Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 53 (9179 total)
6 online now:
Newest Member: Jorge Parker
Upcoming Birthdays: Theodoric
Post Volume: Total: 918,113 Year: 5,370/9,624 Month: 395/323 Week: 35/204 Day: 11/24 Hour: 1/4


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Atheism Cannot Rationally Explain Morals.
Porosity
Member (Idle past 2203 days)
Posts: 158
From: MT, USA
Joined: 06-15-2013


Message 46 of 1006 (798570)
02-03-2017 2:06 PM
Reply to: Message 44 by Dawn Bertot
02-03-2017 1:06 PM


Re: Religion Cannot Rationally Explain Morals
Right that's my point you change the word moral and it's meaning to suit your purposes
HENCE NO ACTUAL MORALITY
No.. this is what you're doing.
You have no moral compass of your own, instead you have morality dictated to you by an immoral book of fables.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 44 by Dawn Bertot, posted 02-03-2017 1:06 PM Dawn Bertot has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 66 by Dawn Bertot, posted 02-04-2017 12:46 AM Porosity has not replied

  
Modulous
Member (Idle past 93 days)
Posts: 7801
From: Manchester, UK
Joined: 05-01-2005


(1)
Message 47 of 1006 (798571)
02-03-2017 2:08 PM
Reply to: Message 14 by Dawn Bertot
02-02-2017 9:57 PM


Why can morals not derive from an instinctual basis?
Instinct by its very nature can take no thought
But it can form the basis of thought. There is a instinct to eat, that can make us form thoughts about food. An instinct to reproduce that make us think about attractive people and how to attract them.
A moral is a thought concept or reasoned idea the likes of which, no more information can be added to it to make it more correct or less correct. This would be called infinite wisdom.
I don't see any reason to accept this definition. It would primarily imply, given nobody has infinite wisdom, that nobody has morals or ethics making the entire discussion moot.
Then I was correct, as an Atheist you have no rational moral in reality
My definitions are about reality. Infinite wisdom and perfect thoughts are not demonstrated to be in reality. It is reality that some people think that eating meat is immoral, for instance. Some people disagree entirely, or disagree on when it is immoral to eat meat and what meats it is immoral to eat. That's reality. Those are actual moral positions that exist in reality.
I too have rational morals in reality. I don't believe morals exist independently of the people that hold them, other than in some communal sense of the collective wisdom of humanity or some community within that.
I can rationally explain morals, but you have failed to prove that there is a reasonable case that proves this is impossible. Your argument relies on definitions of morality and ethics that are peculiar to you.
If you wanted to say 'It is impossible for atheists to believe a god is the originator of morality' it would have been tautologically true, but you didn't say this. If this is what you meant, you haven't really said anything interesting at all.
Perhaps you should try again.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 14 by Dawn Bertot, posted 02-02-2017 9:57 PM Dawn Bertot has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 63 by Dawn Bertot, posted 02-04-2017 12:31 AM Modulous has replied

  
Modulous
Member (Idle past 93 days)
Posts: 7801
From: Manchester, UK
Joined: 05-01-2005


(1)
Message 48 of 1006 (798572)
02-03-2017 2:12 PM
Reply to: Message 19 by Dawn Bertot
02-02-2017 10:32 PM


