Jump to content
IGNORED

Objective morality


Seanc

Recommended Posts


  • Group:  Nonbeliever
  • Followers:  6
  • Topic Count:  2
  • Topics Per Day:  0.00
  • Content Count:  738
  • Content Per Day:  0.21
  • Reputation:   346
  • Days Won:  0
  • Joined:  05/28/2014
  • Status:  Offline

1 hour ago, shiloh357 said:

Actually, you have made that case in the pasts, that what is wrong or right is the result of societal or cultural consensus.  You have used that argument more than once.

Even if that's true then  you are merely responding to arguments I made in the past, what about the argument I'm making now?  

1 hour ago, shiloh357 said:

That is not what morality focuses on, though.  Sometimes doing the moral or the right thing is done even to one's own detriment.

I understand that but I don't see how this is troublesome for my view.  

1 hour ago, shiloh357 said:

No, they are not.  You clearly don't understand them.

They believe the highest authority in existence is asking them to take out "infidels".  They are only doing what their "God" is telling them.  

1 hour ago, shiloh357 said:

First of all there is no human morality that you can claim is based on those things, as human morality, like everything else about human nature, is fickle.

So if something is developed and worked on over time it's inherently useless?  

1 hour ago, shiloh357 said:

And the "God claim"  you mock is quite substantiated and atheists have to borrow from the Bible to even have something to say about what is right or wrong.

If the Bible is so useful in guiding humanity then why did it take us so long to establish societies grounded in the values we hold to today [in free developed Nations]?

1 hour ago, shiloh357 said:

If there is no God, then there is no morality debate, as humans on their own have no morality.

I disagree. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest shiloh357
22 minutes ago, Bonky said:

Even if that's true then  you are merely responding to arguments I made in the past, what about the argument I'm making now?  

I have addressed the argument you are making now.  Are you abandoning the arguments you have made in the past?  Are those no longer true?

Quote

I understand that but I don't see how this is troublesome for my view.  

Because it works against the argument something is moral because it promotes human "flourshing."  People "flourish" through all kinds of immoral things, particularly in organized crime.  People "flourish" by actions that cause other people not to flourish.   So it really presents a problem when something is right when some people flourish, but wrong when others don't flourish because of the same action.   Abortionists flourish all the way to teh bank by killing unborn babies, which is detrimental both the baby and the mother. 

Quote

They believe the highest authority in existence is asking them to take out "infidels".  They are only doing what their "God" is telling them.  

But I thought the argument among popular consensus  has always been that they are NOT following Islam or the commands of Allah.   Are we now going to assert that they are following the tenets of the Islamic religion?  

 

Quote

So if something is developed and worked on over time it's inherently useless?  

It doesn't work, and it hasn't worked and anyone familiar with world history can see the pain and suffering caused by humanistic morality.

 

Quote

If the Bible is so useful in guiding humanity then why did it take us so long to establish societies grounded in the values we hold to today [in free developed Nations]?

The Bible is useful in guiding humanity, but humanity refused to be guided by it.  That is not a flaw in the Bible that man has rejected the Bible and it's principles.

 

Quote

I disagree. 

Human nature  has no morality.   If you raised a baby from birth with no values, no manners, no moral teaching of any kind, how would that child turn out?   Do children naturally grow into kindness, and good manners, and treating people with respect and love without any kind of instruction or guidance?

Human nature is basically evil to the core, with out any objective moral standard of right and wrong, evil would flourish quite well and life on earth would be miserable.

In all other cultures, outside of the Bible, morality and truth are relative and subject to change.  The Bible is the only book that presents a God of perfect justice and mercy.  Not even Islam lays claim to that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Bonky said:

 I'll side with secular morality that is founded on values such as human freedom, safety and empathy [the things we think of when we talk about 'morality'] then some mysterious God claim that's completely unsubstantiated.

Where does secular morality come from?  How do you know that it is wrong to steal and lie? How did your parents know that taught you? God has written the law on our hearts!  God has certainly substantiated himself through his creation. The complexity of the universe in its exact measure is proof enough for me. God has said you have decided to cast off what he has put around you as proof! Romans 1.  We have historical archaeology that is digging up more and more proofs about biblical stories in the bible.  We have 2500 prophecies written in the bible that have come true TO THE LETTER!  God is substantiated. The fact that you fail to recognize it is because you have not  looked into these things or  you refuse to see the truth! 

Edited by Guest
Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Worthy Ministers
  • Followers:  14
  • Topic Count:  32
  • Topics Per Day:  0.01
  • Content Count:  5,204
  • Content Per Day:  0.97
  • Reputation:   5,792
  • Days Won:  1
  • Joined:  07/09/2009
  • Status:  Offline

On 8/16/2017 at 0:02 PM, Bonky said:

With regard to your objective standard, where did this standard come about?  What was used as a metric to slide actions toward "good" or "bad"?

 

"There is a principle which is a bar against all information, which is proof against all arguments, and which cannot fail to keep a man in everlasting ignorance—that principle is contempt prior to investigation."

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Nonbeliever
  • Followers:  6
  • Topic Count:  2
  • Topics Per Day:  0.00
  • Content Count:  738
  • Content Per Day:  0.21
  • Reputation:   346
  • Days Won:  0
  • Joined:  05/28/2014
  • Status:  Offline

On 8/20/2017 at 0:32 AM, Gary Lee said:

"There is a principle which is a bar against all information, which is proof against all arguments, and which cannot fail to keep a man in everlasting ignorance—that principle is contempt prior to investigation."

