts? I have no idea.
If not, isn't it fair to conclude subjective morality had nothing to do with what they did? No, that conclusion doesn't logically follow your premise.
I believe the conclusion does logically follow the premise because if we assume you are correct and morality IS objective, this would be the case regardless of people like me who believe it is subjective.
Since all moral acts are objective, the acts of evil men can’t be blamed on subjective morality because subjective morality doesn’t exist.
Would you mind explaining why you say the conclusion does not logically follow the premise?
RickD wrote: Kenny,
How many times do you need me to explain that it's the belief in subjective morality that I'm talking about?
We might have to agree to disagree on this one. I think Philip said it best when he said; “They don't care about philosophical analysis of their motivations. Even if they believe right and wrong is objective - they care about but one thing, following their on subjective ideas about what suits them”.
And with that I agree! They probably didn’t even know what subjective or objective morality means! These men had a desire for power, they had armed forces backing them, and they killed anybody who opposed them to get that power; a belief in subjective morality had nothing to do with it.
RickD wrote: If I feel like I can do whatever I want, because I believe morality is subjective,even though in reality it's objective, then the logical conclusion to that belief in subjective morality , is that my preference to murder millions, is no better or worse, than my preference for chocolate ice cream!
Previously you said:Am I suggesting that if those men believed in objective morality, therefore they believed in God, that they wouldn't have done those things? No. That wasn't what I was suggesting. That would be equal to me saying that Theists cannot commit mass murders. That's just not logical.
And with that I agreed with you. These men didn’t do what they wanted because they believed in Subjective morality, they did what they wanted because they had the backing of armed forces that allowed them to.
RickD wrote: If someone has a subjective morality worldview, then one doesn't have to consciously think about subjective morality every time one does something evil.
And if someone has an Objective morality worldview, they don’t have to consciously think about objective morality every time one does something evil as well.
RickD wrote: That's why your conclusion doesn't follow your premise.
Just like for me, as one who has an objective morality worldview, I don't consciously think, "objective morality" every time I act.
But if you don’t think of objective morality every time you act, and a subjective moralist doesn’t think about morality every time he acts, and as you stated before that they probably would have done those evil things even if they believed morality were objective, how can you blame their evil acts on subjective morality?