Given that all thing in nature are equal as far as life is concerned. That is, all life is sacred and deserves to thrive and survive, just like you.
Would it be murder to put several chickens to death for your consumption.
Yes.
Can people religious or not be the source for an absolute moral.
Yes.
IOWs, if it's OK to eat another living thing and it's not murder, why could people not kill and eat other people on a regular basis and it not be murder
They could.
For a moral to be real and rational from a Naturalistic standpoint, it has to be consistent in its tenets for all life, because all life is equal, true
False.
Are you saying you are superior to other creatures, the way God would be superior to you?
Not superior. Different.
Morals are nothing more than changing ideas between humans and animals and nature. Nothing is truly right , wrong, good bad or otherwise.
Objectively right, wrong, good, bad or otherwise - then yes that's a reasonable short summary.
. We are simply amazed that a group of people that reduces morality to the most subjective nonsense, have the audacity to attack a God infinite in wisdom, of his actions.
If I come across such a creature, I won't attack it's actions. But how would I know if I had?
It's now the time to demonstrate that any action by an infinite God would be as meaningless, FROM YOUR STANDPOINT ,as any action of yours.
No need, I'm already persuaded.
How would you justify condemning any action of God, if you can find no evil or Good in your own actions.
I can find evil and good in my own actions. But I am a subjective entity, so my finding of these things is necessarily subjective.
If you don't believe this, provide me with an example of human conduct that would be truly evil.
Killing another human being without justification.
If slavery is wrong then why is a zoo not slavery.
Slavery is the ownership of humans usually to force them into some kind of service.
A zoo is, at its best, a place of conservation and study that funds itself through selling tickets to the public.
Since they are different, they are not the same. Since they are not the same a zoo is not slavery.
Right that's my point you change the word moral and it's meaning to suit your purposes
HENCE NO ACTUAL MORALITY
Unless, of course, actual morality is a changeable concept that suits the purposes of an intelligent and social species.
Edited by Modulous, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 19 by Dawn Bertot, posted 02-02-2017 10:32 PM Dawn Bertot has not replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1553 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 49 of 1006 (798573)
02-03-2017 2:22 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by Dawn Bertot
02-02-2017 3:56 PM


Has anybody mentioned the well known very vociferous atheist from some years ago, I can't think of his name, who became a theist (not a Christian) because he realized evolution could not account for morality and human consciousness. It's really indisputable but evolutionists have to maintain their theory, and it's not hard because there's no way to prove any of it. All they have to do is invent a vaguely plausible pathway through the species and voila! Imagination becomes fact, which is THE actual method of evolution. Word magic
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by Dawn Bertot, posted 02-02-2017 3:56 PM Dawn Bertot has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 51 by RAZD, posted 02-03-2017 2:25 PM Faith has replied
 Message 53 by Theodoric, posted 02-03-2017 2:39 PM Faith has not replied
 Message 58 by Dr Adequate, posted 02-03-2017 3:57 PM Faith has not replied
 Message 60 by JonF, posted 02-03-2017 5:07 PM Faith has not replied

  
RAZD
Member (Idle past 1514 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


(1)
Message 50 of 1006 (798574)
02-03-2017 2:23 PM
Reply to: Message 43 by Dawn Bertot
02-03-2017 1:00 PM


