- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
0
Posted on 3/3/21 at 5:56 pm to Flats
quote:
I don't know why anybody would care what you think (maybe that's a typo?) but the second half of that is my entire point. People who claim that their morality is based on logic are claiming an objective standard that doesn't exist. You can't use logic and logic alone to derive a moral code. It can't be done.
Objective morals do exist, or there are no morals at all. Subjective morality is nearly as close as you can come to an oxymoron.
Good is a term, in Scholastic philosophy which describes how well something lives up to its form and function. A "good car" is one with four wheels and an operating engine, as opposed to a car with one wheel missing and no engine, which is a bad car.
The same concept applies, objectively, to humans. Humans are to use their rationality to examine and determine their own behavior. If they choose to behave like lower primates, then they're not "good".
Trying to define a moral code without God or an objective standard that is properly logically anchored outside man is doomed to fail.
But, as I've said several times in this post, feel free to try.
Posted on 3/3/21 at 6:04 pm to BiteMe2020
quote:
Trying to define a moral code without God or an objective standard that is properly logically anchored outside man is doomed to fail.
Like I said, the things you say prove that you don't understand why point. You're arguing with stances I would also say are false.
Posted on 3/3/21 at 6:06 pm to Azkiger
quote:
That said, a perfect deity also doesn't grant you the ability to do that via divine inspiration either.
ITT: people who respond to me to argue with something I've never claimed. I give.
Posted on 3/3/21 at 6:06 pm to BiteMe2020
quote:
Subjective morality is nearly as close as you can come to an oxymoron.
I don't see anything within the definition of the word "morality" that would put it at odds with the word "subjective".
Can you expand upon that?
quote:
Good is a term, in Scholastic philosophy which describes how well something lives up to its form and function. A "good car" is one with four wheels and an operating engine, as opposed to a car with one wheel missing and no engine, which is a bad car.
Who gets to determine function?
A car with one wheel would serve as a better barrier to hide from gunfire than one with four.
quote:
The same concept applies, objectively, to humans. Humans are to use their rationality to examine and determine their own behavior. If they choose to behave like lower primates, then they're not "good".
That's such a vague statement. Lower primates breathe, have sex, eat, defecate, socialize, flee from danger/defend themselves from danger, raise their young, etc.
Those are all not "good"?
And again, who gets to determine what is the function of a human?
You're at least on stronger ground with a car, as it's physically designed and built and it's inventor could tell you. That's not definitive because why would he get to determine how others perceive his invention's function, but you at least have his word.
Humans aren't created. There was no drawing board/inventor.
This post was edited on 3/3/21 at 6:09 pm
Posted on 3/3/21 at 6:08 pm to Flats
quote:
ITT: people who respond to me to argue with something I've never claimed. I give.
So you don't believe that your perfect deity has delivered objective morality to humanity through divine inspiration?
I'm sorry, I thought you were a Christian.Posted on 3/3/21 at 6:10 pm to Azkiger
quote:
So you don't believe that your perfect deity has delivered objective morality to humanity through divine inspiration?
I believe a diety defines objective morality. Our goal is to figure it out, and since man is involved, we will inevitably come up short. But there is a logical goal. I don't know why you would talk about morality at all; it doesn't exist in your world as most people definite it.
Posted on 3/3/21 at 6:11 pm to T1
I appreciate your points but I'm not buying your premise that the Bible teaches the "opposite" of warring for freedom. Spiritual freedom in Christ is not personal freedom or rights that are ordained by God to every man, as our forefathers said.
Spiritual victory in Christ is in a whole different realm than this subject and does not dictate that we submit to Tyranny. If one kidnaps my family and I, am I to submit to that based on my relationship with Christ? Or should I go to violent measures to free myself from the one who stole our freedom? I think it's my duty to the latter. Neither should a people sit idly by while being taken into bondage. Christ brought us to America for the Philadelphia church age and He wrought our freedom with the blood of Christian Patriots.
The Bible is not a PACIFIST Book. God ordered the assault on the Promised Land. Abraham defeated 5 kings. God brought the King of Babylon to Judah in violent fashion to put His people into bondage.
Spiritual victory in Christ is in a whole different realm than this subject and does not dictate that we submit to Tyranny. If one kidnaps my family and I, am I to submit to that based on my relationship with Christ? Or should I go to violent measures to free myself from the one who stole our freedom? I think it's my duty to the latter. Neither should a people sit idly by while being taken into bondage. Christ brought us to America for the Philadelphia church age and He wrought our freedom with the blood of Christian Patriots.
The Bible is not a PACIFIST Book. God ordered the assault on the Promised Land. Abraham defeated 5 kings. God brought the King of Babylon to Judah in violent fashion to put His people into bondage.
Posted on 3/3/21 at 6:18 pm to Flats
quote:
Like I said, the things you say prove that you don't understand why point. You're arguing with stances I would also say are false.
You keep repeating bald assertions, yet there is no objective morality without God.
