cult hero
Mar 26, 12:25 AM
Some of the comments on this board are inane.
1) Launchpad is the selling point...Really? You think Versions, Resume, Mission Control, OS wide Full Screen App support are not selling points?
2) $129 is too much. This one cracks me up. Apple is bundling a $500 product into the OS (and other OS based servers are far more expensive) and people think $129 is too much?
3) When has Apple released an OS, and not shown new features on the final release keynote?
I don't know that #2 matters that much. A vast majority of the people buying the OS couldn't care less about the server tools. In fact of all the Mac users I know personally, I'd be the only one that would care about their inclusion.
Also, we don't know that the price point will be $129.00 yet. The price point is something I am VERY interested in seeing though. Will it be that high? Or will it be as cheap as Snow Leopard? Or somewhere in the middle? I'm personally guessing it'll be the latter. The AppStore is changing the general population's idea of what software should cost (which is, in my opinion, one of the best things about it). So we'll see.
1) Launchpad is the selling point...Really? You think Versions, Resume, Mission Control, OS wide Full Screen App support are not selling points?
2) $129 is too much. This one cracks me up. Apple is bundling a $500 product into the OS (and other OS based servers are far more expensive) and people think $129 is too much?
3) When has Apple released an OS, and not shown new features on the final release keynote?
I don't know that #2 matters that much. A vast majority of the people buying the OS couldn't care less about the server tools. In fact of all the Mac users I know personally, I'd be the only one that would care about their inclusion.
Also, we don't know that the price point will be $129.00 yet. The price point is something I am VERY interested in seeing though. Will it be that high? Or will it be as cheap as Snow Leopard? Or somewhere in the middle? I'm personally guessing it'll be the latter. The AppStore is changing the general population's idea of what software should cost (which is, in my opinion, one of the best things about it). So we'll see.
mozumder
Apr 5, 06:55 PM
- Major revamp of asset cataloguing system with integrated final cut server, something similiar to what Aperture does with photos. This will be it's biggest feature
- Core image fx with integrated Shake-style fx compositing
and the usual obvious things (64 bit, new formats, updated quicktime, etc..)
- Core image fx with integrated Shake-style fx compositing
and the usual obvious things (64 bit, new formats, updated quicktime, etc..)
Lord Blackadder
Apr 28, 04:17 PM
If liberals would stop 'crying wolf' ('claiming racism') at every corner, we might actually take them seriously and help out when there's actual evidence.
I couldn't disagree more. Conservatives have already proven that they are willing to either turn a blind eye to or even support such lunatic accusations against anybody so long as it might damage or distract their political opponent. They don't care how far-fetched or personal the attacks are, as long as it creates some useful political capital.
I couldn't disagree more. Conservatives have already proven that they are willing to either turn a blind eye to or even support such lunatic accusations against anybody so long as it might damage or distract their political opponent. They don't care how far-fetched or personal the attacks are, as long as it creates some useful political capital.
rezenclowd3
Dec 9, 11:38 AM
Nuck, about the trigger travel: I am right. I wasn't asking about holding corner speed, and your tirade against me is very juvenile. When I pull just over 3/4 travel on the trigger, the in-game accelerator display is showing I am pulling full throttle. It was this way in Prologue as well.
ezekielrage_99
Aug 17, 02:01 AM
A lot of folks are waiting for game benchmarks...bring 'em on!
Yeah put up some World of Warcraft or Doom 3 results, that's what this is all about a Mac being the fastest gaming machine :cool:
Yeah put up some World of Warcraft or Doom 3 results, that's what this is all about a Mac being the fastest gaming machine :cool:
LagunaSol
Apr 11, 01:27 PM
given Apple's increasing tendancy to underwhelm us with new technology features (which are in fact old by the time of their introduction 1-2 years after everyone else), I doubt we get any of these three.
