Understanding through Discussion

Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 78 (8960 total)
143 online now:
jar, Minnemooseus (Adminnemooseus) (2 members, 141 visitors)
Newest Member: Mikee
Post Volume: Total: 869,834 Year: 1,582/23,288 Month: 1,582/1,851 Week: 222/484 Day: 40/105 Hour: 0/0

Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Author Topic:   Underlying Philosophy
Posts: 6856
From: Oklahoma
Joined: 09-28-2003
Member Rating: 6.0

Message 547 of 577 (571628)
08-01-2010 3:03 PM
Reply to: Message 546 by Modulous
08-01-2010 2:52 PM

Re: absolutism and objectivity
A statement that relies on several claims.

It also relies on the claim that this god's moral rules should be normative. That is, we should actually believe that these rules are moral and that we should actually desire them. That is what we usually mean by morality as opposed to doing something just because someone bigger than me tells me to do it.

But then, I find the meta-ethical question why should we feel these rules are right to be interesting as well.

To count as an atheist, one needn't claim to have proof that there are no gods. One only needs to believe that the evidence on the god question is in a similar state to the evidence on the werewolf question. -- John McCarthy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 546 by Modulous, posted 08-01-2010 2:52 PM Modulous has acknowledged this reply

Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:

Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2020