Feel free to try, instead of making continual bald assertions.
Posted on 3/3/21 at 6:19 pm to BiteMe2020
quote:
yet there is no objective morality without God.
I agree with that statement. Like I said, you don't understand my point at all.
Posted on 3/3/21 at 6:20 pm to Bayoubred
quote:
Spiritual victory in Christ is in a whole different realm than this subject and does not dictate that we submit to Tyranny. If one kidnaps my family and I, am I to submit to that based on my relationship with Christ? Or should I go to violent measures to free myself from the one who stole our freedom? I think it's my duty to the latter. Neither should a people sit idly by while being taken into bondage. Christ brought us to America for the Philadelphia church age and He wrought our freedom with the blood of Christian Patriots.
The Bible is not a PACIFIST Book. God ordered the assault on the Promised Land. Abraham defeated 5 kings. God brought the King of Babylon to Judah in violent fashion to put His people into bondage.
Indeed. Though never used, Christ asked his disciples to go and sell their cloaks to buy one sword for a long walk.
On top of the fact that he did violently throw the money changers out of the temple.
Posted on 3/3/21 at 6:21 pm to Flats
quote:
I believe a diety defines objective morality.
Lets be careful with our words. A deity defining what's moral and what isn't seems to suggest it's up to his whim. Like, he could say rape is k and it would be k.
quote:
Our goal is to figure it out
And how do you do that? By looking to what was divinely inspired?
quote:
it doesn't exist in your world as most people definite it.
Citation needed.
Posted on 3/3/21 at 6:21 pm to Flats
quote:
Like I said, you don't understand my point at all.
Feel free to explain it coherently, then.
Posted on 3/3/21 at 6:26 pm to Azkiger
quote:
Citation needed.
You:
quote:Nobody, right? We're like apes. We do things, and there are societal norms, but there's really no such thing as "bad" and "good" as people commonly use those terms. To some people pedophilia is natural, to others it's evil. Who's to say? We have cultural norms, they change over time, that's it.
And again, who gets to determine what is the function of a human?
Posted on 3/3/21 at 6:28 pm to Bayoubred
quote:
Neither should a people sit idly by while being taken into bondage.
Did Christ ever once advocate for the Hebrews to rebel against the Romans?
Did he ever advocate that slaves rebel against their masters? No, he did the exact opposite.
quote:
God ordered the assault on the Promised Land. Abraham defeated 5 kings. God brought the King of Babylon to Judah in violent fashion to put His people into bondage.
And the Lord also commanded (Numbers 15:32-36) that a man be stoned to death for picking up sticks on the Sabbath.
I think if you're going to connect "warring for freedom" with Christianity you're target should be the New Testament, not the Old Testament.
Posted on 3/3/21 at 6:32 pm to Flats
quote:
You:
Quoting me doesn't prove your claim. Sorry.
quote:
...but there's really no such thing as "bad" and "good" as people commonly use those terms...
I don't know how people commonly use those terms. Perhaps you're right, but I've never seen a poll on public opinion on objective/subjective morality.
Posted on 3/3/21 at 6:35 pm to Azkiger
quote:
I don't know how people commonly use those terms.
Really? So when somebody says "slavery was bad (or evil, that's the more common description)", you're not sure what they mean? You think maybe they mean it was just evil by our cultural norms today, but maybe it was ok back then?
Posted on 3/3/21 at 6:40 pm to Flats
quote:
Nobody, right? We're like apes. We do things, and there are societal norms, but there's really no such thing as "bad" and "good" as people commonly use those terms. To some people pedophilia is natural, to others it's evil. Who's to say? We have cultural norms, they change over time, that's it.
Sure there is a concept of good and bad. And objectively so.
Otherwise you'd never be able to differentiate between right behavior and wrong behavior for yourself. I assume you've done at least that much. But maybe not.
Posted on 3/3/21 at 6:40 pm to Flats
quote:
Really? So when somebody says "slavery was bad (or evil, that's the more common description)", you're not sure what they mean? You think maybe they mean it was just evil by our cultural norms today, but maybe it was ok back then?
I either think they think there is some sort of objective moral code floating around somewhere out there in the ether, or they think that it's wrong because they think that human society functions much better for everyone when humans are granted control of themselves and their labor.
I literally think that people could see it as subjectively or objectively wrong. I don't know how you're managing to confuse this. Do you think that morals are just a dice roll for people who don't think you can get an ought from an is? That there's not thought put into it?
Posted on 3/3/21 at 6:41 pm to Flats
quote:
Really? So when somebody says "slavery was bad (or evil, that's the more common description)", you're not sure what they mean? You think maybe they mean it was just evil by our cultural norms today, but maybe it was ok back then?
Is slavery objectively wrong, or are you (and others) merely declaring it so? How about sexually abusing children, or murdering Jews because they're Jews?
This post was edited on 3/3/21 at 6:42 pm
Page 9 of 16
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News