Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
5 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:   Morality without god
ringo
Member (Idle past 412 days)
Posts: 20940
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005


Message 229 of 1221 (681086)
11-22-2012 12:35 PM
Reply to: Message 226 by Phat
11-22-2012 12:29 AM


Re: But the Bible says God doesn't have absolute knowledge.
Phat writes:
How could the creator of all seen and unseen need a dope slap from a human?
Why do teachers ask questions? To get the students to think of the answers themselves, maybe?
If "God" is being portrayed as a dope that needs a slap, people should question the portrayal, maybe?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 226 by Phat, posted 11-22-2012 12:29 AM Phat has not replied

  
ringo
Member (Idle past 412 days)
Posts: 20940
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005


(1)
Message 637 of 1221 (687607)
01-14-2013 11:51 AM
Reply to: Message 618 by Dogmafood
01-11-2013 12:02 PM


Re: Absolute Moral Standard
Dogmafood writes:
The formula is simple. It is the quantification of harm that is difficult and complex.
You remind me of Jethro on the Beverly Hillbillies who invented an anti-smog device for cars. The device was simple, he explained, but the filter filled up the back of truck.
Interstellar travel is simple. Only the vehicle is difficult and complex.
Hypothetical morality is simple. Only real morality is difficult and complex.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 618 by Dogmafood, posted 01-11-2013 12:02 PM Dogmafood has not replied

  
ringo
Member (Idle past 412 days)
Posts: 20940
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005


Message 653 of 1221 (687988)
01-18-2013 11:41 AM
Reply to: Message 646 by Straggler
01-16-2013 3:39 PM


Re: Objective / Subjective
Straggler writes:
Can you really tell me when I am experiencing pain and when I am not?
You can be objectively observed to be experiencing pain when you are subjectively not experiencing pain.
That's the trouble with worshiping Holy Objectivity: sometimes objective observations are wrong.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 646 by Straggler, posted 01-16-2013 3:39 PM Straggler has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 658 by Straggler, posted 01-18-2013 1:27 PM ringo has replied

  
ringo
Member (Idle past 412 days)
Posts: 20940
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005


Message 669 of 1221 (688133)
01-19-2013 12:02 PM
Reply to: Message 658 by Straggler
01-18-2013 1:27 PM


Re: Objective / Subjective
Straggler writes:
ringo writes:
You can be objectively observed to be experiencing pain when you are subjectively not experiencing pain.
No. I can be objectively observed to act in a way that implies I am experiencing pain.
It's the same thing. We can only observe what you seem to be feeling, not what you "are" feeling.
Straggler writes:
Furthermore you could objectively observe the physical mechanism that leads to the sensation of pain.
We could hypothetically observe the signals in your brain that "should" produce a feeling of pain but we can't directly observe the feelings themselves.
Straggler writes:
However whether or not I am actually experiencing the sensation of pain is purely subjective.
Yes, by definition.
Straggler writes:
How can you possibly tell me what I feel?
I can only tell other people how you seem to feel. That's the basis of objectivity.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 658 by Straggler, posted 01-18-2013 1:27 PM Straggler has not replied

  
ringo
Member (Idle past 412 days)
Posts: 20940
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005


Message 690 of 1221 (689293)
01-29-2013 12:13 PM
Reply to: Message 689 by Dogmafood
01-29-2013 8:24 AM


Re: Purpose of Morality
Dogmafood writes:
Imagine that we were trying to program a robot to behave morally in any society.
You'd have the same problem in robot society as we have in human society: the conflict between the good of the individual and the good of the group.
Some societies would want to destroy the robot because it threatened their jobs, etc. The robot would want to avoid that.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 689 by Dogmafood, posted 01-29-2013 8:24 AM Dogmafood has not replied

  
ringo
Member (Idle past 412 days)
Posts: 20940
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005


(2)
Message 817 of 1221 (693853)
03-20-2013 12:09 PM
Reply to: Message 811 by Faith
03-20-2013 4:26 AM


Faith writes:
______ has convinced me that all His judgments are righteous whether I am able to see how or not.
Tyrants have always done that - and their minions have always used it as an excuse for "just following orders".
Lack of personal conscience is the ultimate example of having no morality at all.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 811 by Faith, posted 03-20-2013 4:26 AM Faith has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 818 by kofh2u, posted 03-20-2013 12:17 PM ringo has replied

  
ringo
Member (Idle past 412 days)
Posts: 20940
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005


(4)
Message 819 of 1221 (693862)
03-20-2013 12:50 PM
Reply to: Message 818 by kofh2u
03-20-2013 12:17 PM


Re: ...foolish people ignore tyrants as if they don't exist...
kofh2u writes:
You must be under the liberal illusion that you can avoid reality....
I am of the opinion - illusion or not - that we can and ought to try to change the bad parts of reality. If reality included a tyrannical god then the moral thing to do would be to challenge his tyrany, not kowtow to it.
Morality requires trying to do what's right, whether it's possible or not.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 818 by kofh2u, posted 03-20-2013 12:17 PM kofh2u has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 849 by kofh2u, posted 03-20-2013 7:12 PM ringo has replied

  
ringo
Member (Idle past 412 days)
Posts: 20940
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005


(1)
Message 912 of 1221 (694017)
03-21-2013 12:00 PM
Reply to: Message 849 by kofh2u
03-20-2013 7:12 PM


Re: ...foolish people ignore tyrants as if they don't exist...
kofh2u writes:
The grace of this God is that "he" is rationally understandable.
Then why do believers have such bizarre irrational "explanations" for his supposed commandments? Like justifying slavery. ("Slavery was fun in the Bible. It was like a ride at Disneyland. There were long lineups to get in.")
The problem with having an external source for morality is that you don't have an internal understanding. The source of the message is irrelevant (i.e. "God' is irrelevant). You have to understand the message. It's called "empathy".

