3 ms·
You're not responding to the argument Rand makes. I am not attempting to make that argument, merely mentioning how she gets there. It's an interesting argumen
by grandalf 16y ago
You're not responding to the argument Rand makes. I am not attempting to make that argument, merely mentioning how she gets there.
It's an interesting argument, but you have to buy the premise in order to find it remotely persuasive. I find it more persuasive than any argument invoking God (as most other moral philosophers do) but not completely persuasive.
- ThomPete 16y agoSure. And it's her premise I don't buy. Being an atheist I don't buy the God argument either, but Rands is in my mind simply taking the opposite extreme in her attempt to get out of meta land and by doing so becomes religious herself.
- grandalf 16y agoDo you generally consider yourself a moral relativist then? Nothing wrong with it if you do.
- ThomPete 16y agoWell yes and no. I don't believe it's possible to talk about one moral being more correct than another. (i.e. there is in my opinion no rational argument for a correct moral as everything is context dependent) For instance if just some of the things that the transhumanists believe come true (such as close to eternal life) then obviously it's going to change the context of morals. But I do believe some morals in a certain context are better than others. That doesn't mean I believe they are more correct simply that I accept them as a better model for co-existence than others.