Announcement

Collapse

Deeper Waters Forum Guidelines

Notice – The ministries featured in this section of TheologyWeb are guests of this site and in some cases not bargaining for the rough and tumble world of debate forums, though sometimes they are. Additionally, this area is frequented and highlighted for guests who also very often are not acclimated to debate fora. As such, the rules of conduct here will be more strict than in the general forum. This will be something within the discretion of the Moderators and the Ministry Representative, but we simply ask that you conduct yourselves in a manner considerate of the fact that these ministries are our invited guests. You can always feel free to start a related thread in general forum without such extra restrictions. Thank you.

Deeper Waters is founded on the belief that the Christian community has long been in the shallow end of Christianity while there are treasures of the deep waiting to be discovered. Too many in the shallow end are not prepared when they go out beyond those waters and are quickly devoured by sharks. We wish to aid Christians to equip them to navigate the deeper waters of the ocean of truth and come up with treasure in the end.

We also wish to give special aid to those often neglected, that is, the disabled community. This is especially so since our founders are both on the autism spectrum and have a special desire to reach those on that spectrum. While they are a special emphasis, we seek to help others with any disability realize that God can use them and that they are as the Psalmist says, fearfully and wonderfully made.

General TheologyWeb forum rules: here.
See more
See less

Richard Dawkins: A Gift From God

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Boxing Pythagoras
    replied
    Originally posted by seer View Post
    Of course they make the case but it is not coherent. For instance with reincarnation - what created these moral rules that we are governed by? Matter and energy? Do mater and energy care about how we treat each other? As far as moral abstracts, how do they exist? Ethics are about interpersonal interaction, without minds I just don't see it - they might as well go the next step and invoke God. And even if Platonic realism was true, what authority would these moral abstracts have over us. Why would we be obligated to follow them.
    I'm not a Humanist, a spiritualist, or a Platonist, so I won't attempt to defend their position. I'm simply noting that such people do exist.

    Leave a comment:


  • seer
    replied
    Originally posted by Boxing Pythagoras View Post
    ...they all do this. Platonists argue that abstracts are actual, extant entities. Humanists and spiritualists argue that actions have objective consequences which can be evaluated.
    Of course they make the case but it is not coherent. For instance with reincarnation - what created these moral rules that we are governed by? Matter and energy? Do mater and energy care about how we treat each other? As far as moral abstracts, how do they exist? Ethics are about interpersonal interaction, without minds I just don't see it - they might as well go the next step and invoke God. And even if Platonic realism was true, what authority would these moral abstracts have over us. Why would we be obligated to follow them.
    Last edited by seer; 08-26-2014, 10:38 AM.

    Leave a comment:


  • Boxing Pythagoras
    replied
    Originally posted by seer View Post
    Well no, until they can show how moral truths can exist objectively apart from a mind the claims are not coherent.
    ...they all do this. Platonists argue that abstracts are actual, extant entities. Humanists and spiritualists argue that actions have objective consequences which can be evaluated.

    Leave a comment:


  • Sparko
    replied
    Originally posted by Apologiaphoenix View Post
    For anyone interested, I will be interviewing R. Scott Smith of BIOLA on his book "In Search of Moral Knowledge" this Saturday on this very topic.

    With these discussions, I think it's important to start with a simple question.

    Does objective goodness exist and what is it?
    Bacon?

    Leave a comment:


  • Apologiaphoenix
    replied
    For anyone interested, I will be interviewing R. Scott Smith of BIOLA on his book "In Search of Moral Knowledge" this Saturday on this very topic.

    With these discussions, I think it's important to start with a simple question.

    Does objective goodness exist and what is it?

    Leave a comment:


  • seer
    replied
    Originally posted by Boxing Pythagoras View Post
    On the Platonist, spiritualist, and humanist views, objective morality would actually exist, as well, even if we sometimes misunderstood it.
    Well no, until they can show how moral truths can exist objectively apart from a mind the claims are not coherent.