Yeah, like all those trailblazing Android tablets that are 1-2 years ahead of the iPad, right? :rolleyes:
Yeah, like all those trailblazing Android tablets that are 1-2 years ahead of the iPad, right? :rolleyes:
nwcs
Mar 25, 10:39 PM
Since the release of Leopard, the subsequent releases haven't had the wow factor of before.
Just what I think anyway.
Um, there's only been one release since leopard. Too soon to know if Lion will wow or not.
Just what I think anyway.
Um, there's only been one release since leopard. Too soon to know if Lion will wow or not.
macrumors12345
Apr 19, 01:50 PM
It's ambiguous whether they mean the beginning of March, the end of March, or somewhere in between. This will have a huge impact on the iPad numbers since iPad 2 didn't go on sale until March 11, and has been severely constrained since then.
NAG
Mar 31, 03:39 PM
What the heck is this? The "Steve was right" month?
Pathetic Dell and HP, desperate Microsoft, Samsung aka Mr. "Smoothbastic", Google inhibiting fragmentation, the very one, which does NOT exist, really...
who is next? Oh, i have got it - Adobe. So come on, resistance is futile.
Adobe showing how the iPad is only for consumption and not worth their time. (http://www.electronista.com/articles/11/03/30/adobe.photoshop.for.ipad.to.get.layers/)
Pathetic Dell and HP, desperate Microsoft, Samsung aka Mr. "Smoothbastic", Google inhibiting fragmentation, the very one, which does NOT exist, really...
who is next? Oh, i have got it - Adobe. So come on, resistance is futile.
Adobe showing how the iPad is only for consumption and not worth their time. (http://www.electronista.com/articles/11/03/30/adobe.photoshop.for.ipad.to.get.layers/)
Snowy_River
Jul 28, 03:26 PM
Dan=='s mockup is something that I had considered before, I remember talking about it with Yvan 256 at some point as something like "the return of the Cube." I think it's a pretty good design, the guts of the Mini are so packed as it is, an expanded case would allow for a substantial upgrade in components, including the oft clamored for dedicated GPU.
Another way Apple could do it is just to elongate the Mini's case to make it just as svelte vertically, only slightly wider. Could you take a run at that one Dan==? ;)
Okay, I did some tinkering myself, just for kicks, and here's what I came up with. I thought that we were talking about a computer that was somewhere between a Mac Mini and a Mac Pro (Power Mac), so I thought, maybe the style should be a combination of the two. Let me know what you think.
It's not a Mac Plus... It's a Mac++!
http://www.ghwphoto.com/Mac++1.PNGhttp://www.ghwphoto.com/Mac++2.PNG
Another way Apple could do it is just to elongate the Mini's case to make it just as svelte vertically, only slightly wider. Could you take a run at that one Dan==? ;)
Okay, I did some tinkering myself, just for kicks, and here's what I came up with. I thought that we were talking about a computer that was somewhere between a Mac Mini and a Mac Pro (Power Mac), so I thought, maybe the style should be a combination of the two. Let me know what you think.
It's not a Mac Plus... It's a Mac++!
http://www.ghwphoto.com/Mac++1.PNGhttp://www.ghwphoto.com/Mac++2.PNG
ivan2002
Apr 6, 02:18 PM
No matter what Apple does lately or how much they sell or how good the forecasts are for sales Apple Stock continues it quick downward slide. What the HELL!! I just do not understand it ... Specially while Google stock continues to climb at an incredible pace week, after week, after week.. :confused::confused::mad:
I often wonder how do people make money in the stock market. Then I read something like this and remember: off of people who try to play that game without having any idea what it is about.
It's like thinking that the only skill necessary to win in poker is the ability to figure out the strength of your hand. It's not just that "average Joes" trying to play "investors" are unable to tell who the sucker is (it's them), it's that they don't even know that there is supposed to be sucker!
I often wonder how do people make money in the stock market. Then I read something like this and remember: off of people who try to play that game without having any idea what it is about.
