Re: A problem with some religous views Part 2.
 

chez,

So that I am clear - you are starting with new claims right - independent of yesterday‘s? Or are you continuing from the statements made yesterday? If you are continuing from yesterday’s then I have to reread what you are saying now - haven’t had much sleep lately?

RJT

Re: A problem with some religous views Part 2.
 

[ QUOTE ]
chez,

So that I am clear - you are starting with new claims right - independent of yesterday‘s? Or are you continuing from the statements made yesterday? If you are continuing from yesterday’s then I have to reread what you are saying now - haven’t had much sleep lately?

RJT

[/ QUOTE ]

New claim, totally independent.

chez

Re: A problem with some religous views Part 2.
 

Chez,

I am not quite sure now what you mean by your moral sense. Seems to assume things that I hadn’t thought about before. I am assuming that under these scenarios you have no knowledge of this religion or other religions. Can I assume you must delete any knowledge of philosophy, too? Where did you get any moral sense at all here is my question? I need to catch up to where you are here - if you think it is me being a dense, then I’ll reread.

RJT

Re: A problem with some religous views Part 2.
 

[ QUOTE ]
Chez,

I am not quite sure now what you mean by your moral sense. Seems to assume things that I hadn’t thought about before. I am assuming that under these scenarios you have no knowledge of this religion or other religions. Can I assume you must delete any knowledge of philosophy, too? Where did you get any moral sense at all here is my question? I need to catch up to where you are here - if you think it is me being a dense, then I’ll reread.

RJT

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't think you need assume no knowledge of religon or philosophy.

By moral sense, I mean the feeling that some things are right and some things are wrong.

Although my intellectual understanding of how things work, and of the specific situation being considered does have a considerable influence on my moral feeling, I do still experience a feeling of rightness or wrongness that is similar to pain or pleasure.

One common dispute between theists and atheiests is whether these feelings are evolved for evolutionary advantage or whether they are god given.

Does that make sense?

chez

Re: A problem with some religous views Part 2.
 

Are you saying that your moral sense is just the belief that "right" and "wrong" actions exist? Are you not making any claims about how accurately your moral sense judges actions to be right or wrong?

Re: A problem with some religous views Part 2.
 

[ QUOTE ]
Are you saying that your moral sense is just the belief that "right" and "wrong" actions exist? Are you not making any claims about how accurately your moral sense judges actions to be right or wrong?

[/ QUOTE ]

No its not the claim that right and wrong actions exist. I'm assuming we all agree that feelings of rightness and wrongness exists and that's what I mean by moral sense.

The claims are about these feeling (under the assumption that there is a religous type god).

Does that make sense. Its tough to explain and we may need to resort to example but I'll have to get some sleep first.

chez

Re: A problem with some religous views Part 2.
 

Maybe I'm not following you. You say you are assuming the existence of a god for this question, so this is how I understand your point: I have feelings of right and wrong. This is either

A) a moral compass inserted by that god, reflecting his/her/it's moral beliefs, or

B) these feelings are nothing more than random emotions that mislead me, and have no relation to the moral beliefs of that god.

My question is, are you speaking in completely general terms? Are you saying that BECAUSE you have feelings of right and wrong, they must either be faculties put in place by that god or they must be leading you astray from god's feelings?

The way I read it (you say your moral feelings are "evidence" of what is exactly right or wrong), you seem to say that it doesn't matter how accurate your sense of right and wrong is. Kinda like saying god gave you the equipment, but no guarantee that it works. But the mere fact that you have the equipment points to a god who wants you to be able to make moral judgments.

Am I anywhere close?

Re: A problem with some religous views Part 2.
 

[ QUOTE ]
My question is, are you speaking in completely general terms? Are you saying that BECAUSE you have feelings of right and wrong, they must either be faculties put in place by that god or they must be leading you astray from god's feelings?

[/ QUOTE ]
It sounds close but I think I'm saying something slightly different. If (religous type) god then he must be responsible for me having the feelings. Also the feelings seem to be telling about what is right and wrong.

Then either they are not telling me anything about what is right or wrong (this is the option I am currently claiming can be dismissed) or the feelings are evidence of what is right and wrong.



[ QUOTE ]
The way I read it (you say your moral feelings are "evidence" of what is exactly right or wrong), you seem to say that it doesn't matter how accurate your sense of right and wrong is. Kinda like saying god gave you the equipment, but no guarantee that it works.

[/ QUOTE ]
Yes, if my argument is right to this point then all I am establishing is that they are evidence in a similar way to how smoke is evidence of a fire.


[ QUOTE ]
Am I anywhere close?

[/ QUOTE ]
Real close to what I am trying to say. Don't know how close to agreeing [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img]


chez