+0

To draw a sound judgment, one should distinguish between sentences and propositions, most especially if, oriented toward a meta-ethical question or more, such judgment are intended to be made as moral sentences are not propositions, that is, the quality of being true or false is irrelevant to such sentences being unable to be distinguished thereby. However able these sentences are to be subject of a consensus, they are not so on the basis of being true or wrong, but on the basis of its capacity of evoking an affect or more, without any of which even biases would be rendered impossible. This is why, given a convergent inclination toward a certain attitude on a moral question, two individuals can in such moral question come to an agreement.
+0
Hi,

To draw a sound judgment, one should distinguish between sentences and propositions, most especially if, oriented toward a meta-ethical question or more, such judgment are intended to be made as moral sentences are not propositions, that is, the quality of being true or false is irrelevant to such sentences being unable to be distinguished thereby. However able these sentences are to be subject of a consensus, they are not so on the basis of being true or wrong, but on the basis of its capacity of evoking an affect or more, without any of which even biases would be rendered impossible. This is why, given a convergent inclination toward a certain attitude on a moral question, two individuals can in such moral question come to an agreement.

To draw make a sound judgment, one should distinguish between sentences and propositions, most especially if, oriented toward a meta-ethical question or more, such judgments are intended to be made as moral sentences are and (?) not propositions, that is, if the quality of being true or false is irrelevant to such sentences being unable to be distinguished thereby (what does 'thereby' refer to?. However able these sentences are to be the subject of a consensus, they are not so on the basis of being true or wrong, but on the basis of its their capacity of evoking to evoke an affect or more, without any of which (what does 'which' refer to?) even biases would be rendered impossible. This is why, given a convergent inclination toward a certain attitude on a moral question, two individuals can in on such a moral question come to an agreement.

We usually use the pairs true/false, right/wrong, rather than true/wrong.

This writing is not easy to understand. One reason is that the topic is not simple. Another reason is that your sentences are long and complex. I've added queries in a few places where I lost track of the meaning. Is it possible to shorten your sentences?

Best wishes, Clive
+0
And try to write more simply! There are no prizes for the longest, most complex sentence. Contrary to what some may think, convoluted writing is not a hallmark of good writing.
Site Hint: Check out our list of pronunciation videos.
Comments  
To draw make a sound judgment, one should distinguish between sentences and propositions, most especially if, oriented toward a meta-ethical question or more, such judgments are intended to be made as moral sentences are and (?) not propositions, that is, if the quality of being true or false is irrelevant to such sentences being unable to be distinguished thereby (what does 'thereby' refer to?. However able these sentences are to be the subject of a consensus, they are not so on the basis of being true or wrong, but on the basis of its their capacity of evoking to evoke an affect or more, without any of which (what does 'which' refer to?) even biases would be rendered impossible. This is why, given a convergent inclination toward a certain attitude on a moral question, two individuals can in on such a moral question come to an agreement.

thereby = "by the quality"
which = "affect"

thank you for your help. i will try to improve my writing.
Students: Are you brave enough to let our tutors analyse your pronunciation?
Hi,
Revise it and post it again, if you wish.

Clive
 BarbaraPA's reply was promoted to an answer.