It's like thinking that the only skill necessary to win in poker is the ability to figure out the strength of your hand. It's not just that "average Joes" trying to play "investors" are unable to tell who the sucker is (it's them), it's that they don't even know that there is supposed to be sucker!
Multimedia
Aug 19, 08:51 PM
I also find it amusing when I see posters participating in Macpro discussions when they have publicly stated that they have no intention of buying a Macpro. WTF?? Don't they have a life outside of macrumors? If I owned a G5 Quad and had no intention of buying a Macpro, I'd be spending all of my spare time doing cool stuff with my machine... instead of wasting that time participating in discussions that have nothing to do with me. I might read though some of the threads now and then, just to keep up with technology - but to particpate and debate, what a waste. I guess some folks have no life.While it is true I have no life, it is not true I have fully decided to skip buying a Mac Pro. These discussions have lead me to a place of indecision about it rather than what I previously thought, which was to skip it. I never intended to talk anyone out of buying one if they want one. And I never intended to talk bad dirt against it. My apologies to anyone who thought I did. :(
My hearty congratulations to all who have taken the Mac Pro plunge already.
I am also waiting to see what the full scope of Core 2 offerings will be as I want a 17" Core 2 Duo MacBook Pro more first.
As far as the comment that Toast and Handbrake can use all four cores goes, Toast definitely does in the Mac Pro and if you add a significant action to the Quad G5, it will negatively impact the 2-3 core performance of Handbrake as well as Toast. That is what I meant. If it wasn't clear before now, I apologize for the imcomplete explanation of my meaning.
I feel misunderstood by some of you. No harm intended. Not anti-Mac Pro at all. Not trying to ratinoalize Quad G5 as somehow better - no way. Not trying to negatively impact Mac Pro sales. I'm totally Pro Mac Pro. Regret the misunderstanding. Wish I hadn't hurt some people's feelings. :o
My hearty congratulations to all who have taken the Mac Pro plunge already.
I am also waiting to see what the full scope of Core 2 offerings will be as I want a 17" Core 2 Duo MacBook Pro more first.
As far as the comment that Toast and Handbrake can use all four cores goes, Toast definitely does in the Mac Pro and if you add a significant action to the Quad G5, it will negatively impact the 2-3 core performance of Handbrake as well as Toast. That is what I meant. If it wasn't clear before now, I apologize for the imcomplete explanation of my meaning.
I feel misunderstood by some of you. No harm intended. Not anti-Mac Pro at all. Not trying to ratinoalize Quad G5 as somehow better - no way. Not trying to negatively impact Mac Pro sales. I'm totally Pro Mac Pro. Regret the misunderstanding. Wish I hadn't hurt some people's feelings. :o
macintel4me
Aug 7, 07:46 PM
thats a kinda harsh requirement, i would think it will allow you to choose local/external hard drive/network server.
Buts till, it will cost lot of space, no matter where the space is from.
From the Apple website...
Backup Disk: Change the drive or volume you�re backing up to. Or back up to a Mac OS X server computer.
Buts till, it will cost lot of space, no matter where the space is from.
From the Apple website...
Backup Disk: Change the drive or volume you�re backing up to. Or back up to a Mac OS X server computer.
Nuck81
Dec 10, 04:37 AM
But, I DO love all types of cars. I just don't think they all have a place in a RACING game.
The game doesn't have to be only 700hp exotics, that isn't what I'm saying. There have been PLENTY of wildly varied cars throughout history that would be fun to drive, on a track, in a racing game. The VW K�belwagen and Citro�n DS, for example, aren't some of them.
It says right on the front of the box "The real DRIVING simulator" not "the real racing simulator"
The game doesn't have to be only 700hp exotics, that isn't what I'm saying. There have been PLENTY of wildly varied cars throughout history that would be fun to drive, on a track, in a racing game. The VW K�belwagen and Citro�n DS, for example, aren't some of them.
