It's different because it's a presupposition

In physical solipsism, the proposition is that we cannot actually know anything about reality because we may be brains in vats or dreaming or deceived by magic or any of a million different theoretical possibilities. We haven't solved this, we haven't ...

To Dukusaur first:

Part 1 - "life" is fuzzily defined.

This is why I went further than "life" and to "the experiences of living beings". An action that has zero chance of affecting the experiences a living being is not quantifiable in moral terms. I can even defend the "smashing a beautiful rock ...

It's different because it's a presupposition

In physical solipsism, the proposition is that we cannot actually know anything about reality because we may be brains in vats or dreaming or deceived by magic or any of a million different theoretical possibilities. We haven't solved this, we haven't ...

It's not about whether you agree with me or not. There are plenty of people who disagree with me that I don't think are psychopaths. And there are plenty of moral statements we would both agree on. For instance "it would be wrong for someone to murder mrswdk just for fun" or "it would be wrong for ...

What I'm saying is, that for any desired outcome it is possible to come up with a set of rules to produce that outcome. What I believe is not possible, is to come up with any objective reason to desire an outcome.

And here I disagree with you, at least partially.

All of moral discussion is ...

The point is you seem quite capable of saying that the acid storm would be worse for you, and totally incapable of making the simple empathetic step to reasoning that the acid storm would be worse for everyone who shares the same objective reaction to the acid (i.e. restricting activities to avoid ...

nietzsche do you believe that your free will is a conscious thing? Suppose someone showed you evidence that at best all of our choices are made subconciously (so concious intention to choose doesn't factor in) would that alter your view at all?

I can see the dilemma they're rapidly putting Diana (Deanna?) in. For every single important job, given the state of the outside world, the survivor grup have a better candidate than the Alexandria group (barring academic specialists like doctor or architect). If she puts the best person in place ...

Regardless, I've chosen to believe in free will, and those discussion on my head don't come up too often anymore.

Did you have a choice to believe in it?

That's not so flippant a question as it sounds by the way. You can be persuaded into believing something, but I'm not so sure someone can ...

The point is you seem quite capable of saying that the acid storm would be worse for you, and totally incapable of making the simple empathetic step to reasoning that the acid storm would be worse for everyone who shares the same objective reaction to the acid (i.e. restricting activities to avoid ...

Then I stand by my diagnosis. You seem to think "objectively worse" means "has relevance to me"...

Were you joking about it being irrelevant unless it was happening on top of you too?

I think I've just worked out why you seem to be having so much trouble with this morality concept (assuming you're not just trolling). You're a psycopath. (and I mean that seriously, not as a kinda "you're an idiot" style ad hominem attack.)

There's no point trying to continue any kind of morality ...

In my mind there is no debate. There is no objective yardstick for measuring 'right' and 'wrong'.

You're not eliminating the debate by taking that position, you're just pinning your flag to one position.

Purely objectively speaking, do you think that the next rain storm in some random densely ...

I always thought of it more as all the possibilities theoretically exist but only one reality actually exists, and we only get knowledge of the reality when we look at it. To use Schroedinger's cat, the cat is either dead or alive as a matter of fact, but until we open the box we can't say anything ...

You're changing the definition - you said "acceptable" not "no legislation against it". I doubt most would think that these things you have named are "acceptable", especially if they don't know what side of the equation they'll be on...

I think you're still just talking about roughly the same thing

I think your wording has changed slightly now, so lets go back to "a way for all of us to live together in a way that we can generally accept" (to keep things as close to the original terms of the question as possible - starting to talk ...

There's quite a large spoiler for the next episode doing the rounds online and most of the sources that are normally fairly reliable are saying it's most likely true. I won't make it so you can read it if you don't want to but if you do open that spoiler box below.

show

Yeah the key word there is "other" PS, other parents like parents of other children. otherwise they couldn't exactly work with the family.

My doctors note thing was because you implied people could just switch back and forth daily. You still haven't actually provided any evidence of that little ...

So lets just pretend I'm totally stupid for a moment and spell out the difference between them instead of just giving me the wikipedia definition of morality...

Morality and our attempts to find a way for all of us to live together in a way that we can generally accept.

How are they different? (by which I mean the morality stuff, not the maths example that was just there to illustrate a point)

Really PS? How about we look at the transgender policy of one of the more liberal areas of the country (also happens to be the first hit in google for "USA transgender student policy")

m

Most relevant bits:

Privacy

Except as set forth herein, school personnel should not disclose information ...

To say X is moral purely because X gives good results for any given individual is to ignore what morality is.

And what is morality? Any definitions you can find for 'morality', 'good' and 'right' are totally circular (most dictionaries seem to define 'good' as 'that which is morally right ...

Isn't a transgender woman someone who used to be a man?

No. A transgender person is one who 'feels' like they are the opposite sex. It can possibly last for life (theory) or it can last for years, even decades, or it can last for a day (fact) Monday, man #1 can feel like a woman, and declare ...