Two Plus Two Older Archives  

Go Back   Two Plus Two Older Archives > Other Topics > Science, Math, and Philosophy
FAQ Community Calendar Today's Posts Search

 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Prev Previous Post   Next Post Next
  #10  
Old 10-14-2005, 10:04 PM
chezlaw chezlaw is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: London, England
Posts: 58
Default Re: absolute morality - relative morality = 0 ?

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

What I'm wondering is is there any way any sort of absolute morality could make it false (god or no god).


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



And that's the part I'm quibbling over. Your statement premises a concept called "absolute morality" but until we can get somebody to define what that means your question is unanswerable. My contention is that Absolute Morality is impossible, god or no god ... but that's based on what I think Absolute Morality means, which isn't fair to somebody making a claim based on their defnition of Absolute Morality. In another thread I'm waiting for RJT to give me his definition of AM so I can illustrate there could be other ways of it existing besides god-driven. AM undefined is just two words put together but when you take it into the field "that dog won't hunt".

[/ QUOTE ]
ok, but if there no possible definition of AM then AM cannot make anything false.

Suppose someone has a definition of AM that is 100% correct.

1) if I have no knowledge of AM then I can't make use of it.
2) if I have aware of some theory of AM but don't understand it (incorporate it into my understanding of the world) then I can't make use of it.
3) if I understand AM then I am suggesting that moral feelings work in such a way that they reflect this understanding.
3*) (if you don't like feelings) if I understand AM then my understanding reflects this understanding.

Doesn't that that cover any AM, however defined, so the argument is independent of any particular AM. I can't give you a definition (I'm not holding it back, I haven't got one). Its 2) where I think someone might object.


[ QUOTE ]
I've been ducking the "feelings" part because feeling ( as I use the term) are way too kludgy trust with such a delicate balancing act as morality.

[/ QUOTE ]
I'm using feeling more or less synonomously with understanding. just use 'understanding' instead of 'feeling' if you prefer. (I need feelings to handle the god case).

chez
Reply With Quote
 


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 06:42 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.