 So here's a question. Can any of these statements be objectively true? Now, I'm not asking according to Hume. I'm asking according to you. Can any of these be objectively true? That means that they are true or false regardless what anybody believes. In other words, if they are true, they are true not a virtue of belief, but because they're true for some other reason. Now, you've had a chance to look at them, and I've asked you whether you think that they can be objectively true. Well, what are the consequences? Here's something further to ask. What are the consequences of claiming that none of these can be objectively true? All right, so we say you're for any one of them. They can't be objectively true. Well, what are the consequences of this? Well, considering that first one, right, I have the moral right not to be harmed. Well, if this is not objectively true, then, well, that's just merely a subjective belief. Mm-hmm. It's not going to be true. It's certainly not true for some other person, right? Yes, somebody else through their own subjectivity might have some, oh, shall we say, nefarious intentions towards you. They wouldn't necessarily believe this and, you know, your preference to not be harmed is right up there with your preference for chocolate. And if that's all there is to it, then you're, and if they do actually harm you, well, it's just the same thing as not giving you chocolate. Espresso is the best kind of coffee. Yes, this is objectively true. No, I'm kidding. It's not. Yeah, Espresso is certainly my favorite kind of coffee. If you don't like Espresso, I kind of feel bad for you. But, you know, I understand, right? This is not something that's objectively true. That's up to the individual, okay? So if we say this is false, right? If we say it's false, it's objectively true. Well, it probably is false that it's objectively true. But yeah, yeah, this is just something that is up to the individual. It's bad to cheat on your romantic partner. Now, if you say that this is not objectively true, then whether somebody cheats on one's romantic partner is, yeah, it's it's kind of like a preference. And if there is some infidelity involved, well, it's just the same thing as, you know, not fulfilling that preference for chocolate. By the way, if you don't think this can be objectively true, that might explain why you're single. Okay, so murder is killing another person for no good reason. Well, if you're gonna say this is not objectively true, okay, that's fine. But this is just a definition. This is just a definition. If you don't think this is objectively true, then well, yeah, okay, so maybe you have a different definition of murder. One person's murder is another person's justifiable killing, I guess. So the question, you know, if we say this is that this can't be objectively true, then what definition of murder are we dealing with, right? You have to come up with this the sort of definition of murder. And if we say there is no objective truth as to what murder is, well, you know, this is probably similar to that problem with chocolate. It's bad sportsmanship to gloat when the other team loses. Well, again, this is not objectively true. Well, then we're just talking about preferences here. We're not talking about anything that's actually morally wrong with gloating. You kind of turn the tables on this. Now you have the duty not to harm me without good reason. And if we say this can't be objectively true, well, your duties would depend upon your subjective beliefs. Okay. Well, then harming another person is now just sort of the same thing as not satisfying preferences. You lie when you knowingly say something false with the intention of leading the other person to believe something false. Well, as with the early case we just saw, this is just a definition. This is just a definition. So it's not really a statement about whether a particular instance is lying or whether lying is good or bad. This is just a statement about lying. And if it's not objectively true, well, you got to come up. We're gonna have deep problems about whether somebody's lying or not. Whether somebody's lying on a contract or politician in front of Congress or whatever. Somebody says, well, you were lying. I said, no, I wasn't. According to my definition, I wasn't. Well, then lying would just merely be a subjective matter. Not even necessarily good or bad, but lying itself, whether something is lying, is a subjective matter. It's wrong to lie for no good reason. Okay. Well, now we're back to a claim about whether lying is good or bad, right? We left the definition behind. Now we're saying whether it's good or bad. And if somebody does lie and somebody else doesn't want that to happen, well, then we just merely have failure to satisfy preferences as opposed to any kind of moral wrong. There's a difference between right and wrong. By the way, Hume thinks this is right. Even Hume's gonna agree with this, but there's a difference between right and wrong. Sure. For him, what is right or wrong is entirely subjective. Okay, that's fine. But at least there's something of a difference. And if we say there is no difference between right or wrong, well, then there's no difference in your decisions. No, it doesn't really matter what you do. You know, even if you say something like, I have to look out for myself. Well, why? Because that's neither right nor wrong. There is no right or wrong. So if we deny that there's any kind of right or wrong, we've left a lot behind. We've left a lot behind, including Hume. Now, we've seen quite a few statements here about whether something can be objectively right or wrong. Okay, now, if you don't like the consequences that follow, say, you know, murder is merely a failure to satisfy preferences as opposed to something really wrong, genuinely wrong. If you don't accept that consequence, well, you left Hume behind. You're saying there is now something about what's right or wrong independent of mere belief. And if you want to say that, well, that's fine. I'm not saying you can't think that there's something more to morality than mere belief. But if you're going to say that, what does determine what's true or false about morality?