It says right on the front of the box "The real DRIVING simulator" not "the real racing simulator"
NAG
Mar 31, 04:45 PM
I don't think it is evil. It is crazy for people to pretend like Google makes Android to be benevolent and help the world. They have financial motives, and they have to protect their interests. Removing Google as search is probably going to be a huge no-no. It is kind of dumb that anyone has even tried to do that... That is part of the problem. Some of the carriers/manufacturers are stupid.
They have disrespected what Google has done for them and forced Google to clamp down. When someone gives you something for free and does a lot of work for you, you can at least respect their position and understand when you do things that might be stepping on their toes.
That is the real problem with the android commodity market though. It is not google, it is all the second rate manufacturers who sucked at making smartphones before Apple and Google, and continue to do dumb things to this day.
You mix a more general usage based OS with a hardware marketplace filled with knuckleheads, and you end up with the mess that is the Android hardware market and ecosystem.
That was a hoot changing the search to Bing. Only thing gutsier would be to somehow replace every admob ad to a competitor.
I wouldn't leave Google completely blameless here. They knew who they were dealing with. They need eyeballs to sell (ad business) so they made their bed. Same reason why the software marketplace on android sucks, they designed it for their bottom line (eyeballs). They aren't making a product for people to use, they're making a channel to deliver a product (eyeballs) to their customers (advertisers).
They have disrespected what Google has done for them and forced Google to clamp down. When someone gives you something for free and does a lot of work for you, you can at least respect their position and understand when you do things that might be stepping on their toes.
That is the real problem with the android commodity market though. It is not google, it is all the second rate manufacturers who sucked at making smartphones before Apple and Google, and continue to do dumb things to this day.
You mix a more general usage based OS with a hardware marketplace filled with knuckleheads, and you end up with the mess that is the Android hardware market and ecosystem.
That was a hoot changing the search to Bing. Only thing gutsier would be to somehow replace every admob ad to a competitor.
I wouldn't leave Google completely blameless here. They knew who they were dealing with. They need eyeballs to sell (ad business) so they made their bed. Same reason why the software marketplace on android sucks, they designed it for their bottom line (eyeballs). They aren't making a product for people to use, they're making a channel to deliver a product (eyeballs) to their customers (advertisers).
heisetax
Jul 14, 03:43 PM
This is good news for me.. it will make it easy to resist buying one this year. No 3ghz xeon, no bluray, no new case design.
This means that the 2.7 GHz G5 of a year ago or more would still be a high for CPU speeds for the PowerMac/MacPro line. We already have dual dual 2.5 GHz G5 a year ago. An increase to 2.66 GHz means that either 2008 or 2009 we will see the promised 3 GHz PowerMac/MacPro.
Any bets on which year it will be?
Bill the TaxMan
This means that the 2.7 GHz G5 of a year ago or more would still be a high for CPU speeds for the PowerMac/MacPro line. We already have dual dual 2.5 GHz G5 a year ago. An increase to 2.66 GHz means that either 2008 or 2009 we will see the promised 3 GHz PowerMac/MacPro.
Any bets on which year it will be?
Bill the TaxMan
RebootD
Mar 31, 04:42 PM
Doesn't mean he's not right on this one.
Who didn't see this coming? They differentiated themselves, gained enough marketshare and now want to clean up and tighten the ship down.
As an EVO 4G user I'd love to have the latest updates as soon as they are released by Google.
Who didn't see this coming? They differentiated themselves, gained enough marketshare and now want to clean up and tighten the ship down.
As an EVO 4G user I'd love to have the latest updates as soon as they are released by Google.
KnightWRX
Apr 27, 09:59 AM
This was my point.
Wait, I don't get it. You're telling me there's tons of more stuff to care about while trying to tell someone else that if he doesn't care, he shouldn't comment.
I really don't get your point. Nor do I find the "there's more important stuff to care about" argument valid in any kind of way.
Wait, I don't get it. You're telling me there's tons of more stuff to care about while trying to tell someone else that if he doesn't care, he shouldn't comment.
