Iambiguous said
I haven’t used any psychobabble, as you accuse me of below, but let’s lean into that criticism instead of away. Your behavior is unbelievably passive aggressive. Asking me to resolve conflicting goods, when it is clear I do not think they can be, given I don’t believe in objective morals and have repeatedly said. Repeating your same posts over and over when they are not relevent to the issue I am bringing up, as if they were relevent. Telling me repeatedly how I think, and why told this is not the case, with no evidence saying that from your perspective it is the case. Not seeming to understand that other people have goals and issues, so when they bring those up, you say that what they are saying does not solve your issue. IOW evaluating everything in terms of your needs, seemingly without understanding that other people exist.
Yes, I tend more than you in our exchange the express hostility openly.
You can’t seem to understand the issue about revision in science, and that I am not saying that IS and OUGHT realms are the same. That one could, but you don’t, feel in a hole, given science’s revising around the self, minds, brains, time, determinism. Not the specific current conclusions, but that they have changed over time and have a good chance of changing again.
YOu come back to abortion, as if I am saying IS and OUGHT are the same in all ways, rather than the specific way I mention. I give up.
You may not be passive aggressive and this may not be another example of it. But the other options that I can think of are not particularly flattering either.
People get angry at you because they either cannot face a lack of objective morals or those of us who can face that, for whatever motivations you hint at above. It has nothing to do wiht the way your communicate or your own behavior.
I doubt you really do miss all the implicit psychobabble in how you think of everyone you encounter here and their motivations. That’s not psychobabble because you kept it short and in simpler words.