(1) By "correct our thoughts" I mean that, as individuals sometimes violate the principles of correct reasoning in favour of emotionalism, we need laws of logic in order to ensure we are reasoning correctly. If laws of logic were based upon what we as human beings think, then they could not be used as a tool to think or reason correctly. History demonstrates that it is the tendency of humanity to be irrational and emotional, so how could a system based upon irrational and emotional thoughts possibly be a determiner of correct reasoning and argumentation?
(2) I cannot but express dismay that you believe morality is some subjective, relativistic convention contrived by man. That is literally the same logic Adolf Hitler's regime was built upon – Darwinian morality of survival of the fittest, perpetuation of the "favoured race" and extermination of those deemed unfit or unfavored. This twisted ideology has resulted in hundreds of millions of worldwide deaths and if that is not self-evidently wrong to you, then you have rejected all premises of decency and humanity for a cruel and depraved ideology of murder and destruction. I, however, believe that God decided what is right and wrong, thus creating basic moral laws like "do not murder" and "do not steal" that mankind used to universally agree upon, and that are ingrained in the consciences of all but a wretched few members of humanity.
(3) See above points.
(4) Without objective morality, you have no basis upon which to enforce your worldview or utopian vision upon others, nor, I may add, any right.
(5) I do not understand why you conflated me asking you why you could claim my worldview is wrong with me not understanding the reasons humans argue... see above points for presentation about my beliefs on morality...
(6) You avoided my question. I asked you why we can trust inventions invented by humans using their senses when the senses themselves are not reliable, and you just begged the question by claiming that tools provide a basis of objectivity for everyone, without once confronting the logic hurdle I presented to you in my prior comments. And if you believe that truths can only be objective when they observed by tools, with what tool have you observed this empiricist principle?
Be the first to reply to this disagreement.