U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Religion and Spirituality
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 04-01-2010, 02:07 PM
 
31,385 posts, read 31,087,877 times
Reputation: 14878

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Vic235 View Post
Religion is all faith-based. There is no rationality involved.

Religious "moral values and worldview" is just another name for religious codes -- most of are absurdities.
Funny, of the 10 Talmudic Commandments only 7, deal with "morality" and are so patently self-evident as to defy the need of Divine invention. Honor you mother and father, not to murder, commit adultery, steal, lie, and admonishment against jealously and covetousness which is nothing more than a refinement on stealing and adultery. So in fact there are only 5 divine rules for a moral life.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 04-02-2010, 08:13 AM
 
5,463 posts, read 5,787,780 times
Reputation: 1803
Quote:
Originally Posted by MysticPhD View Post
IF[/b] as you assert there IS NO raison d'etre for human life
Where did I assert there's no reason for human life? Again, you seem to be the only one who doesn't understand that a lack of god doesn't equal nihilism - but that belief of yours makes it pretty obvious why you cling so desperately to any possible shred of evidence that you might possibly be right.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-02-2010, 01:44 PM
 
31,385 posts, read 31,087,877 times
Reputation: 14878
Quote:
Originally Posted by KCfromNC View Post
Where did I assert there's no reason for human life? Again, you seem to be the only one who doesn't understand that a lack of god doesn't equal nihilism - but that belief of yours makes it pretty obvious why you cling so desperately to any possible shred of evidence that you might possibly be right.
As much as it pains me to say this, but I believe we have been missing Mystics point.

His latest argument isn't a cognizant reason for existence on the part of man, but whether or not there is a larger external cognizant reason for humans to exist.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-02-2010, 01:56 PM
 
37,573 posts, read 25,275,797 times
Reputation: 5860
Quote:
Originally Posted by ovcatto View Post
As much as it pains me to say this, but I believe we have been missing Mystics point.

His latest argument isn't a cognizant reason for existence on the part of man, but whether or not there is a larger external cognizant reason for humans to exist.
DING! DING! DING! We have a winner. IF there is NOT . . . then morality is an arbitrary delusion.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-02-2010, 02:40 PM
 
31,385 posts, read 31,087,877 times
Reputation: 14878
Quote:
Originally Posted by MysticPhD View Post
DING! DING! DING! We have a winner. IF there is NOT . . . then morality is an arbitrary delusion.
Ah, sorry, just because I was able to decipher your rather turgid writing style doesn't mean that I agree with what you wrote.

Morality is no more an arbitrary delusion than a floating life preserver to a drowning swimmer. The fact that there was no etherial reason for swimmer to be drowning doesn't make the need for a life preserver any less pressing.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-02-2010, 03:14 PM
 
37,573 posts, read 25,275,797 times
Reputation: 5860
Quote:
Originally Posted by ovcatto View Post
Ah, sorry, just because I was able to decipher your rather turgid writing style doesn't mean that I agree with what you wrote.

Morality is no more an arbitrary delusion than a floating life preserver to a drowning swimmer. The fact that there was no etherial reason for swimmer to be drowning doesn't make the need for a life preserver any less pressing.
DO me a favor, ovcatto . . . provide the syllogism that proceeds from your premise of meaningless accidental life to the existence of morality (right and wrong) in that life. It should be illuminating.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-02-2010, 04:32 PM
 
31,385 posts, read 31,087,877 times
Reputation: 14878
Quote:
Originally Posted by MysticPhD View Post
DO me a favor, ovcatto . . . provide the syllogism that proceeds from your premise of meaningless accidental life to the existence of morality (right and wrong) in that life. It should be illuminating.
It has been provided an numerous times already and it hasn't illuminated anything in your brain yet since you are so insistent upon ignoring them.
Morality is nothing more and nothing less than a code of conduct for a society.

Without a code of conduct cooperative societies will fail.

Man depends on a cooperative society for survival.

If the cooperative society fails, so will man.

Man requires morality to survive.
Pretty simple actually.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-02-2010, 07:15 PM
 
3,614 posts, read 2,954,198 times
Reputation: 909
Quote:
Originally Posted by ovcatto View Post
As much as it pains me to say this, but I believe we have been missing Mystics point.

His latest argument isn't a cognizant reason for existence on the part of man, but whether or not there is a larger external cognizant reason for humans to exist.
I had figured that out: He is trying to red-herring is way into his argument. As I pointed out using the evolution\creation analogy, Mystic is trying to argue a different point entirely in order to "win." It doesn't matter how life got here, evolution occurred after that. It doesn't matter what the origin of life (and survival) is, morality took place after that.

More logical fallacious by everyone's favorite obfuscator, Mystic.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-02-2010, 09:04 PM
 
37,573 posts, read 25,275,797 times
Reputation: 5860
Quote:
Originally Posted by ovcatto View Post
It has been provided an numerous times already and it hasn't illuminated anything in your brain yet since you are so insistent upon ignoring them.
Morality is nothing more and nothing less than a code of conduct for a society.

Without a code of conduct cooperative societies will fail.

Man depends on a cooperative society for survival.

If the cooperative society fails, so will man.

Man requires morality to survive.
Pretty simple actually.
All you have provided are groundless and unsupported assertions containing their own additional premises that float in your mindless logical landscape. No wonder you think it is simple . . . it is designed by and for a very simple mind.

How did you get from your meaningless accidental life premise to:

this meaningless accidental life must have a society;

that this meaningless accidental society must have a code;

that this meaningless accidental society must not fail; OR

that the meaningless accidental humans in this society need to survive?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-03-2010, 06:07 PM
 
Location: 30-40N 90-100W
13,856 posts, read 22,264,183 times
Reputation: 6657
Quote:
Originally Posted by KCfromNC View Post
I'm intrigued by a Christian claiming that lack of infanticide is a benefit of Christianity when you can't make it through two chapters of the Bible without reading about God ordering this very thing. Either there's some inherent blind spot going on here or the absolute morality of Christianity is actually anything but.
I think I know where you're coming from, you're coming from a misunderstanding of what the word "infanticide" means. This is sadly common. It's also possible you think I take a primarily Old Testament view of life.

Infanticide is not any time an infant dies. God knows infants will die and at times has told that this will happen. Infanticide, as I'm meaning it, is also not the practice of "total war" that may involve killing kids to avoid them seeking vengeance in adulthood. Yes technically that is infanticide of a kind, but this is not what I meant. The Medieval Japanese would slaughter entire families, including infants, but this was generally a separate practice from the infanticide they would also commit.

Also I was speaking of Christianity in general, particularly as it was practiced before Calvin, rather than specifying some Old-Testament focused version of Protestantism. I've went over this explanation before, but maybe it wasn't with you. I might just copy it to a file somewhere so I can repeat it as needed.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Religion and Spirituality
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2018, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top