No, my points are grounded in the actual existential trajectory of my own personal value judgments with regard to abortion; and in how those experiences then reconfigured my thinking about it over the years. And then how in particular my thinking there reconconfigured from an objectivisist frame of mind to one revolving around what I construe to be the components of moral nihilism.
While even here I acknowledge this reflects only what I have come to believe “in my head” “here and now”. I have no capacity to demonstrate that others are obligated to think like me if they wish to be construed as rational human beings.
Sure, fall back on this if you must. Only when the epistemologists among us are all in argeement regarding the one and the only optimal “intellectual framework and system” for discussing the distinctiction I make between that which is applicable to all of us objectively in either/or world and that which comes to be embodied subjectively/subjunctively in conflicting moral and political values in the the is/ought world, is such an attempt even to be made.
RM/AO? VO? One of your own Capital Letter Contraptions?
You really, really, really would like it to be like this, wouldn’t you?
Instead, I turn it around. I encompass my own understanding of dasein here: viewtopic.php?f=1&t=176529
Then I ask the Heidegger scholars to note how this is not in sync with Martin’s own eminently more scholastic rendition of Dasein.
Then I challenge them to bring their intellectual contraptions out into the world of actual human interactions in conflict. Where I can then note the components of my own intellectual contraption – identity, values and political power – by situating them in an actual existential trajectory as I did above re abortion. Where they can then do the same regarding their components.
Oh, yeah. It was assigned by either Dr. Rene DeBrabander or Dr Walt Fuchs at TSU here in Baltimore many years ago. Didn’t finish it though.
Note to others:
He’s really pinned me to the mat with this, right?