Morality: Do you agree

[Pete in Panama]

I don't understand. Where are you headed with this?

Where I was going is that I'd wanted to know what absolutes u subscribe to, but it sounds like we are not in a good position to discuss this.

Thanks anyway, cheers!

 

[RestlessSoul]

A thought came into my head, please tell me if you'd subscribe to the statement "there are no absolutes", and are u aware that the statement itself is an absolute?

Absolutely

 

[lukethethird]

Weird how we only supposedly hear from two out of twelve.

What two would that be? The only apostle that wrote anything down was Paul. The rest were anonymous or had names other than the actual author assigned to them as far as I know.

 

[Muffled]

Was watching a debate between a Muslim and an atheist. And the Muslim make the argument that people that believe in subjective morality have no foundation for making moral judgements and are therefore not valid. Whereas people with a foundation in objective morality, meaning God as the moral judge are because this gives them a foundation for their morality.

Do you agree with this, that without God there is no moral foundation for judging right from wrong? And therefore people not believing in objective morality is not allowed or invalid when judging others?

I believe from a subjective viewpoint one person sees homosexuality as right and another person sees it as wrong. In Judaic and Islamic law Homosexuality is always wrong. Which is more accurate the one that produces varying results or the one that produces the same result?

 

[Muffled]

No in the radical sense. Humans got an internal sense of justice with which we were created.

Besides that, it's not very difficult to understand that what hurts me can hurt another human being in the same way, so it would be easy to make it a convention for everyone.

However, God's justice is higher, because he made us and knows exactly what hurts us all.

I believe this varies from person to person as does sinfulness.

 

[Muffled]

Good point. Guess this means we should stone people to death like we used to for blasphemy. Alright everyone, line up! I'll go first

I believe that is a rush to judgment. Our God is more patient than that unless He is doing something special.

 

[Soandso]

I believe that is a rush to judgment. Our God is more patient than that unless He is doing something special.

Is it? These are things that really happen even to thos day in some theocracies. It's not rushing to judgement if we have real world examples going back before the invention of writing

 

[Nimos]

I believe from a subjective viewpoint one person sees homosexuality as right and another person sees it as wrong. In Judaic and Islamic law Homosexuality is always wrong. Which is more accurate the one that produces varying results or the one that produces the same result?

Depends on what it is

If there is an objectively correct answer then the one that produces the same result is. But if there ain't then it can be equally as wrong, if, for the sake of argument, God doesn't exist, then Judaism and Islam are wrong 100% of the time.

 

[viole]

Was watching a debate between a Muslim and an atheist. And the Muslim make the argument that people that believe in subjective morality have no foundation for making moral judgements and are therefore not valid. Whereas people with a foundation in objective morality, meaning God as the moral judge are because this gives them a foundation for their morality.

Do you agree with this, that without God there is no moral foundation for judging right from wrong? And therefore people not believing in objective morality is not allowed or invalid when judging others?

The problem is easy to solve.

viole was born with the gift of perfectly knowing right from wrong, and therefore everything she says is morally objective.

Evidence? Same as Allah doing the same.

Joking aside, the claim does not obtain necessarily.

The fact that X does not have a source of objectivity, does not entail that we cannot have opinions, even strong opinions, about X. There are many examples of such X, and no rational reason why morality cannot be one of them.

Another killer: religion experiences and beliefs are ultimately subjective. Therefore the objectivity of what they entail is illusory, because they derive from a subjective premise. In other words, the Muslim, by demoting what is subjective, undermines his own theism, and therefore, the very source that intends to give objectivity to morality.


So, to say that X is objectively right, because I believe in a source of objective morality, has the same depth as saying that Kryptonite exists objectively, because I believe in Superman.

Ciao

- viole