I really don't get your point. Nor do I find the "there's more important stuff to care about" argument valid in any kind of way.
Porchland
Aug 7, 04:11 PM
Looks very nice. Spaces will become a "how did we live without this?" feature as expose already has.
Does anyone know when we can expect a video of the WWDC to be uploaded??:confused:
I can't really tell how Spaces will work the Expose.
Apple's Leopard Sneak Peak says:
Configure your Spaces by visiting the Dashboard and Exposé preference pane in System Preferences. Add rows and columns until you have all the desktop real estate you need. Arrange your Spaces as you see fit, then assign what function keys you want to control them. You can also lock specific applications to specific Spaces, so you’ll always know where, say, Safari or Keynote is at all times.
I could the simulteneous use of both getting a little confusing.
My main concern overall about Leopard is that feature creep is going to cut into ease of use.
Does anyone know when we can expect a video of the WWDC to be uploaded??:confused:
I can't really tell how Spaces will work the Expose.
Apple's Leopard Sneak Peak says:
Configure your Spaces by visiting the Dashboard and Exposé preference pane in System Preferences. Add rows and columns until you have all the desktop real estate you need. Arrange your Spaces as you see fit, then assign what function keys you want to control them. You can also lock specific applications to specific Spaces, so you’ll always know where, say, Safari or Keynote is at all times.
I could the simulteneous use of both getting a little confusing.
My main concern overall about Leopard is that feature creep is going to cut into ease of use.
ergle2
Sep 19, 08:38 PM
then i will have to work just a little bit harder i'm afraid ;)
i'll start with the 1 gig ram, maybe 2, and later i will be upgrading,it can't stay expansive forever.
thx again for your reply
DailyTech (http://www.dailytech.com/article.aspx?newsid=4217) has a mention of the Core 2 Quadro processors.
Pricing mentioned was a little lower than I expected, but it's processors in the Conroe line rather than the Xeon. Having said that, the 3GHz Xeon is slightly cheaper than the 2.93GHz Conroe.
As expected, the highest rated speed mentioned is 2.67Ghz.
i'll start with the 1 gig ram, maybe 2, and later i will be upgrading,it can't stay expansive forever.
thx again for your reply
DailyTech (http://www.dailytech.com/article.aspx?newsid=4217) has a mention of the Core 2 Quadro processors.
Pricing mentioned was a little lower than I expected, but it's processors in the Conroe line rather than the Xeon. Having said that, the 3GHz Xeon is slightly cheaper than the 2.93GHz Conroe.
As expected, the highest rated speed mentioned is 2.67Ghz.
bibbz
Jun 14, 06:34 PM
I hate Radio Shack.
Salesman have their heads up their butts
or corporate does not know what to tell them.
The 4th store I called said if you have a PIN
you are guaranteed a phone.
I understand your frustration, but apple kept us all in the dark until the very last minute. Before 3:30 no body knew anything. It will take it a little while to roll down hill.
I think we all know how secretive apple is don't we?
I just manage a store in the best region in the company. We have a very effective chain of command here in E. Texas.
Salesman have their heads up their butts
or corporate does not know what to tell them.
The 4th store I called said if you have a PIN
you are guaranteed a phone.
I understand your frustration, but apple kept us all in the dark until the very last minute. Before 3:30 no body knew anything. It will take it a little while to roll down hill.
I think we all know how secretive apple is don't we?
I just manage a store in the best region in the company. We have a very effective chain of command here in E. Texas.
Virtualball
Apr 19, 02:32 PM
It appears from the F700's standpoint though the natural progression became TouchWiz.
Wrong. Just because a company released one phone that has a similar look as the iPhone doesn't mean their current offerings are a progression of that phone. It's a true testament as to who browses this forum if you honestly think that. The F700 didn't run an advanced OS, so it probably ran Symbian or used BREW. That means all Samsung did was create a theme. How does a theme they made 3 years prior to the Galaxy S mean it's a progression on the coding and UI they built? It doesn't. Here's a list of every Samsung phone: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Samsung_mobile_phones Now, pick out one of those and say it inspired all of their new devices 3 years later.
