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.
Why not actually read my posts? I'm not advocating for a morality system on this thread. I've simply pointed out the irony of someone attempting to judge God by a human sense of morality. You don't think God is the author of morality? Great. Give me an alternative.
Betcha can't.
We have! You just don't like it. We have pointed out that pretending your invisible friend told you what to do is every bit as subjective as any other basis for morality. We are all in the same boat.
If there is a God, he is either amoral, and thus cannot be "good" in any meaningful sense of the word, or he can be morally judged the same way anyone else can be. Which is it?
No, I think it is a layer deeper than that. We are, studies are showing, born with an instinct for cooperation rather than competition, with desire to group and bond, and be part of a community. We are also born with or develop very quickly a sense of self, a sense of possession, and a sense of empathy and equity.
Morality is a layer or two above that, morality is something we develop and grow into. My point is that for any given system of morality we choose to examine, we can compare it to these innate traits and determine, if not its "correctness" then at least its humanity. How well does this set of moral dictates enhance, encourage, and balance these aspects, these fundamentally human qualities.
But as I have filled several screens with my ideas, enough about me. You were going to explain how there can be an objective basis for morality, yes?
-NoCapo
Great. You've given me a biological explanation for a non-biological problem. Who is responsible for that system of morality you believe is innate in us?
I would suggest that it's God. We all know that certain behaviors are wrong. It's programmed into us by God. Unfortunately, due to our sinful natures, we suppress that knowledge and we instead do what we want to. that's why we can be outraged at seeing someone do the same behavior we may do in secret.
Why not actually read my posts? I'm not advocating for a morality system on this thread. I've simply pointed out the irony of someone attempting to judge God by a human sense of morality. You don't think God is the author of morality? Great. Give me an alternative.
Betcha can't.
You've been told by me at least 20 times and many more times by others, that morality is not something with objective basis.
Just because you find that uncomfortable doesn't change the reality that you have to take responsibility for your morality and stop blaming your god.
Perhaps you should look up the definition of subjective and objective and see if your understanding of those terms is actually correct.
And every single one of the answers is something to the effect of "Because I THINK it so....". No one has told me WHY their opinion is the one we should use.
I'm sorry...what it comes down to is that your opinion of morality is no more valid than anyone else's. It's irrelevant to anyone but you.
Still waiting.....
You also are saying "because I THINK it is so." You haven't told me why YOUR opinion is one we should use.
You seem to think there is some special quality of morality that makes it different from other topic. ANY opinion I express on ANYTHING is "only" my opinion and I never claim anything else. Under normal circumstances you would take my opinion on board along with others and integrate it with your own, potentially altering your opinion, potentially not. Potentially even reinforcing your existing opinion. But somehow you can't do that with morality.
Let me ask you this: do YOU have an opinion on this topic that should be listened to in preference to mine?
So you think my opinion of what is and isn't moral is objective and absolute? Or anyon else's? Why or why not? Do you even comprehend what I'm saying?
You sit here and tell me that God is unjust. Yet, all you've got is your opinion. Nothing more. You're quick to tell me my opinion is wrong...but you fail to see your own opinion is just an opinion.
And you fail to see that your opinion is all you have. That, and the opinion of a bunch of long-dead, primitive guys who wrote pamphlets.
And I don't care if it's "only" my opinion that your god is a psychopathic, narcissistic case of arrested development. My opinion has served me well for 64 years.
For instance, I've learned to recognize when an emperor has no clothes, or a pastor with no reasonable argument.
Great. You've given me a biological explanation for a non-biological problem. Who is responsible for that system of morality you believe is innate in us?
I would suggest that it's God. We all know that certain behaviors are wrong. It's programmed into us by God. Unfortunately, due to our sinful natures, we suppress that knowledge and we instead do what we want to. that's why we can be outraged at seeing someone do the same behavior we may do in secret.
You could suggest that it's God, but you haven't substantiated his very existence much less his opinion about what I eat for breakfast or what I get up to with my tallywhacker. In fact when it comes to god's morality you and your Christian brethren have many and vast disagreements anyway.
By the way, you and I are vertebrates with biologies. So in fact while morality isn't strictly a biological "problem" it is certain to be hugely influenced by biology. Why would it not? Humans, like all other creatures, ultimately are concerned first with putting food in one end and excreting out the other, and to the extent that is dealt with, enjoying the experience of being alive, which involves emotional responses and anxieties and pain and pleasure and our preference for pleasant emotions and sensations as mediated by various biological factors like hormones and the balance of the sympathetic and parasympathetic nervous subsystems. So it would be a huge mistake to ignore biology in consideration of any aspect of human behavior, much as you might prefer to emphasize the opposite "spiritual" qualities of humans to the exclusion of biology.
So you think my opinion of what is and isn't moral is objective and absolute? Or anyon else's? Why or why not? Do you even comprehend what I'm saying?
You sit here and tell me that God is unjust. Yet, all you've got is your opinion. Nothing more. You're quick to tell me my opinion is wrong...but you fail to see your own opinion is just an opinion.
I believe I do understand what you are saying. I just don't believe you have any reason to suggest there must be an objective morality.
I really don't mean this to be snarky....but are you certain you understand the terms you are arguing? Subjective vs objective?
Great. You've given me a biological explanation for a non-biological problem. Who is responsible for that system of morality you believe is innate in us?
I would suggest that it's God. We all know that certain behaviors are wrong. It's programmed into us by God. Unfortunately, due to our sinful natures, we suppress that knowledge and we instead do what we want to. that's why we can be outraged at seeing someone do the same behavior we may do in secret.
And you can suggest that, but unless you can objective demonstrate that God exists and is responsible for said biology, then both of our concepts of morality are equally subjective. I would argue it is an evolutionary adaptation, since we have far more evidence pointing to that as a mechanism for human development, but ultimately it is a subjective basis for morality. (although the closest thing I can think of to an objective basis)
So now that we have established that morality is subjective, that all moral viewpoints and systems are "opinions", as you put it,( unless of course you have more to add...) the question is where do we go from that? I would submit that all of human history is a case study for how you deal with subjective morality. Moral codes shift and flex with time, they are altered by new ideas, new cultures, and new problems. Ultimately we all make the best decisions we can, based on our culture, values, religions, reason, and moral intuition. In doing so we shape the moral values of the future. Each generation, each culture will have its own ideas about morality rooted in the past and adapting to the future. Each of us must make moral choices based on our own morality, just as humans have always done.
I believe I do understand what you are saying. I just don't believe you have any reason to suggest there must be an objective morality.
I really don't mean this to be snarky....but are you certain you understand the terms you are arguing? Subjective vs objective?
If you don't believe in objectivity, then it's simply up to you and your opinion. That means you are incapable of stating that anyone else is wrong, because their subjective opinion tells them that YOU'RE wrong.
With no objectivity there is no such thing as truth. That is a hallmark of our modern society -- that people have completely lost the ability to think critically.
And you can suggest that, but unless you can objective demonstrate that God exists and is responsible for said biology, then both of our concepts of morality are equally subjective.
Nope. I can say with certainty that some things are right, and some things are wrong. And I can say with certainty that anyone that doesn't believe in objective absolutes is incapable of declaring anything wrong.
Can you tell me that?
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.
