Comment on What is Metaethics?

Wed, 27 Apr 2011 23:18:58 GMT

It seems to me that right and wrong being objective, just like truth and falsehood, is what you've been trying to prove all this time. To equate "right and wrong" with "true and false" by assumption would be to, well you know, beg the question. It's not surprising that it always comes back to circularity, because a circular argument is the same in effect as an unjustified assertion, and in fact that's become the theme of not just our exchange here, but this entire thread: "objective ethics are true by assertion."

I think we agreed elsewhere that ethical sentiments are at least quasi-universal; is there something else we needed to agree on? Because the rest just looks like wordplay to me.

Discuss