The F700 was an iPhone clone with a keyboard. It's depressing that people are saying that the iPhone copied its own clone.
Wrong. Just because a company released one phone that has a similar look as the iPhone doesn't mean their current offerings are a progression of that phone. It's a true testament as to who browses this forum if you honestly think that. The F700 didn't run an advanced OS, so it probably ran Symbian or used BREW. That means all Samsung did was create a theme. How does a theme they made 3 years prior to the Galaxy S mean it's a progression on the coding and UI they built? It doesn't. Here's a list of every Samsung phone: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Samsung_mobile_phones Now, pick out one of those and say it inspired all of their new devices 3 years later.
The F700 was an iPhone clone with a keyboard. It's depressing that people are saying that the iPhone copied its own clone.
0815
Apr 25, 02:27 PM
Prove it.
Not guilty until proven guilty ... your turn to proof that they have the data. There is zero evidence for that, no matter how often you repeat the claim.
Not guilty until proven guilty ... your turn to proof that they have the data. There is zero evidence for that, no matter how often you repeat the claim.
Bill McEnaney
Mar 3, 10:05 AM
And I don't see the point in being sexually attracted to anyone of the opposite sex, but since society tells me it's "normal" I live with it nonetheless. It's all a matter of perception and experience. You have yours, I have mine and they're both normal to us.
Sure, different people have different experiences. That's partly why some people feel same-sex attractions and why others feel opposite-sex attractions. Macaroony doesn't see any point in opposite-sex attractions. I don't see any point in same-sex attractions. Here are two videos that explain what I believe about why some people feel same-sex attractions. I think the speaker works for NARTH.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rFAJXvxcGrk&feature=player_embedded
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UziWSdC8Zhw&feature=related
Pedophilia is immoral - no matter man or woman. Please do not put both homosexuality and pedophilia into the same boat. There are plenty of grown men who abuse underage girls, it's when they happen to be gay that elevates the problem and lazily ties it to homosexuality.
Just as no one chooses to feel same-sex attractions, no one chooses to be a pedophile. I know some pedophiles. But some pedophiles do choose to molest children. I don't want to conflate pedophilia and immoral actions that some pedophiles do because they're pedophiles.
Many people ignore the difference between homosexuality and homosexual acts. Many Christians insist that homosexuality is immoral. But homosexuality is a property, not an action. Nor is it a sin of omission. Homosexuality the property is morally indifferent. Homosexual acts are, I think, immoral. An action can be immoral, even if someone doesn't deserve any blame for doing it.
No, I shouldn't put homosexuality and pedophilia in the same boat. I mentioned the Catholic Church's homosexual-abuse because skunk seems to think my opinions about sexual morality are feelings, not beliefs that are either true or false. Even psychotherapists I've talked with have agreed that feelings are neither truths nor falsehoods. Feelings are neither of those, but there are truths about feelings and there are falsehoods about them. If I only feel that homosexual acts are immoral, should some government outlaw feeling that way?
The phrase "a fact" is ambiguous. It can mean "a truth." It can also mean "a set of actual set of circumstances." There are truths about feelings, and there are feelings about truths. But my feelings aren't truths. Even if moral relativism is true, there are still objective truths about whether some society or other considers some action morally acceptable. And some relativists still hold a self-inconsistent belief when they believe that since every belief is relative to some context or other, there's no such thing as absolute truth. In one sense of the phrase "absolute truth," a truth is absolute when it's true about every context. In that sense of the phrase "absolute truth," I imply a self-contradiction myself when I say that since every truth is relative to some context or other, I imply that it's an absolute truth that there's no absolute truth.
