Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 64 (9046 total)
500 online now:
AZPaul3, dwise1, Parasomnium, PaulK (4 members, 496 visitors)
Newest Member: Dade
Post Volume: Total: 887,304 Year: 4,950/14,102 Month: 548/707 Week: 103/176 Day: 12/20 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Atheists must appeal to an absolute moral standard when complaining about wrongs.
Tangle
Member
Posts: 8203
From: UK
Joined: 10-07-2011
Member Rating: 4.5


(2)
Message 5 of 71 (865125)
10-21-2019 3:22 AM
Reply to: Message 4 by Hyroglyphx
10-21-2019 12:25 AM


There obviously is no moral absolute so whatever point you're trying to make is moot. But if you think there is, let's have a look at an example.

Je suis Charlie. Je suis Ahmed. Je suis Juif. Je suis Parisien. I am Mancunian. I am Brum. I am London.I am Finland. Soy Barcelona

"Life, don't talk to me about life" - Marvin the Paranoid Android

"Science adjusts it's views based on what's observed.
Faith is the denial of observation so that Belief can be preserved."
- Tim Minchin, in his beat poem, Storm.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 4 by Hyroglyphx, posted 10-21-2019 12:25 AM Hyroglyphx has not yet responded

Tangle
Member
Posts: 8203
From: UK
Joined: 10-07-2011
Member Rating: 4.5


(1)
Message 13 of 71 (865167)
10-21-2019 4:20 PM
Reply to: Message 11 by GDR
10-21-2019 1:57 PM


Benefit or harm. That's it.

Je suis Charlie. Je suis Ahmed. Je suis Juif. Je suis Parisien. I am Mancunian. I am Brum. I am London.I am Finland. Soy Barcelona

"Life, don't talk to me about life" - Marvin the Paranoid Android

"Science adjusts it's views based on what's observed.
Faith is the denial of observation so that Belief can be preserved."
- Tim Minchin, in his beat poem, Storm.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 11 by GDR, posted 10-21-2019 1:57 PM GDR has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 23 by GDR, posted 10-21-2019 8:24 PM Tangle has responded

Tangle
Member
Posts: 8203
From: UK
Joined: 10-07-2011
Member Rating: 4.5


Message 28 of 71 (865230)
10-22-2019 3:06 AM
Reply to: Message 23 by GDR
10-21-2019 8:24 PM


GDR writes:

Not really.

Yes really. Morality is about intent.

If the person gave the cash wanting/expecting to improve the guy's life it was a good moral act. If he gave the cash wanting/expecting him to buy drugs and kill himself it was an immoral act.


Je suis Charlie. Je suis Ahmed. Je suis Juif. Je suis Parisien. I am Mancunian. I am Brum. I am London.I am Finland. Soy Barcelona

"Life, don't talk to me about life" - Marvin the Paranoid Android

"Science adjusts it's views based on what's observed.
Faith is the denial of observation so that Belief can be preserved."
- Tim Minchin, in his beat poem, Storm.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 23 by GDR, posted 10-21-2019 8:24 PM GDR has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 33 by GDR, posted 10-22-2019 4:23 PM Tangle has responded

Tangle
Member
Posts: 8203
From: UK
Joined: 10-07-2011
Member Rating: 4.5


Message 38 of 71 (865298)
10-23-2019 3:10 AM
Reply to: Message 33 by GDR
10-22-2019 4:23 PM


GDR writes:

Yes, but if the criteria is harm or benefit then you can't know whether it was harmful or beneficial until later or maybe never. In my example it was a loving act when the money was given but when the money was given it was an unknown as to whether or not it was harmful or beneficial.

All you're doing is substituting love - and by inference - hate, for benefit and harm. If you give the panhandler money out of love and he then buys drugs and overdoses you have an hateful outcome.

Intent.


Je suis Charlie. Je suis Ahmed. Je suis Juif. Je suis Parisien. I am Mancunian. I am Brum. I am London.I am Finland. Soy Barcelona

"Life, don't talk to me about life" - Marvin the Paranoid Android

"Science adjusts it's views based on what's observed.
Faith is the denial of observation so that Belief can be preserved."
- Tim Minchin, in his beat poem, Storm.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 33 by GDR, posted 10-22-2019 4:23 PM GDR has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 44 by GDR, posted 10-23-2019 4:17 PM Tangle has responded

Tangle
Member
Posts: 8203
From: UK
Joined: 10-07-2011
Member Rating: 4.5


Message 45 of 71 (865343)
10-23-2019 5:13 PM
Reply to: Message 44 by GDR
10-23-2019 4:17 PM


GDR writes:

I agree that intent is the point. Firstly being hateful and unloving are two different things. Hatred is unloving but it is only one aspect of it. In a broader sense unloving is simply indifference to the well being of others.

