You cannot prove the correctness of an idea not based, in any part, in reality as we experience it. So whether any opinion is correct, or none are, or whether correctness in itself is a misnomer (because it simply does not exist outside of our conception of it)
Your conclusion does not follow from your premise. Lack of the ability to prove the correctness of an idea does not prove that it does not exist outside our conception of it. I know that you believe that it does not exist outside our conception of it but I disagree.
And again, we come to Karen's point of forcing, as little as possible, the behavior of others, to conform to our personal whims.
As I said above I see it as more then just our personal whims, but even if I did for the sake of argument agree that no moral, or metaphysical, or philosophical ideas have an extrinsic existence, I would still be left with the question of how do you justify any public policy without a moral or philosophical belief or "whim" if that is what you want to call it. I know of no public policies that do not at some level have some unprovable assumption to justify them (even if the justification is not stated out loud and exists only in the mind of the person or people creating the policy).
Tim |
