Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
2 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,817 Year: 3,074/9,624 Month: 919/1,588 Week: 102/223 Day: 0/13 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Atheism Cannot Rationally Explain Morals.
Taq
Member
Posts: 9973
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 5.7


(2)
Message 763 of 1006 (806565)
04-26-2017 11:02 AM
Reply to: Message 750 by Dredge
04-26-2017 12:29 AM


Re: You really need to drop that straw man by now
Dredge writes:
We share 60% of our DNA with bananas and even more with fruit flys - this helps to understand why humans and chimps are so different despite them sharing 98.8% of their each other's DNA.
I have yet to see a reference comparing the whole banana genome to the human genome, so that number seems to be pulled out of thin air.
I still don't understand how you take a percentage and determine how physically similar or dissimilar two species should be. Perhaps you could enlighten us?
And it means humans and chimps may not be anywhere nearly as closely related to each other as the 98.8% figure suggests - and evolutionists would have us believe.
Why? Chimps share more DNA with humans than the do with other apes. There are more differences between the chimp and gorilla genome than there is between the chimp and human genome. Chimps are more closely related to humans than they are to other apes.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 750 by Dredge, posted 04-26-2017 12:29 AM Dredge has not replied

  
Taq
Member
Posts: 9973
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 5.7


(2)
Message 781 of 1006 (806692)
04-27-2017 10:34 AM
Reply to: Message 769 by Davidjay
04-26-2017 9:57 PM


Re: Evolutionists can not explain morals
Davidjay writes:
Evolutionists can not explain altruistic behaviour,
If altruistic behavior spreads the genes you are carrying, then it will be selected for. This is what altruistic behavior does. A good example are bee colonies. While the workers are sterile, their genes are still found in the queen, and the queen spreads the genes found in the worker bees due to their altruistic behavior.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 769 by Davidjay, posted 04-26-2017 9:57 PM Davidjay has not replied

  
Taq
Member
Posts: 9973
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 5.7


(2)
Message 788 of 1006 (806764)
04-27-2017 3:09 PM
Reply to: Message 786 by Coyote
04-27-2017 12:24 PM


Re: Evolutionists can not explain morals
Coyote writes:
And this is where grandparents and elders--past the reproduction age--can benefit their groups. Grandparents care for the young while parents are out hunting and gathering, and are often the most skilled at making baskets, stone tools, and a lot of other needed items. Elders carry and pass on the knowledge of the group.
It is also worth mentioning that in human hunter/gatherer groups there is a good chance that the young are carrying the genes found in the elders, either through direct ancestry or through very close relatives. Even in cases of intraspecific competition there is still selection for altruistic behavior since the human groups who work well together within the group can outcompete lone humans or human groups that don't cooperate well together.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 786 by Coyote, posted 04-27-2017 12:24 PM Coyote has seen this message but not replied

  
Taq
Member
Posts: 9973
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 5.7


(1)
Message 794 of 1006 (806875)
04-28-2017 4:04 PM
Reply to: Message 793 by Faith
04-28-2017 3:36 PM


Re: Evolutionists can not explain morals
Faith writes:
Not to mention all the commands about self-denial, dying to self, loving your enemies, doing good to those who persecute you, doing the extra mile, making yourself a living sacrifice, loving your neighbor as yourself and so on
"And Samuel said to Saul, The Lord sent me to anoint you king over his people Israel; now therefore listen to the words of the Lord. Thus says the Lord of hosts, ‘I have noted what Amalek did to Israel in opposing them on the way when they came up out of Egypt. Now go and strike Amalek and devote to destruction all that they have. Do not spare them, but kill both man and woman, child and infant, ox and sheep, camel and donkey.’ (1 Sam 15:1‑3)
God ordained genocide. Nuff said.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 793 by Faith, posted 04-28-2017 3:36 PM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 796 by Faith, posted 04-28-2017 9:30 PM Taq has replied
 Message 830 by Dredge, posted 05-01-2017 1:17 AM Taq has not replied

