Talk:Argument from queerness

This is more a logical fallacy than an argument.
Any sui generis entity is of necessity "utterly different from anything else in the universe". Doubting something because it is sui generis is, itself, absurd, since everything in the universe can be divided into groups which are sui generis. The logical result of this argument from queerness is that everything is queer. That is a reductio ad absurdum. --70.131.60.45 (talk) 09:16, 5 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Mackie's argument is an inductive argument that suggests moral properties would have to be so unlike anything we have reason to believe exists in the universe that we should not believe in them. He is quite explicit about the fact that his position rests on metaphysical naturalism and believes that if God existed, this could change things.  If one wishes to bite the bullet and admit&mdash;as Korsgaard does&mdash;that moral properties would be queer in this way, I take it that Mackie would simply say, "fine, but so much the worse for your theory."  Postmodern Beatnik (talk) 03:17, 9 November 2008 (UTC)
 * You may disagree with the argument. That doesn't mean the argument is not notable.  Show some quality academic sourcing which says it's a reductio and put it in the article with that as citation. 142.157.61.6 (talk) 20:21, 11 April 2009 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 1 one external link on Argument from queerness. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110819224850/http://leeshepski.net/VanishingArg.php to http://leeshepski.net/VanishingArg.php

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 17:19, 17 October 2016 (UTC)