I did but then you didn't seem to want to engage with my posts. Not exactly worth it to write big responses if you're not going to respond. I'd still like to know what you think the normative implications of moral antirealism are, for instance, as per the previous discussion. If those posts were too long, I'd be happy to write more concise posts. I'm verbose. If it helps, I can employ a self-imposed word limit.
The problem wasn't that, it was just that it was hard to read given that I was unclear about when I was quoting you, and substack comments of immense length are hard to read. I think it might be better for you to start a substack and write a response, and then I could write a response to my blog. Maybe comments above 700 words should be divided into multiple comments, or posted separately.
With adequate spacing, this may be clear enough. More generally, would like to engage in text format on your blog in a substantive way! Is there nothing you can do to improve the way substack displays messages?
Anyway, I'm curious about your take on the normative implications of moral antirealism - I'd have to go back and dig up the original comment to see what the context was.
I'll use the method you suggest in the future. There is no way I know of to make this clearer on substack.
I don't think antirealism has significant normative implications. There are a few small things, so for example, antirealists are less susceptible to debunking accounts, because showing that particular moral beliefs aren't truth tracking doesn't matter if, as antirealists suggest, none of our moral beliefs are truth tracking. It also means that theoretical virtues matter less, because if there's no fact of the matter, it doesn't matter how virtuous a theory is, in much the same way that theoretical virtues don't matter when it comes to food preferences.
Ahh. Well okay then. Yea, I expect there are small things like that but nothing substantive. Carry on then. We'll have to find something else to disagree about.
I did but then you didn't seem to want to engage with my posts. Not exactly worth it to write big responses if you're not going to respond. I'd still like to know what you think the normative implications of moral antirealism are, for instance, as per the previous discussion. If those posts were too long, I'd be happy to write more concise posts. I'm verbose. If it helps, I can employ a self-imposed word limit.
The problem wasn't that, it was just that it was hard to read given that I was unclear about when I was quoting you, and substack comments of immense length are hard to read. I think it might be better for you to start a substack and write a response, and then I could write a response to my blog. Maybe comments above 700 words should be divided into multiple comments, or posted separately.
You can use this:
// [TEXT //
With adequate spacing, this may be clear enough. More generally, would like to engage in text format on your blog in a substantive way! Is there nothing you can do to improve the way substack displays messages?
Anyway, I'm curious about your take on the normative implications of moral antirealism - I'd have to go back and dig up the original comment to see what the context was.
I'll use the method you suggest in the future. There is no way I know of to make this clearer on substack.
I don't think antirealism has significant normative implications. There are a few small things, so for example, antirealists are less susceptible to debunking accounts, because showing that particular moral beliefs aren't truth tracking doesn't matter if, as antirealists suggest, none of our moral beliefs are truth tracking. It also means that theoretical virtues matter less, because if there's no fact of the matter, it doesn't matter how virtuous a theory is, in much the same way that theoretical virtues don't matter when it comes to food preferences.
Ahh. Well okay then. Yea, I expect there are small things like that but nothing substantive. Carry on then. We'll have to find something else to disagree about.
I will! :)
I refuse to comment on any of your posts.