Racism and Methodological Naturalism

Please tell us how to determine racism is wrong using MN.


You discuss the effects it has on human beings while treating them as naturalistic entities.

1 Like

That does not tell us racism is wrong. At most it would tell us racism is ineffective, but I’m not even sure that is the case. Perhaps racism is very effective at some goals, such as excluding people we don’t like and favoring people we do like.

So on what basis do you believe we can demonstrate racism is wrong, that is incompatible with MN? Assuming you believe it can be shown to be wrong?

1 Like

Isn’t it the point that MN cannot prove that racism is wrong, and that there is truth outside of MN?

1 Like

That would seem to be the claim. I do not believe it can be supported, but we’ll see.

So you believe there is no truth outside of MN. Prove that racism is wrong.

1 Like

Let’s make it personal. What kind of car do you drive? As an M.D., I suspect that it is better than decent. Supposed someone keyed it, slashed its tires or stole it. Prove that that is wrong, using MN.

1 Like

A case can be made that through investigation by science through MN that there is only one race - the human race. So MN and the findings of science show that racism is purely a social construct.

That doesn’t make it wrong, only wrong in the eyes of some.

1 Like

What kind of car do you drive? :sunglasses:

1 Like

I know, but it doesn’t make it right either. Humans decide what is right and what is wrong not Gods.

A Black 2017 Ford Fusion SE

I do not need to do that. I have not claimed that everything can be demonstrated to be true thru MN, nor have I claimed that nothing IS true outside of MN.

I am claiming that there are no means by which we can demonstrate things to be true that require gong beyond the assumptions of MN. I probably wasn’t clear about that.

Anyway, if I demonstrate that racism is wrong thru MN, that does not demonstrate my claim is true. And if I am unable to do so, it does not demonstrate my position to be false. So it would just be a waste of time for me to answer your question.

What would forward the discussion would be someone demonstrating racism to be wrong thru an argument we can all accept is sound, and using assumptions or propositions that could not be held under MN.

1 Like

So if someone thought it was okay to steal it, you shouldn’t have any problem with that.

That would involve faith.

So, IOW, there is no way to demonstrate things to be true other than thru MN.

Thanks for the discussion.

Actually, there is. Faith can be justified.

MN uses faith all the time.

If it can be, this is only thru MN. Unless you’d care to give an example.