    Leave a comment:


  • Boxing Pythagoras
    replied
    Originally posted by Sparko View Post
    I was referring to your comment that atheists are all over the place as to why something is moral or not (Society, Plato, Evolution, etc) and basically it just boils down to different atheists have different opinions on why something is moral. They might all agree that murder is immoral, but one might say because it hurts society, one might say because we evolved to believe it is immoral, another might say it is not immoral. That all boils down to a subjective standard of morality.
    You are conflating an individual's understanding of morality with the existence of objective morality. Ironically, this is exactly the same fallacy to which a number of atheists fall prey when they assert that theists can't actually believe in objective morality because they have different views on what is intrinsic to that morality.

    Atheists are no more a single, monolithic whole than are theists.

    Leave a comment:


  • Sparko
    replied
    Originally posted by Boxing Pythagoras View Post
    I understand precisely what is meant by the phrase. I don't understand why you would think the assertion that objective morality exists "boils down to opinion" for an atheist but not for a theist.
    I was referring to your comment that atheists are all over the place as to why something is moral or not (Society, Plato, Evolution, etc) and basically it just boils down to different atheists have different opinions on why something is moral. They might all agree that murder is immoral, but one might say because it hurts society, one might say because we evolved to believe it is immoral, another might say it is not immoral. That all boils down to a subjective standard of morality.

    Leave a comment:


  • Boxing Pythagoras
    replied
    Originally posted by Sparko View Post
    I don't think you understand what "objective morality" means.
    I understand precisely what is meant by the phrase. I don't understand why you would think the assertion that objective morality exists "boils down to opinion" for an atheist but not for a theist.

    Leave a comment:


  • Sparko
    replied
    Originally posted by Boxing Pythagoras View Post
    No more than a Christian's ideas about moral objectivity would.
    I don't think you understand what "objective morality" means.

    Leave a comment:


  • Boxing Pythagoras
    replied
    Originally posted by seer View Post
    Except in our world objective moral law would actually exist, even if we sometimes misunderstood it. And the universe would be, in the end, a just place.
    On the Platonist, spiritualist, and humanist views, objective morality would actually exist, as well, even if we sometimes misunderstood it.

    Leave a comment:


  • seer
    replied
    Originally posted by Boxing Pythagoras View Post
    No more than a Christian's ideas about moral objectivity would.
    Except in our world objective moral law would actually exist, even if we sometimes misunderstood it. And the universe would be, in the end, a just place.

    Leave a comment:


  • Boxing Pythagoras
    replied
    Originally posted by Sparko View Post
    so basically it just boils down to opinion, like seer said.
    No more than a Christian's ideas about moral objectivity would.

    Leave a comment:


  • seer
    replied
    Originally posted by Boxing Pythagoras View Post
    It depends on the atheist. Some are Platonic realists who believe that objective morality is extant in the form of abstracts. Some are humanists who define morality on the basis of societal health. Some are spiritualists who believe that there exists some objective set of rules which can elevate or lower the state of the soul (for example, ending a reincarnation cycle). Some wholly reject the idea of objective morality.
    I think today most atheists, at least the high profile ones, would reject the idea of objective morality. I personally never got the Platonic thing, or reincarnation. How moral ideas could exists apart from a mind.

    Leave a comment:


  • Sparko
    replied
    Originally posted by Boxing Pythagoras View Post
    It depends on the atheist. Some are Platonic realists who believe that objective morality is extant in the form of abstracts. Some are humanists who define morality on the basis of societal health. Some are spiritualists who believe that there exists some objective set of rules which can elevate or lower the state of the soul (for example, ending a reincarnation cycle). Some wholly reject the idea of objective morality.
    so basically it just boils down to opinion, like seer said.

    Leave a comment:

Related Threads

Collapse

Topics Statistics Last Post
Started by Apologiaphoenix, 03-15-2024, 10:19 PM
14 responses
74 views
1 like
Last Post rogue06
by rogue06
 
Started by Apologiaphoenix, 03-13-2024, 10:13 PM
6 responses
60 views
0 likes
Last Post Apologiaphoenix  
Started by Apologiaphoenix, 03-12-2024, 09:36 PM
1 response
23 views
0 likes
Last Post rogue06
by rogue06
 
Started by Apologiaphoenix, 03-11-2024, 10:19 PM
0 responses
22 views
2 likes
Last Post Apologiaphoenix  
Started by Apologiaphoenix, 03-08-2024, 11:59 AM
3 responses
44 views
0 likes
Last Post whag
by whag
 
Working...
X