>>2781277>"X is good" simply means "I think that x is good to me"There is a problem here. If one "thinks" upon what is "good", this is not a formal statement, and thus cannot be a moral proposition, and so is debased as an opinion. So, when one says "I think (x) is good for me", this cannot express "(x) is good". In all cases, you are twisting around the denotation of "(x) = (y)". Just admit that you are misusing terms and this nonsense can end, or else delve further into confusion - so answer this:
is "i think (x) is good for me" equivalent to "(x) = (y)"?
>It doesn’t mean that I « like » or « enjoy » X, because those words are not strict equivalent of « I value ».So, enjoying something is not the same as valuing it? Can we value things which we do not prefer for ourselves? What is the difference?
>dismantling my positionI want you to actually explain your position. You are jumping through hoops to sustain incomprehension.
>I’m not saying that it is good,YES YOU ARE - you are saying that to a pedo, it is GOOD, and that a pedo OUGHT to rape kids. You are demented.
>people value child rapeand if they VALUE it, is this GOOD for them, and OUGHT they be instructed by their VALUES? OUGHT A PEDOPHILE RAPE CHILDREN? Enlighten us all with your brilliance.
>I can claim that some people are bad despite themselves thinking as goodWHAT MAKES PEOPLE GOOD OR BAD? YOUR OPINION?
If a person says "child rape is good", you submit to their personal correctness, because it aligns with THEIR values, so you forfeit any moral disagreement. Who cares what your OPINION is if it has no general ability to become sentimental or a shared feeling since we are all atomic, disconnected and irreducible individual units, after all, right? Literally, why are you speaking of moral disagreement if morality is exclusively personal?
Post too long. Click here to view the full text.