Sounds like a good phrase to give someone when they're asking questions that make you nervous ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Worthy Ministers
  • Followers:  14
  • Topic Count:  32
  • Topics Per Day:  0.01
  • Content Count:  5,204
  • Content Per Day:  0.97
  • Reputation:   5,792
  • Days Won:  1
  • Joined:  07/09/2009
  • Status:  Offline

16 minutes ago, Bonky said:

Sounds like a good phrase to give someone when they're asking questions that make you nervous ;)

Not really. I've encountered this subject in the past. It is just that what was easy for me to understand seems so hard for some to grasp, and I'm not but average.   Actually, I enjoy listening to you Bonky, and Shiloh, and appreciate the sharp logic of both. I cannot know your mind, or the reason you are on this forum, as I noticed your "nonbeliever" note.   But, though I also don't really know Shiloh other than he is very knowledgeable  about bible/scripture, I can under his deep desire to impart his knowledge to others seeking that knowledge. How is it yourself, that you happen to be here on this Christian forum. Investigating? Are you seeking knowledge, or just trying to prove your point. That would determine if that little "good phrase" above in your reply,  applies to you. My hope would be that neither of you "win" the discussion, but that the tangible truth would be understood by all.   Good enough?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest shiloh357
1 hour ago, Bonky said:

Sounds like a good phrase to give someone when they're asking questions that make you nervous ;)

What questions have you proposed that you think make us nervous?   I don't mind questions, as I truly believe I have the truth.   When you have the truth, questions don't threaten you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Nonbeliever
  • Followers:  6
  • Topic Count:  2
  • Topics Per Day:  0.00
  • Content Count:  738
  • Content Per Day:  0.21
  • Reputation:   346
  • Days Won:  0
  • Joined:  05/28/2014
  • Status:  Offline

19 hours ago, shiloh357 said:

What questions have you proposed that you think make us nervous?   I don't mind questions, as I truly believe I have the truth.   When you have the truth, questions don't threaten you.

My statement was made a bit "tongue in cheek".   The comment seemed to suggest that I, a priori have some "contempt" for an objective standard.   I don't feel that I've done anything other than ask fair questions.  So my spin on the comment was to suggest perhaps that's something somebody would say when they don't want their critics to question their claim(s).

Having said that I don't recall my question really being answered.  So far I've essentially heard that there's an objective standard that we should be measured against but no idea where the standard came from or what it's based on.   My view is that if morality entails how humans should treat each other to maximize human flourishing and freedom, then we have solid tangible avenues to take to try to strive for that goal.   If you're ultimately asking, "Why should we strive for happiness, freedom and security?" to me that's a senseless question I guess.  

Edited by Bonky
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest shiloh357
19 hours ago, Bonky said:

 

Having said that I don't recall my question really being answered.  So far I've essentially heard that there's an objective standard that we should be measured against but no idea where the standard came from or what it's based on.

Yes, that question has been answered. The biblical worldview enshrined in the 10 commandments is what all objective morality is based on.

Quote

  My view is that if morality entails how humans should treat each other to maximize human flourishing and freedom, then we have solid tangible avenues to take to try to strive for that goal.  

If you're ultimately asking, "Why should we strive for happiness, freedom and security?" to me that's a senseless question I guess.  

The problem is that morality has nothing to do with maximizing human flourishing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Nonbeliever
  • Followers:  6
  • Topic Count:  2
  • Topics Per Day:  0.00
  • Content Count:  738
  • Content Per Day:  0.21
  • Reputation:   346
  • Days Won:  0
  • Joined:  05/28/2014
  • Status:  Offline

4 hours ago, Sojourner414 said:

So my two questions for you to consider (they do not require an answer) are this:

1) If we came from nothing, then why do each of us, no matter the society, culture or geographical location, have a sense of anger and a desire for it to be corrected when we perceive that we have been wronged?

I don't know what you mean by "If we came from nothing...".    I don't view us as coming from "nothing".

4 hours ago, Sojourner414 said:

2) If our feelings of right and wrong come from nothing, then why do they matter to us? Example: If someone say stole the rent money from us the day before the rent was due, and ultimately right and wrong are just human constructs, then why would it matter that it be corrected?

Our feelings of right and wrong don't come from "nothing".  I'm can't accept your starting premises so it's hard for me to answer these questions.   I think I understand perhaps what you're trying to say so I'll attempt an answer based on that.  I could really pose the question right back, we can ultimately trivialize anything I would think and say "why does it matter?".  The Bible states that God wants his created humans to serve and worship him so that he can spend eternity in heaven with them.  Some people make it and some don't, in either case ... what does it matter?  

In my view of morality humans are the focus, in your view it seems that humans are NOT the focus.  We don't HAVE to strive for a moral framework but we have the choice to.  You relegate our morality as just a "human construct" so why does it matter?  Because it involves humans, that's why it matters to US.  What is the eternal significance of going out for a round of golf with your father on fathers day?  None whatsoever so why do it right?  Why take a walk in the park with your Mother on mothers day?  What eternal good does that do?  So why do it?   From that perspective we can question anything we do and say what does it matter.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...