  
Taq
Member
Posts: 9973
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 5.7


(1)
Message 843 of 1006 (807215)
05-01-2017 12:19 PM
Reply to: Message 796 by Faith
04-28-2017 9:30 PM


Re: Evolutionists can not explain morals
Faith writes:
No, God ordained punishment for the guilty.
God ordained the killing of babies simply because of who their parents were. That is immoral.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 796 by Faith, posted 04-28-2017 9:30 PM Faith has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 874 by Dredge, posted 05-03-2017 2:23 AM Taq has not replied

  
Taq
Member
Posts: 9973
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 5.7


(1)
Message 844 of 1006 (807216)
05-01-2017 12:23 PM
Reply to: Message 809 by Dredge
04-30-2017 12:43 AM


Dredge writes:
Humans can and do form their own codes of morality, but it could be anything.
Humans can also write any story about any deity they want, and it could be anything. Your argument
If a human believes that he is created by God, then it makes sense to conclude that the God who made everything and knows everything, will also know what is morally right and wrong, It also makes sense that this God will let humans know what is right and wrong.
Humans can also believe in any deity they want, believe in anything they want about that deity, and claim that their deity commands anything they want. Your claims about religion suffer the same problems you are claiming exists with morality based on human reason and logic.
However, religion has the added problem of being dogmatic and unquestioned. In the words of Steven Weinberg, with or without religion there will be good and bad people, but to get good people to do bad, that takes religion. When someone really believes a deity has commanded them to kill the infidels they will kill infidels in contradiction to their own sense of morality. That's why religious based moralities are so dangerous.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 809 by Dredge, posted 04-30-2017 12:43 AM Dredge has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 862 by Dredge, posted 05-03-2017 12:52 AM Taq has replied

  
Taq
Member
Posts: 9973
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 5.7


Message 845 of 1006 (807217)
05-01-2017 12:25 PM
Reply to: Message 821 by Davidjay
04-30-2017 9:44 AM


Re: Atheists/Evolutionists can not explain morality
Davidjay writes:
Atheism is a brother of evolution, they BOTH deny a Creator.
Why single out evolution? Gravity says that God doesn't push the planets around the Sun. Germ theory says that microorganisms cause infection, not God. You seem to be against science, not just evolution.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 821 by Davidjay, posted 04-30-2017 9:44 AM Davidjay has not replied

  
Taq
Member
Posts: 9973
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 5.7


(1)
Message 846 of 1006 (807218)
05-01-2017 12:27 PM
Reply to: Message 835 by Dredge
05-01-2017 4:19 AM


Re: Let's start over.
Dredge writes:
I don't have an issue with that. If you find meaning and happiness in life, good luck to you. If I were an atheist, I would consider life meaningless, morality meaningless and beliefs meaningless and actions meaningless and emotions meaningless.
I guess some people are just empty shells incapable of individual thought.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 835 by Dredge, posted 05-01-2017 4:19 AM Dredge has not replied

  
Taq
Member
Posts: 9973
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 5.7


(2)
Message 858 of 1006 (807335)
05-02-2017 11:05 AM
Reply to: Message 851 by Dredge
05-02-2017 2:32 AM


Re: Evolutionists can not explain morals
Dredge writes:
Yes. I accept all my God's judgements as righteous and just. He doesn't do evil.
This is the scary result of someone ignoring their own sense of morality in favor of blind obedience to a man made religion.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 851 by Dredge, posted 05-02-2017 2:32 AM Dredge has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 860 by jar, posted 05-02-2017 9:00 PM Taq has not replied
 Message 887 by Dredge, posted 05-04-2017 3:36 AM Taq has not replied

  
Taq
Member
Posts: 9973
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 5.7


(3)
Message 961 of 1006 (808145)
05-08-2017 2:47 PM
Reply to: Message 862 by Dredge
05-03-2017 12:52 AM