Re: enlightened self-interest
... I have waited to this point to interject God's actions in this or that context or what he does or not does as evil, because I wanted it firmly established by at least a few here what your actual position consists of.
Do you think that would have changed anyone's reply? That we don't already suspect your position from past dialogues? Fascinating.
Fortunately, our position has nothing to do with religious belief, at least fundamentally. ...
Which is basically what I said at the end.
It should be Clear to even the simplest of readers that your position is as subjective as any position could possibly be. ...
Except that they are not random, but embedded within the culture\social group, which gives them consistency across beliefs. People interact within the culture\social group and not randomly.
... Morals are nothing more than changing ideas between humans and animals and nature. Nothing is truly right , wrong, good bad or otherwise. What may or may not serve the good of the species. Etc, etc, etc.
A simple reading of your and Venesy's post demonstrate this point.
Possibly because that is what the evidence shows. Take an example from the Bible - adulterers are supposed to be stoned to death, but this no longer occurs in at least 99% of Christian sects -- they have evolved to a more accepting morality, perhaps because laws about adultery can be used instead, resulting in lesser punishments than death.
We don't attack the Atheists concept of morals because we have nothing better to do. We are simply amazed that a group of people that reduces morality to the most subjective nonsense, have the audacity to attack a God infinite in wisdom, of his actions. These same SFH can't even be consistent in reason and application of thier ALLEDGED morals
You seem to think that because morality is subjective that it would be wildly inconsistent, when it is based on the society mores instead of the individual's beliefs.
This is rather obvious when we review crimes against others, as we find the same basic proportions of atheist and various theist people as in the general population. That would argue for a rather consistent moral code across society.
It's now the time to demonstrate that any action by an infinite God would be as meaningless, FROM YOUR STANDPOINT ,as any action of yours. ...
Show me an example of this infinite God action and we can discuss the ramifications.
... Or that the same group ofpeople, involve themselves in the same autrocites, with lesser or thierarchy own species.
Please reword in english.
How would you justify condemning any action of God, if you can find no evil or Good in your own actions.
Or, instead, if I cannot find "any action of God" (other than the creation of the universe ) how can I condemn it (and who says creation of the universe would be condemned)?
If you don't believe this, provide me with an example of human conduct that would be truly evil. ...
Treating other humans as lesser beings.
... But remember, let's not just talk about the human species. That kind of logic doesn't work
Again, rewrite this in english please.
If slavery is wrong then why is a zoo not slavery. From the SFH position, Morals are nothing more than to justify your actions
Well I do believe that zoos are wrong. Animals so contained are sad shadows of their wild counterparts. But we also have the mass incarceration of Blacks, Latinos and other non-whites, that are the new slave labor. And we have a biased judicial system that puts non-proportional numbers of Blacks, Latinos and other non-whites into those jails and deprive them of their citizenship rights. Do you think that is moral? Is the death penalty moral?
Enjoy

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAmerican☆Zen☯Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.


Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 43 by Dawn Bertot, posted 02-03-2017 1:00 PM Dawn Bertot has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 64 by Dawn Bertot, posted 02-04-2017 12:37 AM RAZD has replied

  
RAZD
Member (Idle past 1514 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


(2)
Message 51 of 1006 (798575)
02-03-2017 2:25 PM
Reply to: Message 49 by Faith
02-03-2017 2:22 PM


Has anybody mentioned the well known very vociferous atheist from some years ago, I can't think of his name, who became a theist ...
Or ALL the people that became atheists because they found fundamentalism was a lie.
Enjoy

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAmerican☆Zen☯Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.


Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 49 by Faith, posted 02-03-2017 2:22 PM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 52 by Faith, posted 02-03-2017 2:39 PM RAZD has replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1553 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 52 of 1006 (798577)
02-03-2017 2:39 PM
Reply to: Message 51 by RAZD
02-03-2017 2:25 PM


Has anybody mentioned the well known very vociferous atheist from some years ago, I can't think of his name, who became a theist ...
Or ALL the people that became atheists because they found fundamentalism was a lie.
That's apples and oranges, RAZD. The decision of the atheist who became a theist had to be based on some pretty complicated analysis of possibilities in the natural world, not like determining that a theological statement is true or false.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 51 by RAZD, posted 02-03-2017 2:25 PM RAZD has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 54 by Theodoric, posted 02-03-2017 2:44 PM Faith has not replied
 Message 55 by PaulK, posted 02-03-2017 3:00 PM Faith has not replied
 Message 56 by NoNukes, posted 02-03-2017 3:45 PM Faith has not replied
 Message 61 by RAZD, posted 02-03-2017 5:43 PM Faith has not replied

  
Theodoric
Member
Posts: 9342
From: Northwest, WI, USA
Joined: 08-15-2005
Member Rating: 2.7


(1)
Message 53 of 1006 (798578)
02-03-2017 2:39 PM
Reply to: Message 49 by Faith
02-03-2017 2:22 PM


Why should anyone give a rat's ass about what one guy thought, said or did on his death bed? Your little anecdote has nothing to do with morality or this thread.

