anthony Posted February 17, 2016 Share Posted February 17, 2016 2 hours ago, BaalChatzaf said: Please read what I wrote. I said I don't know what anyone else is thinking. I know what they write when I read what they write. I know what they say, when I can hear what they say. I know what they do when I can see what they do. I do NOT know what they think. Their thoughts are in their heads where I cannot perceive them. My actions are connected to what I think. That I can say from first hand witness. I can -suppose- that other people's actions are connected to what they think. Do you know the difference between know as in first hand witness and suppose or the difference between direct knowledge gotten through the senses and second hand witness i.e. hearsay? A circuitous trip to establish the self-evident : that none of us knows what others think. So? You avoided addressing the bulk of my earlier post by embarking on this red herring: because it is too clear that people's actions are ultimately dependent on their morals, and your Golden Rule is next to useless if they are already immoral/irrational. By their actions and words one will know them and their morality. But you've often trivialised an objective morality, so I understand why. Do you have to personally meet a known thief, a known terrorist, a dictator etc., - "first hand" - to make a good assessment of his premises? C'mon. You are joking of course. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!Register a new account
Already have an account? Sign in here.Sign In Now