I think the arguments we do have, for Bayesian epistemology, Occam-like priors, and induction are already much stronger than the arguments we have that anyone’s moral beliefs are objective truths.
Really? I’d love to see them. I suspect you’re so used to using these things that you’ve forgotten how weak the arguments for them actually are.
Really? I’d love to see them. I suspect you’re so used to using these things that you’ve forgotten how weak the arguments for them actually are.