Facts don't lie or have an agenda. Facts are just facts
"God did it" is not an argument. It is an excuse for intellectual laziness.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 49 by Faith, posted 02-03-2017 2:22 PM Faith has not replied

  
Theodoric
Member
Posts: 9342
From: Northwest, WI, USA
Joined: 08-15-2005
Member Rating: 2.7


(1)
Message 54 of 1006 (798580)
02-03-2017 2:44 PM
Reply to: Message 52 by Faith
02-03-2017 2:39 PM


Or it could have been manipulation by other people or a bad burrito.
What does it say of your religion if it is really complicated to accept, but super easy to reject.

Facts don't lie or have an agenda. Facts are just facts
"God did it" is not an argument. It is an excuse for intellectual laziness.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 52 by Faith, posted 02-03-2017 2:39 PM Faith has not replied

  
PaulK
Member
Posts: 17849
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 3.7


(1)
Message 55 of 1006 (798581)
02-03-2017 3:00 PM
Reply to: Message 52 by Faith
02-03-2017 2:39 PM


quote:
The decision of the atheist who became a theist had to be based on some pretty complicated analysis of possibilities in the natural world, not like determining that a theological statement is true or false.
That is obviously false. In fact it was obviously based on personal incredulity without a strong understanding of the issues - since nobody actually has a strong understanding of the issues and what evidence we do have suggests a contrary view.
In reality we do not understand consciousness or how it is generated. But we do know that it is strongly tied to,the physical brain and that more complex animals do show some signs of consciousness.
Likewise more complex social animals - especially chimpanzees - show signs of having a morality of sorts - which could obviously have the same basis as our morality. In addition a sort of morality is a beneficial trait for social animals with a degree of consciousness so it should be favoured by natural selection in such species. And of course there has been a great deal of work in this area. To,the extent that evolution should be expected to account for morality - obviously we would not expect it to explain the whole structure - it does quite well.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 52 by Faith, posted 02-03-2017 2:39 PM Faith has not replied

  
NoNukes
Inactive Member


(1)
Message 56 of 1006 (798588)
02-03-2017 3:45 PM
Reply to: Message 52 by Faith
02-03-2017 2:39 PM


That's apples and oranges, RAZD. The decision of the atheist who became a theist had to be based on some pretty complicated analysis of possibilities in the natural world
Why is that true? Do you some idea that atheists are inherently rational? Few Christians, and none that I have met, or have observed, have come to their beliefs through rationalizing about the universe.
In this case, you have someone who claims that a conclusion about the origins of morality was the basis of his conversion. But who can know just how rational and objective his realization is? In fact, his argument is ridiculous, because there are other sources of human behavior other than biological evolution. Morality, of one sort or another, is an inevitable outcome of humans trying to get along as a society. And because of the way we've evolved, living in a society is a requirement for being human. If you view your current morality, whatever its source, to be the highest level possible, I submit that other cultures likely believed similarly despite their flaws.
Do apes and lions have a moral code. I'd suggest that they do although their codes would be foreign to us and not desirable.
Edited by NoNukes, : Add some argument to flesh out comments.

Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846)
History will have to record that the greatest tragedy of this period of social transition was not the strident clamor of the bad people, but the appalling silence of the good people. Martin Luther King
I never considered a difference of opinion in politics, in religion, in philosophy, as cause for withdrawing from a friend. Thomas Jefferson
Seems to me if its clear that certain things that require ancient dates couldn't possibly be true, we are on our way to throwing out all those ancient dates on the basis of the actual evidence. -- Faith
Some of us are worried about just how much damage he will do in his last couple of weeks as president, to make it easier for the NY Times and Washington post to try to destroy Trump's presidency. -- marc9000

This message is a reply to:
 Message 52 by Faith, posted 02-03-2017 2:39 PM Faith has not replied

  
NoNukes
Inactive Member


(2)
Message 57 of 1006 (798589)
02-03-2017 3:51 PM
Reply to: Message 41 by Dawn Bertot
02-03-2017 12:51 PM


If he believes that incarceratiing an animal in a cage for experimentation, observation, as in a zoo, is not slavery, then he'll have to show me why I could not do the same thing to a group of humans.
This fairly amusing. What does the Bible tell us about slavery?

Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846)
History will have to record that the greatest tragedy of this period of social transition was not the strident clamor of the bad people, but the appalling silence of the good people. Martin Luther King
I never considered a difference of opinion in politics, in religion, in philosophy, as cause for withdrawing from a friend. Thomas Jefferson
Seems to me if its clear that certain things that require ancient dates couldn't possibly be true, we are on our way to throwing out all those ancient dates on the basis of the actual evidence. -- Faith
Some of us are worried about just how much damage he will do in his last couple of weeks as president, to make it easier for the NY Times and Washington post to try to destroy Trump's presidency. -- marc9000

This message is a reply to:
 Message 41 by Dawn Bertot, posted 02-03-2017 12:51 PM Dawn Bertot has not replied

  
Dr Adequate
Member (Idle past 393 days)
Posts: 16113
Joined: 07-20-2006


Message 58 of 1006 (798591)
02-03-2017 3:57 PM
Reply to: Message 49 by Faith
02-03-2017 2:22 PM


Has anybody mentioned the well known very vociferous atheist from some years ago, I can't think of his name, who became a theist (not a Christian) because he realized evolution could not account for morality and human consciousness. It's really indisputable ...
If it was really indisputable, wouldn't there be a good argument for it somewhere?
The decision of the atheist who became a theist had to be based on some pretty complicated analysis of possibilities in the natural world ...
Or on crass stupidity. That would be consistent with the complete, utter, glaring absence of a "complicated analysis of possibilities in the natural world" proving that "evolution could not account for morality and human consciousness". Whereas stupidity is abundant and easy to find, especially in creationist apologetics.
Edited by Dr Adequate, : No reason given.
Edited by Dr Adequate, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 49 by Faith, posted 02-03-2017 2:22 PM Faith has not replied

  
frako
Member (Idle past 414 days)
Posts: 2932
From: slovenija
Joined: 09-04-2010


Message 59 of 1006 (798592)
02-03-2017 4:02 PM
Reply to: Message 15 by Dawn Bertot
02-02-2017 10:04 PM


If this is the case as you state can I ask you a question
I noticed in this MONKEY video, they are in cages. Did they do something wrong? Did they commit a crime to be incarcerated, probably against thier will?
Really well monkeys are not part of our community as fellow humans are, i have no problem with experiments on animals as long as they are not unnecessarily inhumane. Fact is the only way we can learn is to experiment if a few monkeys haveto suffer a bit to save potentionaly an endless ammount of human lives down the line tough luck.
Your moral has to be consistent across all species, not just humans.
So your saying only the Pranist's have it right. The guys in india that walk around naked with a peacock feather that they use to sweep the floor so they dont accedentaly step on any bugs.
If you think your biblical god's morality sprads accross all species alike you must have not read the bible.
Why would morality haveto be consistant across all species?

Christianity, One woman's lie about an affair that got seriously out of hand
What are the Christians gonna do to me ..... Forgive me, good luck with that.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 15 by Dawn Bertot, posted 02-02-2017 10:04 PM Dawn Bertot has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 62 by Dawn Bertot, posted 02-04-2017 12:29 AM frako has not replied

  
JonF
Member (Idle past 277 days)
Posts: 6174
Joined: 06-23-2003


(2)
Message 60 of 1006 (798599)
02-03-2017 5:07 PM
Reply to: Message 49 by Faith
02-03-2017 2:22 PM


Antony Flew. There's a pretty even-handed article about him, by someone who knew him personally and with lots of Flew quotes, at Antony Flew Considers God...Sort Of » Internet Infidels.
TL;DR: he became unsure of his atheism but never affirmed the existence of any God(s), and his reasons for being unsure had nothing to do with morality.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 49 by Faith, posted 02-03-2017 2:22 PM Faith 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