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 the view that there is always a "better choice" in whatever we are facing, that you are calling a "moral dilemma." A person has priorities that are "driving the bus" in their decision making.
If a person seeks to "do the right thing" then their decision may look and feel different than if a person "does whatever they feel like." A high priority for many is considering "how does this affect my relationship with God?"
God is within the circumstance, the dilemma, the situation. The more we turn to God, the clearer our decision becomes in "doing the right thing."
My observation is that many reject a higher intelligence precisely because they don't want to be held accountable for "doing the right thing." They would rather swim in the seas of "do whatever they want."
Last edited by Tzaphkiel; 02-03-2019 at 09:47 AM..
You are since under your no God premise there is no purpose for your existence.
Ah. Okay. At least I understand now where you're coming from.
Well here's the problem with your addled way of thinking:
There are two types of people in this world (at least in regard to this sense of the meaning) -- those who find purpose and satisfaction in life extrinsically, and those who find purpose and satisfaction in life intrinsically.
When I first graduated from high school, I just didn't want to do four years of college, so I got a community college degree in computer programming. But deep inside of myself I wanted to "make a difference" through teaching, so I went on and got my first two degrees in education/science. I never once connected my desire to make a difference with any external force (god). I did it because my family (for all their faults) always instilled in me the belief that people should "do right" and help others...and they did that without bringing religion into it. After thirteen years of notably successful teaching, I thought I could help more students and teachers by becoming a school administrator. Nobody like an external god whispered that in my ear. It came from within. And again, I made a difference. I made my own purpose in life. And tomorrow, if suddenly it were proven that there was no god, I would still be perfectly content with my role in life.
On the other hand, since you apparently believe that "there is no purpose for...existence" without god, if tomorrow it was suddenly proven that there was no god, your purpose for existence would crumble and your life would be meaningless.
People who deal with life intrinsically, without a god, are generally strong. People who deal with life requiring extrinsic satisfaction through god, are generally weak...akin to being "mama's boys (and girls)".
Sometimes the "goal" might not be in the destination, as such, but in the journey itself. If there really are ambiguous moral situations, then perhaps there is some spiritual benefit in confronting these situations and dealing with them, even though there is no "correct" solution. In the example of abortion, suppose two women in essentially the same circumstances chose different options. If this particular situation happens to be morally ambiguous, then each woman's choice could be morally correct, even though they chose opposite solutions. The "test" might be simply to make them "run the course" - an "endurance test", as it were - a challenge to increase some sort of strength, or whatever. Also, some tests are simply to "see where you are" as opposed to seeing if you can accomplish any specific goal. You might be tested to see how many push-ups you can do, with no fixed goal defining how many you ought to do.
BTW: In case any of you don't already know, I'm a somewhat "mystical agnostic" so I don't really believe that there is (or isn't) a "higher intelligence" who would put humans to any sort of "test". I was simply trying to offer examples of possible theistic alternatives.
I understand. I guess I am also a mystical agnostic.
I think the ultimate test in these ambiguous moral situations is being able to live with the consequences. That is only one part of it and what makes it an endurance test. What makes these decisions even more difficult are the people who want others to live with regret for making the choice or for even thinking they had a choice. That last part is what makes an ambiguous moral situation not so ambiguous anymore. To this last group, there is clearly a right and wrong and there no such thing as an "endurance test".
I agree with the view that there is always a "better choice" in whatever we are facing, that you are calling a "moral dilemma." A person has priorities that are "driving the bus" in their decision making.
If a person seeks to "do the right thing" then their decision may look and feel different than if a person "does whatever they feel like." A high priority for many is considering "how does this affect my relationship with God?"
God is within the circumstance, the dilemma, the situation. The more we turn to God, the clearer our decision becomes in "doing the right thing."
My observation is that many reject a higher intelligence precisely because they don't want to be held accountable for "doing the right thing." They would rather swim in the seas of "do whatever they want."
I don't think there is always a better choice. There is simply a choice and if it hurts somebody, then it is up to that somebody or the community to stop enabling the one making the bad choices.
To answer the question by the original post, if there is a god, yes, I do think he would allow for ambiguous moral situations. People are not perfect and even if they made the best choice, there are still going to be negative consequences associated with the choice. It cannot be avoided. Not everyone can come out better on every choice.
I don't think there is always a better choice. There is simply a choice and if it hurts somebody, then it is up to that somebody or the community to stop enabling the one making the bad choices.
To answer the question by the original post, if there is a god, yes, I do think he would allow for ambiguous moral situations. People are not perfect and even if they made the best choice, there are still going to be negative consequences associated with the choice. It cannot be avoided. Not everyone can come out better on every choice.
I agree that a best choice can have negative outcomes. A "right decision" can "take a wrong turn."
However that doesn't change that it was still the "right decision."
I don't think there is always a better choice. There is simply a choice and if it hurts somebody, then it is up to that somebody or the community to stop enabling the one making the bad choices.
To answer the question by the original post, if there is a god, yes, I do think he would allow for ambiguous moral situations. People are not perfect and even if they made the best choice, there are still going to be negative consequences associated with the choice. It cannot be avoided. Not everyone can come out better on every choice.
I think you're missing the point entirely. So let me give you an example of what I'm talking about. I'll mention a specific situation, but it was a situation that -- to one extent or another -- repeated itself every so often.
One year I needed to hire a math teacher for our middle school. Social studies and English were easy, usually with many candidates. Math and science were tough. In this particular year there were only three applicants. None of whom were good applicants. But I had to hire a teacher. I couldn't have 130 kids a day sitting in a teacher-less classroom. I made the "best" decision I could, knowing that it wouldn't be a great hire, and knowing that I'd probably end up going down the dismissal route sooner or later.
I think you're missing the point entirely. So let me give you an example of what I'm talking about. I'll mention a specific situation, but it was a situation that -- to one extent or another -- repeated itself every so often.
One year I needed to hire a math teacher for our middle school. Social studies and English were easy, usually with many candidates. Math and science were tough. In this particular year there were only three applicants. None of whom were good applicants. But I had to hire a teacher. I couldn't have 130 kids a day sitting in a teacher-less classroom. I made the "best" decision I could, knowing that it wouldn't be a great hire, and knowing that I'd probably end up going down the dismissal route sooner or later.
Your discussing competency and you did the best you could. I think that is different from moral situations. Were these teachers ever a danger to the students?
Moral dilemma: a man is married. He wants to sleep with other women. He also wants to stay married. He wants what he wants when he wants it. He rejects the morality of monogamy while demanding the benefits of matrimony.
That is an example. Of a mindset that typically rejects the notion of being expected to follow moral guidelines. Because it challenges their preoccupation with self-indulgence.
What is the role of higher intelligence in this? Don't blame God for a person choosing to stay stuck in self indulgence.
Last edited by Tzaphkiel; 02-03-2019 at 11:27 AM..
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.
