Quote:
Originally Posted by tame_deuces
I'm not the one trying to impress with a bachelor's degree, calling people names and talking about "winning" in every 3rd post, but whatever.
Bachelor's degree? Where did I mention that? I think you're referring to my mention of a philosophy minor, which was a joke since everyone knows that a philosophy minor is BS. But...thanks for proving my point?
Also, when you purposefully misinterpret your opponent's polemic, and then deny direct sources that prove his position, you should probably not be talking about penis size, k? Atta boy.
Quote:
Originally Posted by tame_deuces
According to you DCT proposes a god of relative morals that has give humans the power to deduce those morals, and whatever relative morals humans deduce to be good is good and therefore they are good. You have also supported MB's proposition that "bad" can be better than "good".
This is false. Nowhere did I say that DCT necessarily proposes such a god; I gave one possible interpretation following Mightyboosh's post, and now you're (again) attempting to pervert my position. Not too cool.
As far as "bad" being better than "good", I guess you've never heard of moral relativism then? Ok.
Quote:
Originally Posted by tame_deuces
If God is such a moral nihilist, I don't think the Euthyphro dilemma is very interesting.
There's that spin again. Never said that God is "moral nihilist", but you don't know, and I don't know, therefore making arguments based on assumptions that he definitely is or is not is foolhardy. The argument here is one
variant of DCT, given the ambiguity present, and an explanation as to why discounting such a variant (as Aaraon W. did previously) is untenable. Simple, right?