stemelbow Posted September 9, 2020 Posted September 9, 2020 1 minute ago, pogi said: Except that misses the point of his morality, which is well-being. Are you denying that the goal of his morality is human well-being? My goodness, Pogi. It doesn't matter what I am saying, at this point. You will intently misconstrue what is happening here, it seems. I'm not saying anything about wellbeing. I"m saying drop the second half the premise 1 and the argument remains untouched. It is the same. He just adds it for clarification, but it's not necessary.
pogi Posted September 9, 2020 Posted September 9, 2020 (edited) 2 hours ago, stemelbow said: My goodness, Pogi. It doesn't matter what I am saying, at this point. You will intently misconstrue what is happening here, it seems. I'm not saying anything about wellbeing. I"m saying drop the second half the premise 1 and the argument remains untouched. It is the same. He just adds it for clarification, but it's not necessary. Just drop the second half? I don’t think you understand why he added the second half. Hint - his whole premise of morality depends on it. I think we are done. I perceive you as the one intentionally misconstruing things. Harris suggests the goal of morality is “well-being” or human “flourishing” (His exact words). You made that blatantly clear throughout this thread, or should I just forget the first 10 pages or so? His whole book centers on that premise and goal of well-being. But I should just drop the second half of the premise that morality depends on Minds that experience well-being? I truly don’t know why you are trying to backpedal your way out of simply acknowledging that Harris’ morality is human centric with the goal of well-being specifically. Edited September 9, 2020 by pogi 1
Recommended Posts