This message is a reply to:
 Message 849 by kofh2u, posted 03-20-2013 7:12 PM kofh2u has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 913 by GrimSqueaker, posted 03-21-2013 12:14 PM ringo has replied
 Message 917 by kofh2u, posted 03-21-2013 1:34 PM ringo has replied
 Message 920 by kofh2u, posted 03-21-2013 1:44 PM ringo has replied

  
ringo
Member (Idle past 412 days)
Posts: 20940
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005


Message 914 of 1221 (694029)
03-21-2013 12:47 PM
Reply to: Message 913 by GrimSqueaker
03-21-2013 12:14 PM


Re: ...foolish people ignore tyrants as if they don't exist...
GrimSqueaker writes:
I would go a step further and say that an external source for morality is an oximoron
I'd call it a commonly-believed fantasy. If it wasn't, we wouldn't have threads like this.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 913 by GrimSqueaker, posted 03-21-2013 12:14 PM GrimSqueaker has not replied

  
ringo
Member (Idle past 412 days)
Posts: 20940
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005


Message 944 of 1221 (694142)
03-22-2013 12:03 PM
Reply to: Message 917 by kofh2u
03-21-2013 1:34 PM


Re: ...foolish people ignore tyrants as if they don't exist...
kofh2u writes:
BUT,... the Law was the list of what was moral.
The operative word there is "was". The Law was considered moral by the people who devised it. However, it is not considered moral by people of conscience today.
That's the problem with prescribed morality. People who accept the prescription don't internalize the morality; they don't understand the morality and/or immorality of the prescription. Thus, we have people trying to justify outrages like slavery because it "must" be moral - even if they themselves can't understand how it could be.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 917 by kofh2u, posted 03-21-2013 1:34 PM kofh2u has not replied

  
ringo
Member (Idle past 412 days)
Posts: 20940
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005


(1)
Message 945 of 1221 (694143)
03-22-2013 12:12 PM
Reply to: Message 920 by kofh2u
03-21-2013 1:44 PM


Re: ...foolish people ignore tyrants as if they don't exist...
kofh2u writes:
You believe you fully understand the Bible and have found it wanting and erroneous and wrong.
Not at all. I accept the Bible for what it says, instead of trying to re-interpret plain language to be more palatable. If the Bible tells people to treat their slaves well, then I take it as condoning slavery. (And don't be confused by the word "servant". The practice described in the Bible is definitely slavery.)
kofh2u writes:
Nothing will persuade you either.
The behaviour that the Bible describes is wrong for any person of conscience. If you're saying that I refuse to put a book ahead of my own conscience, you're right.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 920 by kofh2u, posted 03-21-2013 1:44 PM kofh2u has not replied

  
ringo
Member (Idle past 412 days)
Posts: 20940
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005


Message 1120 of 1221 (695068)
04-02-2013 12:21 PM
Reply to: Message 1117 by Dawn Bertot
04-01-2013 5:12 PM


Dawn Bertot writes:
I have explained to you twice now, that the choice is not what constitutes free will.
You're using the word "free" like an advertising man: "Here's a FREE gift for you... but you have to buy our product to get it."

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1117 by Dawn Bertot, posted 04-01-2013 5:12 PM Dawn Bertot has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 1124 by Dawn Bertot, posted 04-02-2013 10:22 PM ringo has replied

  
ringo
Member (Idle past 412 days)
Posts: 20940
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005


(2)
Message 1137 of 1221 (695140)
04-03-2013 12:03 PM
Reply to: Message 1124 by Dawn Bertot
04-02-2013 10:22 PM


Dawn Bertot writes:
ringo writes:
You're using the word "free" like an advertising man: "Here's a FREE gift for you... but you have to buy our product to get it."
Maybe you could elaborate on this a bit and show how it actual applies to this discussion.
You're redefining the word for your own purposes. What's supposedly "free" has a lot of conditions attached. We have "free will" but if we make the wrong choice, we get punished. A choice between apple pie and a punch in the face isn't a free choice; it's a loaded one.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1124 by Dawn Bertot, posted 04-02-2013 10:22 PM Dawn Bertot has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 1139 by Dawn Bertot, posted 04-05-2013 11:27 AM ringo has replied

  
ringo
Member (Idle past 412 days)
Posts: 20940
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005


Message 1142 of 1221 (695463)
04-05-2013 12:04 PM
Reply to: Message 1139 by Dawn Bertot
04-05-2013 11:27 AM


Dawn Bertot writes:
Simply put, I could not redefine free will any more than I could redifine the principles of gravity.
You can't change the reality of gravity but you can describe gravity in terms that do not fit the reality. For example, you could say that gravity causes objects to fall in parallel lines toward the surface of the earth (implying a flat earth). Similarly, you could describe a decision process as "free will" when in reality there is no freedom at all.
A choice between apple pie and a punch in the face isn't a free choice; it's a loaded one.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1139 by Dawn Bertot, posted 04-05-2013 11:27 AM Dawn Bertot has not replied

  
ringo
Member (Idle past 412 days)
Posts: 20940
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005


(1)
Message 1214 of 1221 (702905)
07-12-2013 1:38 PM
Reply to: Message 1209 by Paul Serup
07-12-2013 12:02 PM


Re: Ireland/credibility of authors and book
Paul Serup writes:
My name is Paul Serup and I will address a number of statements that Theodoric has made about myself and the book I wrote.
Does the book you wrote have paragraphs? Do you think it's possible for someone to be a moral person without using paragraphs?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1209 by Paul Serup, posted 07-12-2013 12:02 PM Paul Serup 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