Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I agree with you. I base that on my view of what is good and evil, right and wrong, which tends to be utilitarian, with a healthy dose of the importance of reciprocity, and the concept of the inherent dignity and equality of mankind. You base your opinion on your interpretation of the Bible. We both believe strongly that Hitler's behavior was evil. This is not a place where out opinions on morality are in conflict.
-NoCapo
The problem, of course, is that your view is something that can change. Your view may differ from someone else's view--someone who may think it's ok. My view is not based on the whim of man.
Yes it is. It is based on your interpretation of a book, and your personal experience. Countless others have used the same source material, and come to different conclusions.
You believe your interpretation to be absolute truth, but you have nothing other than your own opinion to make the case.
Unless you have some some objective method to evaluate morality that you would like to offer up for examination?
The problem, of course, is that your view is something that can change. Your view may differ from someone else's view--someone who may think it's ok. My view is not based on the whim of man.
What whim IS it based on, Vizio??? How can you possibly say it isn't based on the whim of man??
Yes it is. It is based on your interpretation of a book, and your personal experience. Countless others have used the same source material, and come to different conclusions.
You believe your interpretation to be absolute truth, but you have nothing other than your own opinion to make the case.
Unless you have some some objective method to evaluate morality that you would like to offer up for examination?
-NoCapo
I'm sure you know by now, NoCapo, not to hold your breath awaiting a clear-cut response.
Vizio has scurried away from many a thread when cornered into actually answering, instead of questioning everyone else.
The problem, of course, is that your view is something that can change. Your view may differ from someone else's view--someone who may think it's ok. My view is not based on the whim of man.
What is the difference between YOUR claim and the view of those who use the Q'uran and hadiths and make the same claim???
Yes it is. It is based on your interpretation of a book, and your personal experience. Countless others have used the same source material, and come to different conclusions.
You believe your interpretation to be absolute truth, but you have nothing other than your own opinion to make the case.
Unless you have some some objective method to evaluate morality that you would like to offer up for examination?
-NoCapo
No interpretation is necessary. It's what God has commanded. That's enough. The sad thing though, is that you cannot even account for morality....period. It's just your idea of what you like or not. If you don't think stealing is ok....so what? That's just your opinion. That has no bearing on anyone else.
Huffing and puffing and STILL not answering questions.
I'm STILL waiting to see how an atheist can account for morality. What is it? How do we define it? It can't be simply your opinion or my opinion. You and others keep dodging it. Or you say society determines it. That's nonsense.
There's the OP. Paul returned the slave. Huck refused to do so. Which is better moral guidance? That's the crux of it.
Instead, you've tried to hijack the thread and turn it into a "my definition of morality is better than yours" argument.
Personally, I think that common morality has developed with humanity through hundreds of thousands of years of development (evolution) from when early animals figured out it was better for the tribe (pack, pride, herd, etc.) if they didn't eat each other. Later generations figured out it was better also if they didn't kill each other, steal each others' stuff, and lie to each other. There's no one source of common morality (but we all know what it is).
Here's the answer you've refused to acknowledge since it was posted.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vizio
I'm STILL waiting to see how an atheist can account for morality. What is it? How do we define it? It can't be simply your opinion or my opinion. You and others keep dodging it. Or you say society determines it. That's nonsense.
I don't see morality as an atheist/theist thing. It's just a humanity thing. Anybody can account for it as I have with the history of civilization.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
