Posted: Oct 02, 2010 4:12 pm
Last call 
Submissions due by Oct 9 here:
http://blogcarnival.com/bc/submit_28.html
Late submissions due by Oct 29 here:
ichthus77@hotmail.com
Here is a question to get the critical thinking juices flowing:
If truth corresponds to reality, then, if there is moral truth,
shouldn't it correspond to a real good, an always fulfilled ought? If
it is always true, it always corresponds--to a good that always is, to
an ought that is always fulfilled. So, if Sam Harris wants to call
this good/ought "well-being"--then (skipping the definition of "well"
for now) moral truth (always true) corresponds to being that is
(always) well--the real standard, the real pattern, but Harris denies
the existence of such a being. Hence, the question.
Submissions due by Oct 9 here:
http://blogcarnival.com/bc/submit_28.html
Late submissions due by Oct 29 here:
ichthus77@hotmail.com
Here is a question to get the critical thinking juices flowing:
If truth corresponds to reality, then, if there is moral truth,
shouldn't it correspond to a real good, an always fulfilled ought? If
it is always true, it always corresponds--to a good that always is, to
an ought that is always fulfilled. So, if Sam Harris wants to call
this good/ought "well-being"--then (skipping the definition of "well"
for now) moral truth (always true) corresponds to being that is
(always) well--the real standard, the real pattern, but Harris denies
the existence of such a being. Hence, the question.