In another sense of the phrase "absolute truth," a truth is absolute when it's true whether anyone believes it or not. Even if I'm mistaken when I believe that homosexual sex is gravely immoral, it's still true that either they're moral or not moral.
Too often, people who feel same-sex attractions suffer needlessly partly because they, others, or both ignore important distinctions. Unfortunately, people often ignore them when their feelings determine too much of what those people believe.
Immoral behavior continues partly because of moral relativism. Instead of conforming our minds to reality, we try to conform reality to our minds. Moral relativists talk as though an action is moral if and only if someone believes that it's moral. Some moral relativists even insist that if you believe that homosexual acts are morally acceptable, and I believe they're immoral, then we're both right. A moral relativist might say the same about the morality or immorality of gay-bashing. But someone is right when he thinks that gay-bashing is morally right, should a court punish him for gay-bashing someone?
Sure, different people have different experiences. That's partly why some people feel same-sex attractions and why others feel opposite-sex attractions. Macaroony doesn't see any point in opposite-sex attractions. I don't see any point in same-sex attractions. Here are two videos that explain what I believe about why some people feel same-sex attractions. I think the speaker works for NARTH.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rFAJXvxcGrk&feature=player_embedded
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UziWSdC8Zhw&feature=related
Pedophilia is immoral - no matter man or woman. Please do not put both homosexuality and pedophilia into the same boat. There are plenty of grown men who abuse underage girls, it's when they happen to be gay that elevates the problem and lazily ties it to homosexuality.
Just as no one chooses to feel same-sex attractions, no one chooses to be a pedophile. I know some pedophiles. But some pedophiles do choose to molest children. I don't want to conflate pedophilia and immoral actions that some pedophiles do because they're pedophiles.
Many people ignore the difference between homosexuality and homosexual acts. Many Christians insist that homosexuality is immoral. But homosexuality is a property, not an action. Nor is it a sin of omission. Homosexuality the property is morally indifferent. Homosexual acts are, I think, immoral. An action can be immoral, even if someone doesn't deserve any blame for doing it.
No, I shouldn't put homosexuality and pedophilia in the same boat. I mentioned the Catholic Church's homosexual-abuse because skunk seems to think my opinions about sexual morality are feelings, not beliefs that are either true or false. Even psychotherapists I've talked with have agreed that feelings are neither truths nor falsehoods. Feelings are neither of those, but there are truths about feelings and there are falsehoods about them. If I only feel that homosexual acts are immoral, should some government outlaw feeling that way?
The phrase "a fact" is ambiguous. It can mean "a truth." It can also mean "a set of actual set of circumstances." There are truths about feelings, and there are feelings about truths. But my feelings aren't truths. Even if moral relativism is true, there are still objective truths about whether some society or other considers some action morally acceptable. And some relativists still hold a self-inconsistent belief when they believe that since every belief is relative to some context or other, there's no such thing as absolute truth. In one sense of the phrase "absolute truth," a truth is absolute when it's true about every context. In that sense of the phrase "absolute truth," I imply a self-contradiction myself when I say that since every truth is relative to some context or other, I imply that it's an absolute truth that there's no absolute truth.
In another sense of the phrase "absolute truth," a truth is absolute when it's true whether anyone believes it or not. Even if I'm mistaken when I believe that homosexual sex is gravely immoral, it's still true that either they're moral or not moral.
Too often, people who feel same-sex attractions suffer needlessly partly because they, others, or both ignore important distinctions. Unfortunately, people often ignore them when their feelings determine too much of what those people believe.
Immoral behavior continues partly because of moral relativism. Instead of conforming our minds to reality, we try to conform reality to our minds. Moral relativists talk as though an action is moral if and only if someone believes that it's moral. Some moral relativists even insist that if you believe that homosexual acts are morally acceptable, and I believe they're immoral, then we're both right. A moral relativist might say the same about the morality or immorality of gay-bashing. But someone is right when he thinks that gay-bashing is morally right, should a court punish him for gay-bashing someone?
No comments:
Post a Comment