atheistic morality - Page 3

NotReady · #21 08-13-2005, 05:38 PM

[ QUOTE ]

The OP seems to think theistic moral philosophies and atheistic moral philosophies differ in that respect.

They don't.

[/ QUOTE ]

The circularity doesn't make them equivalent. Invented atheistic morality remains irrational, subjective and relative.

maurile · #22 08-13-2005, 06:03 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

The OP seems to think theistic moral philosophies and atheistic moral philosophies differ in that respect.

They don't.

[/ QUOTE ]

The circularity doesn't make them equivalent. Invented atheistic morality remains irrational, subjective and relative.

[/ QUOTE ]
Well then, how do they differ?

NotReady · #23 08-13-2005, 06:12 PM

[ QUOTE ]

Well then, how do they differ?

[/ QUOTE ]

Rational vs irrational.
Objective(for us) vs subjective.
Absolute vs relative.

There are other obvious differences not relating to logic, such as revealed vs invented. There is also some congruence though revealed morality is more complete than invented. I believe the congruence is itself a result of God creating man in His image, i.e., with a conscience.

andyfox · #24 08-13-2005, 06:13 PM

"On whose authority is something right?"

You tell me. Certainly not on god's.

"Where do you get this stuff?"

Christians don't believe that if they do the right thing they'll go to heaven and if they don't they'll go to hell?

maurile · #25 08-13-2005, 06:18 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

Well then, how do they differ?

[/ QUOTE ]

Rational vs irrational.
Objective(for us) vs subjective.
Absolute vs relative.

[/ QUOTE ]
I don't see any differences on any of those scores.

If I say Britney Spears has some moral rules that she's revealed to us, how is that any different from you saying that Yahweh has some moral rules that He's revealed to us?

In both cases, the rules could have been invented or they could have always existed independent of anybody's invention. In both cases, the rules are revealed (whether previously invented or not). In both cases, the rules are stated in an objective fashion ("stealing is wrong"). In both cases, the rules can be either absolute ("stealing is always wrong") or relative ("stealing is sometimes wrong depending on the circumstances").

NotReady · #26 08-13-2005, 06:33 PM

[ QUOTE ]

You tell me. Certainly not on god's.

[/ QUOTE ]

Certainly on God's.

[ QUOTE ]

Christians don't believe that if they do the right thing they'll go to heaven and if they don't they'll go to hell?

[/ QUOTE ]

Christians believe that salvation is by grace through faith.

David Sklansky · #27 08-13-2005, 06:50 PM

Please leave Andy alone. He has work to do.

eastbay · #28 08-13-2005, 07:27 PM

[ QUOTE ]
In reality, the 'wicked' deeds of Hitler, Stalin, Mau, Bush (???), etc., are not evil in any meaningful or absolute sense.

[/ QUOTE ]

It's amazing what you can do to the mind of a child if you start indoctrinating him young enough.

Are you saying that without appealing to God as an authority for right and wrong, there is no way to discern that mass murder of innocents is evil?

eastbay

David Sklansky · #29 08-13-2005, 07:39 PM

"In reality, the 'wicked' deeds of Hitler, Stalin, Mau, Bush (???), etc., are not evil in any meaningful or absolute sense."

"It's amazing what you can do to the mind of a child if you start indoctrinating him young enough."

"Are you saying that without appealing to God as an authority for right and wrong, there is no way to discern that mass murder of innocents is evil?"

WHY IS EVERY SINGLE PERSON CONFUSED ABOUT THIS SUBJECT?

Mass murder of innocents is not evil in an absolute sense. Tigers do it all the time and they are not evil. The reasons humans don't is because doing it will make them FEEL BAD (now or later). For any one of a variety of reasons. Some genetic. Some taught. Where religious (and non religious) people get confused is in thinking that the above fact is of any particular consequence.

eastbay · #30 08-13-2005, 07:43 PM

[ QUOTE ]
"In reality, the 'wicked' deeds of Hitler, Stalin, Mau, Bush (???), etc., are not evil in any meaningful or absolute sense."

"It's amazing what you can do to the mind of a child if you start indoctrinating him young enough."

"Are you saying that without appealing to God as an authority for right and wrong, there is no way to discern that mass murder of innocents is evil?"

WHY IS EVERY SINGLE PERSON CONFUSED ABOUT THIS SUBJECT?

[/ QUOTE ]

I am not confused, David.

[ QUOTE ]

Mass murder of innocents is not evil in an absolute sense.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is a boring semantics game over the meaning of "absolute".

[ QUOTE ]

The reasons humans don't is because doing it will make them FEEL BAD (now or later).

[/ QUOTE ]

Correct. So what am I confused about, exactly?

[ QUOTE ]

For any one of a variety of reasons. Some genetic. Some taught. Where religious (and non religious) people get confused is in thinking that the above fact is of any particular consequence.

[/ QUOTE ]

eastbay