No Absolute Morality WITH God Either

David Sklansky · #1 10-26-2005, 05:27 PM

For those who did not already realize it, my concession to Not Ready that there is no absolute morality without God was done mainly to move debates along to other points. Because I never accepted the converse. That God provides absolute morality. All he provides is rules. Rules that he wants obeyed. Most of those rules are similar to rules that the majority of people think are good for people in general. Some aren't. When they aren't there is no is no reason to ascribe to them some sort of absolute "rightness".
God is the boss and the buck stops with him. And there is benefits to having a boss even if he sometimes expects, you to do what you don't like. The Prisoners Dilemma shows this. Both prisoners do better if their boss tells them not to snitch, then if there was no boss at all.

But that doesn't mean that you have to give up your notions of what is "just" because God wants something else. Even God can't tell you what is just. Anymore than he can tell you whether chocolate tastes better than vanilla.

#2 10-26-2005, 05:40 PM

I'm not sure if this is what you mean... but...

If God is the Absolute moral standard, then morals are still relative -- to God!

So, morals can be relative to humans -- that we know exist, and can poll to get their opinions on various ethical situations -- OR, they can be relative to "God" -- that we don't know exists, and can't poll to get his opinion on ethical situations.

#3 10-26-2005, 05:44 PM

[ QUOTE ]
If God is the Absolute moral standard, then morals are still relative -- to God!

[/ QUOTE ]

Bingo.

NotReady · #4 10-26-2005, 05:54 PM

[ QUOTE ]

But that doesn't mean that you have to give up your notions of what is "just" because God wants something else. Even God can't tell you what is just.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is just another form of the Euthyphro dilemma. As I've stated before, it amounts to a denial of the possibility of God and reduces to might makes right.

#5 10-26-2005, 05:57 PM

[ QUOTE ]
As I've stated before, it amounts to a denial of the possibility of God and reduces to might makes right.

[/ QUOTE ]

You once again fail to see the hypocrisy of your own untenable position.

Your stance that God is the source of absolute morality is, by definition, nothing but might makes right.

NotReady · #6 10-26-2005, 06:05 PM

[ QUOTE ]

Your stance that God is the source of absolute morality is, by definition, nothing but might makes right.

[/ QUOTE ]

No it isn't.

David Sklansky · #7 10-26-2005, 06:36 PM

You may have misunderstood me. I don't claim that people who believe in God should disobey him. I only claim that you don't have to agree with him.

Put another way, I say that what is "just" is a matter of opinion. You seem to sort of agree with that. But even God can't say who is right if it truly is only a matter of opinion. Just like he can't tell you which of two paintings is more beautiful. You will obey his decrees, but if you think the more beautiful painting is the one God doesn't choose, his decree won't change your mind.

chezlaw · #8 10-26-2005, 07:11 PM

[ QUOTE ]
You may have misunderstood me. I don't claim that people who believe in God should disobey him. I only claim that you don't have to agree with him.

Put another way, I say that what is "just" is a matter of opinion. You seem to sort of agree with that. But even God can't say who is right if it truly is only a matter of opinion. Just like he can't tell you which of two paintings is more beautiful. You will obey his decrees, but if you think the more beautiful painting is the one God doesn't choose, his decree won't change your mind.

[/ QUOTE ]

Its deja vu again

[ QUOTE ]
Quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Nonsense. Given the supposed nature of heaven and hell, only lunatics wouldn't obey god (the one associated with heaven and hell) if they were sure he existed. Which by the way is pretty good proof that most people who claim they believe, really don't (given their occasional sinful behavior). -- DS

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Hey, that argument that most people who claim they believe, really don't is mine. I even used up one of my better jokes 'saying is not believing'

However, I guess there will be some clause about loving him or some other mental attitude and god will know I don't.

chez

[/ QUOTE ]

Sometimes we really have to try hard to misunderstand each other so well.

[original thread if god existed ]

chez

#9 10-26-2005, 07:27 PM

I am not quite sure what you are getting at here. I have followed the anti-religion topics for a while but have not posted but I wanted to see if I am understanding your point correctly.

People that obey the Judeo Christian god can not have a perfect morality because they disagree with some of the tenets of the core doctrine. Is that correct?

If so, it is besides the point. According to that doctrine, man is a sinful creature and will as a matter of course not agree with God. Man is just meant to obey like a child obeys his parents.

Society sets up laws which (In the case of our own.) are derived from biblical principles. Folks may not agree with them but they provide safety and order to the populance just the same.

Well, I am probably way off but if your point is that man can't reach "absolute" moral purity than I agree with you. I don't think you can have an absolute anything.

Well, I will see if I am way off base before I continue making a jackass of myself.

Aytumious · #10 10-26-2005, 07:27 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

But that doesn't mean that you have to give up your notions of what is "just" because God wants something else. Even God can't tell you what is just.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is just another form of the Euthyphro dilemma. As I've stated before, it amounts to a denial of the possibility of God and reduces to might makes right.

[/ QUOTE ]

Just because you dislike the outcome of a position -- might makes right -- it doesn't mean it is not the nature of reality. Might does make right, though in human affairs it can get quite complicated.