2017

>2017
>Not deriving an ought from an is

What's your excuse, Veeky Forums?

Not suffering from severe mental retardation.

What does deriving an ought from an is actually mean?

Still haven't bought a PhD.

Ought = morality
Is = facts

>2017
>being a less talented version of Ben Stiller

The Moral Landscape is utter garbage.

That's my excuse, Sam "Torture is 100% A-OK" Harris.

Sam Harris is right about torture btw, doesn't matter how ridiculous The Moral Landscape is

I don't think he tries to derive an ought from an is. What he's arguing against is people who misunderstand the is/ought gap, who think it is the end of moral philosophy and necessarily leads to moral relativism. He basically just argues for a form of moral realism.

Any sufficiently elaborated on prescription statement becomes a predictive statement, which can then be falsified.

>offer $20,000 and a public recantation if anyone can prove the moral landscape wrong
>over 400 essays and not one person can prove him wrong

when will you guys admit defeat

nobody who's even thought about morality could agree with moral relativism, it's ridiculous

>he thinks the future isn't metaphysically open, making predictive statements truth valueless until their time of verification passes

literally lmaoing @ u

>Sam Harris is alive
>We ought to change that

I do. For instance; life IS without any underlying teleology and IS an accumulation of disutility in the form of a thermodynamic deficit over an arbitrary period of time therefore I OUGHT to kill myself

I support torture. Why? Because Sam Harris is still alive.

It's about patterns.
Is: what occurs now during the present.
Ought: what will occur in the future. i.e. making a prediction

From a bunch of "is", an "ought" is formed. In other words, from a bunch of events, I find a pattern to which I use to make prediction about the future.

>When you really think abou tit

>"I think therefore I am" is a tautology

>the expression presupposes a subject for the temp;oral qualitative state to apply to
>am I right or what?

-Burt spammed up philioso man talking trash to get the room rowdy before he gets into the real shenanigans
*crowd is eating it up, hooting like it's arsenio up there, they all tweet like mad about it*

explain further

i dont think many people are actually proponents of "moral relativism", strictly speaking, certainly not sam harris

underrated post

>Ought: what will occur in the future. i.e. making a prediction
the way i figured, "ought" in the is/ought case isn't "It's cloudy so it ought to rain later" but "we ought not fuck children"
not predicting the future, but describing a set of values that the person strives toward

hi every1 im new!!!!!!! holds up nuke my name is sam but u can call me t3h a1heIst oF d00m!!!!!!!! lol…as u can see im very rational!!!! thats why i came here, 2 meet rational ppl like me _… im 49 years old (im mature 4 my age tho!!) i like 2 write ab0ut nuking muslims w/ my girlfreind (im a philosopher if u dont like it deal w/it) its our favourite form of racism !!! bcuz its SOOOO rational!!!! shes rational 2 of course but i want 2 meet more rational ppl =) like they say the more the merrier!!!! lol…neways i hope 2 profile alot of brown people here so give me lots of commentses!!!!
ISLAAAAAAAAAM!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! <--- me bein rational again _^ hehe…toodles!!!!!

love and waterboarding,

t3h a1heIst oF d00m

...