I think you've just explained why this business of love and heart and sacrifice and so on is really just well meaning religious waffle.

What our sense of morality is built on is the wellbeing of others, which means reducing harms and increasing benefits.

My point was that you can have a negative outcome from a loving moral act.

Unlikely but possible but also irrelevant. Morality is an attempt to do the right or wrong thing. Help or harm.

Just to use the terms harm or benefit focuses on the outcome rather than the intent.

Nope, it's the intent to harm or help that matters and usually it will result in the intended outcome.


Je suis Charlie. Je suis Ahmed. Je suis Juif. Je suis Parisien. I am Mancunian. I am Brum. I am London.I am Finland. Soy Barcelona

"Life, don't talk to me about life" - Marvin the Paranoid Android

"Science adjusts it's views based on what's observed.
Faith is the denial of observation so that Belief can be preserved."
- Tim Minchin, in his beat poem, Storm.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 44 by GDR, posted 10-23-2019 4:17 PM GDR has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 46 by jar, posted 10-23-2019 5:54 PM Tangle has responded
 Message 50 by GDR, posted 10-24-2019 12:05 AM Tangle has responded

Tangle
Member
Posts: 8203
From: UK
Joined: 10-07-2011
Member Rating: 4.5


(2)
Message 56 of 71 (865386)
10-24-2019 3:06 AM
Reply to: Message 46 by jar
10-23-2019 5:54 PM


The acts where still moral at the time they were made. It's just that the outcomes were not what we envisioned or could envision. Intending to make the lives of people worse by destroying communities would be immoral - doing it accidentally while trying to improve their lives would be unfortunate and maybe even a tragedy but it would not be immoral.

All you can say in hindsight is that they got it wrong, not that they were wrong to try to do the right thing.


Je suis Charlie. Je suis Ahmed. Je suis Juif. Je suis Parisien. I am Mancunian. I am Brum. I am London.I am Finland. Soy Barcelona

"Life, don't talk to me about life" - Marvin the Paranoid Android

"Science adjusts it's views based on what's observed.
Faith is the denial of observation so that Belief can be preserved."
- Tim Minchin, in his beat poem, Storm.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 46 by jar, posted 10-23-2019 5:54 PM jar has acknowledged this reply

Tangle
Member
Posts: 8203
From: UK
Joined: 10-07-2011
Member Rating: 4.5


Message 58 of 71 (865388)
10-24-2019 3:17 AM
Reply to: Message 50 by GDR
10-24-2019 12:05 AM


GDR writes:

Help or harm are the result and independent of the morality of the original act.

That's just not correct, actual outcomes are irrelevant, it's intent that decides morality.

Is the intent to do good or harm? To improve the wellbeing of others or to make things worse? To benefit or to harm?

Intent is written into our laws, if you accidentally take something out of a shop without paying or kill someone you are not guilty of theft or murder. You do not have the 'mens rea' - the guilty mind - necessary to do the wrong. Even though the outcome may have been awful.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mens_rea


Je suis Charlie. Je suis Ahmed. Je suis Juif. Je suis Parisien. I am Mancunian. I am Brum. I am London.I am Finland. Soy Barcelona

"Life, don't talk to me about life" - Marvin the Paranoid Android

"Science adjusts it's views based on what's observed.
Faith is the denial of observation so that Belief can be preserved."
- Tim Minchin, in his beat poem, Storm.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 50 by GDR, posted 10-24-2019 12:05 AM GDR has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 61 by GDR, posted 10-24-2019 1:42 PM Tangle has responded

Tangle
Member
Posts: 8203
From: UK
Joined: 10-07-2011
Member Rating: 4.5


Message 62 of 71 (865407)
10-24-2019 2:04 PM
Reply to: Message 61 by GDR
10-24-2019 1:42 PM


GDR writes:

Intent to help or intent to harm would define the morality of the act.

Well you know, intent is assumed in a moral act. But so long as we agree then fine.

However, I would still go further than that because an even an "intent to help" can be self serving in that it might also be a benefit to the self making the act morally neutral.

Couldn't care less personally, so long as the act adds to the sum of human wellbeing.

In any case, as this is supposed to be about religion, the moral acts of religious people are to further their chances of a happy afterlife. Couldn't be more self-serving than that. At least with an atheist you know their actions are honest in that respect.


Je suis Charlie. Je suis Ahmed. Je suis Juif. Je suis Parisien. I am Mancunian. I am Brum. I am London.I am Finland. Soy Barcelona

"Life, don't talk to me about life" - Marvin the Paranoid Android

"Science adjusts it's views based on what's observed.
Faith is the denial of observation so that Belief can be preserved."
- Tim Minchin, in his beat poem, Storm.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 61 by GDR, posted 10-24-2019 1:42 PM GDR has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 63 by GDR, posted 10-24-2019 3:24 PM Tangle has not yet responded

Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2021