Dredge writes:
Sounds a bit tendentious to me. In the 20th century, non-religious morality proved much more dangerous and deadly than all the religion in history - just ask the six millions Jews that Hilter murdered,
""Hence today I believe that I am acting in accordance with the will of the Almighty Creator: by defending myself against the Jew, I am fighting for the work of the Lord."--Adolf Hitler, "Mein Kampf"
Want to try that one again?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 862 by Dredge, posted 05-03-2017 12:52 AM Dredge has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 971 by Dredge, posted 05-10-2017 3:48 AM Taq has replied

  
Taq
Member
Posts: 9973
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 5.7


(2)
Message 962 of 1006 (808147)
05-08-2017 2:59 PM
Reply to: Message 861 by Dredge
05-03-2017 12:29 AM


Re: Evolutionists can not explain morals
Dredge writes:
What you need to do is stop arguing emotionally, and start arguing philosophically. I know all about how to argue philosophically coz when I was ten I watched a program on TV about Socrates.
Then you should read up on Euthyphro's Dilemma that was discussed by Socrates. He asked whether something was pious because the gods commanded it, or if the gods commanded it because it was pious.
Euthyphro: Summary | SparkNotes
The problem with "it is moral because God says so" is that it is entirely arbitrary, especially when you consider what other gods find moral which can be contradictory to what other gods find moral. What you are calling for is obedience to the commands of a deity as written by men. That isn't morality.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 861 by Dredge, posted 05-03-2017 12:29 AM Dredge has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 989 by Dredge, posted 05-12-2017 4:50 AM Taq has replied

  
Taq
Member
Posts: 9973
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 5.7


(1)
Message 967 of 1006 (808250)
05-09-2017 11:57 AM
Reply to: Message 964 by Dredge
05-09-2017 3:38 AM


Re: Quibbles the quibbler
Dredge writes:
Then there's ISIS, who thinking slaughtering infidels offers a direct benefit to society.
ISIS believes they are following the commands of God, which by your book makes their actions moral.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 964 by Dredge, posted 05-09-2017 3:38 AM Dredge has not replied

  
Taq
Member
Posts: 9973
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 5.7


Message 982 of 1006 (808347)
05-10-2017 10:48 AM
Reply to: Message 971 by Dredge
05-10-2017 3:48 AM


So which religion did Hitler follow?
Christianity, obviously.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 971 by Dredge, posted 05-10-2017 3:48 AM Dredge has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 985 by Dredge, posted 05-11-2017 2:49 AM Taq has not replied

  
Taq
Member
Posts: 9973
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 5.7


(1)
Message 983 of 1006 (808349)
05-10-2017 10:53 AM
Reply to: Message 974 by Dredge
05-10-2017 4:52 AM


Re: Creationist summary? vs rationalist summary
Dredge writes:
Do human beings need to survive, individually or collectively?
They don't need to do anything. You are looking at this from the wrong direction.
The process of evolution looks at one thing, the survival of genes. Genes that promote altruism can cause those genes to survive at a higher rate. For example, groups of humans that work together in an altruistic manner can have more offspring than a lone human. They pass on their genes at a higher rate. This means that those genes come to dominate the human population.
You need to have a better understanding between cause and effect.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 974 by Dredge, posted 05-10-2017 4:52 AM Dredge has not replied

  
Taq
Member
Posts: 9973
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 5.7


Message 996 of 1006 (808722)
05-12-2017 11:10 AM
Reply to: Message 989 by Dredge
05-12-2017 4:50 AM


Re: Evolutionists can not explain morals
As I pointed out in an earlier post, if no Gods or gods exist, some of the morality invented by religions is as valid as any non-religious morality, because it is still the morality of human beings.
Why? Why can't one human based morality be superior to another?
To illustrate this point, if there were no religions, a great many people would still consider homosexuality to be immoral; likewise, many people would still consider abortion immoral.
And? For quite a while now there has been a humanistic argument for homosexuals having equal rights. In fact, philosophers have been basing human rights on humanistic and areligious arguments for quite a while now.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 989 by Dredge, posted 05-12-2017 4:50 AM Dredge has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024