4 hours ago, Daniel McKay said:

Dim - I'm not sure what you mean by your second comment. By "freedom" I mean the ability of free (possessing free will), rational (possessing the capacity for rationality) agents (conscious entities capable of making some choice) to understand and make those choices that belong to them.

What metric are you going to use in order to objectify one's freedom, and make it universally true?

Dim - I'm not sure I understand the question, but I'll try to answer the spirit of what I think you're asking and you can tell me if I'm off. I would say that the reason we should think that freedom (of the sort I have just described) is of objective moral value is that it can apply to all moral agents in all possible worlds and, indeed, might well be the only coherent measure of value that can do so.

On 8/16/2024 at 12:52 PM, Daniel McKay said:

Dim - I'm not sure I understand the question, but I'll try to answer the spirit of what I think you're asking and you can tell me if I'm off. I would say that the reason we should think that freedom (of the sort I have just described) is of objective moral value is that it can apply to all moral agents in all possible worlds and, indeed, might well be the only coherent measure of value that can do so.

Who sets the rules?

For instance, if I was dying of thirst and broke into your home to drink from the tap, in some countries you would be within your rights to shoot me when I turn round, before I have a chance to apologise and offer to pay for the damages. 

Nobody "sets" the rules. Things are either right or wrong (edit: or neither). People's opinions, or indeed country's laws don't affect that one way or the other.

Edited August 18, 20241 yr by Daniel McKay

7 hours ago, Daniel McKay said:

Nobody "sets" the rules. Things are either right or wrong (edit: or neither). People's opinions, or indeed country's laws don't affect that one way or the other.

Your OP seems to... 😉

13 hours ago, dimreepr said:

Your OP seems to... 😉

I mean, my post sets rules regarding me giving away my money. It isn't the reason for moral facts existing in the world assuming that they do.

10 hours ago, Daniel McKay said:

I mean, my post sets rules regarding me giving away my money. It isn't the reason for moral facts existing in the world assuming that they do.

Is there ever going to be a time when you'll pay out your money?

Isn't it morally wrong to promise something you have no intention of honoring? 

@dimreepr, please stop trolling this thread.

58 minutes ago, dimreepr said:

Is there ever going to be a time when you'll pay out your money?

Isn't it morally wrong to promise something you have no intention of honoring? 

Just shut up and stop turning every thread into spaghetti. .

24 minutes ago, TheVat said:

@dimreepr, please stop trolling this thread.

 

3 minutes ago, StringJunky said:

Just shut up and stop turning every thread into spaghetti. .

I'm sorry, did I interupt your replies... 🙄

5 hours ago, dimreepr said:

Is there ever going to be a time when you'll pay out your money?

Isn't it morally wrong to promise something you have no intention of honoring? 

!

Moderator Note

Take a break from the thread, or from the site, your choice. Let me know what you decide. This is unacceptable.

 

Dim- It would be wrong to offer money in return for something and then, upon recieving the thing requested, not pay the money. If someone solves the problem, I will pay them the money. If someone makes a significant contribution to solving the problem, I will pay them part of the money.

8 hours ago, Daniel McKay said:

Dim- It would be wrong to offer money in return for something and then, upon recieving the thing requested, not pay the money. If someone solves the problem, I will pay them the money. If someone makes a significant contribution to solving the problem, I will pay them part of the money.

I'm sorry, there was a point to my question's which would have been revealed upon receipt of your answers (for additional context).

Along the lines of, there's no independent adjudication of your rules...

Last post @Phi for All, I'd say it's been fun, but lately, with all this prejudice of my intent; no thanks...

 

Dim - yeah, you made that point right at the start, and I responded to it then too.

1 hour ago, Daniel McKay said:

Dim - yeah, you made that point right at the start, and I responded to it then too.

Well, maybe neither of us is correct; but you're welcome to your filter bubble, where you can't be wrong...

I don't care anymore...

Dim - This is an odd response to me pointing out that you have already made this point and I have already answered it.