Announcement

Collapse

Apologetics 301 Guidelines

If you think this is the area where you tell everyone you are sorry for eating their lunch out of the fridge, it probably isn't the place for you


This forum is open discussion between atheists and all theists to defend and debate their views on religion or non-religion. Please respect that this is a Christian-owned forum and refrain from gratuitous blasphemy. VERY wide leeway is given in range of expression and allowable behavior as compared to other areas of the forum, and moderation is not overly involved unless necessary. Please keep this in mind. Atheists who wish to interact with theists in a way that does not seek to undermine theistic faith may participate in the World Religions Department. Non-debate question and answers and mild and less confrontational discussions can take place in General Theistics.


Forum Rules: Here
See more
See less

Absurdity of Morality Apart From God

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

  • Originally posted by Stoic View Post
    I don't see it as more rational.
    Would mathematics be more or less rational if mathematical truths were not universal or absolute?

    Atheism is the cult of death, the death of hope. The universe is doomed, you are doomed, the only thing that remains is to await your execution...

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jbnueb2OI4o&t=3s

    Comment


    • Originally posted by seer View Post
      Would mathematics be more or less rational if mathematical truths were not universal or absolute?
      To the extent that mathematical truths are universal or absolute, they don't tell you anything about the world. You have arbitrary axioms, and from them you can draw conclusions that are absolute and universal, as long as the axioms are accepted. We have generally chosen axioms in accordance with how the world seems to us, but the connection is inductive, so we can't be certain of it.

      The same could be done with morality. You can choose axioms based on the Golden Rule, or Kant's Categorical Imperative, or Rawls' Justice as Fairness, to name a few. Even Divine Command Theory, if you like. Morality can be perfectly rational, but the result is only universal and absolute to the extent that the axioms are accepted.

      Comment


      • Originally posted by Stoic View Post

        To the extent that mathematical truths are universal or absolute, they don't tell you anything about the world. You have arbitrary axioms, and from them you can draw conclusions that are absolute and universal, as long as the axioms are accepted. We have generally chosen axioms in accordance with how the world seems to us, but the connection is inductive, so we can't be certain of it.

        The same could be done with morality. You can choose axioms based on the Golden Rule, or Kant's Categorical Imperative, or Rawls' Justice as Fairness, to name a few. Even Divine Command Theory, if you like. Morality can be perfectly rational, but the result is only universal and absolute to the extent that the axioms are accepted.
        I think we both agree that mathematical truths would be less rational, or not rational at all, without absoluteness.
        Atheism is the cult of death, the death of hope. The universe is doomed, you are doomed, the only thing that remains is to await your execution...

        https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jbnueb2OI4o&t=3s

        Comment


        • Originally posted by seer View Post
          I think we both agree that mathematical truths would be less rational, or not rational at all, without absoluteness.
          I'm not sure what you consider "absolute". Have you heard of non-Euclidean geometry?

          Comment


          • Originally posted by Stoic View Post
            I'm not sure what you consider "absolute". Have you heard of non-Euclidean geometry?
            How about something more simple? Two objects plus two objects equals four objects. That is an absolute and universal - agreed? If it wasn't basic math would be irrational.
            Atheism is the cult of death, the death of hope. The universe is doomed, you are doomed, the only thing that remains is to await your execution...

            https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jbnueb2OI4o&t=3s

            Comment


            • Originally posted by seer View Post
              How about something more simple? Two objects plus two objects equals four objects. That is an absolute and universal - agreed? If it wasn't basic math would be irrational.
              Mathematics does not deal with objects, at least not in an absolute and universal sense.

              What if the objects are water droplets? Or if some of them are made of matter, and the remainder are antimatter?

              Comment


              • Originally posted by Stoic View Post

                Mathematics does not deal with objects, at least not in an absolute and universal sense.

                What if the objects are water droplets? Or if some of them are made of matter, and the remainder are antimatter?
                OK, then use the laws of logic, if the law of non-contradiction is not absolute then reasoning is not rational.
                Atheism is the cult of death, the death of hope. The universe is doomed, you are doomed, the only thing that remains is to await your execution...

                https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jbnueb2OI4o&t=3s

                Comment


                • Originally posted by seer View Post
                  OK, then use the laws of logic, if the law of non-contradiction is not absolute then reasoning is not rational.
                  I thought we had had this conversation before. The law of non-contradiction doesn't have to be absolute.

                  See paraconsistent logic, for example.

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by seer View Post

                    So why are we right now as opposed to then?
                    We are “right” for our era of belief in equal rights, just as the era of Christian slave-owners was “right” according to the acceptance of racial discrimination as the norm.
                    “He felt that his whole life was a kind of dream and he sometimes wondered whose it was and whether they were enjoying it.” - Douglas Adams.

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by Tassman View Post

                      Actually, Yuval Noah Hariri is a favorite author of mine – I’ve read three of his books but he (and you) is saying nothing different to what I’m arguing. Namely that tribal/group behavior is similar between Chimps and humans and for the same reason – the need to maintain cohesive social behavior.

                      The difference is that humans are much more intelligent than chimps and so they ponder and philosophize as to WHY they behave the way they do. But this is not WHY they behave this way, it’s not the basis of their behavior. It’s just that, as an intelligent species, we like to understand why we do what we do.
                      Unsure of your position...?...are you saying that tribalism is the evolutionary mechanism for human survival and not intelligence? that our concepts/abstractions/myths are simply a byproduct, of little use/consequence in the evolutionary process?

                      I am theist therefore may be biased, but as our discussion progresses, my opinion is leaning towards the centrality of myths in our human evolution....and seeing it as a necessary evolutionary difference between chimps and humans precisely because humans are so unfit (weak) for survival.....
                      and this is why the mechanism of social cohesion is fundamentally and necessarily different between chimps and humans.

                      The formation of tribes aids in co-operation, but in order for such a group/tribe to function cohesively/collectively , a leader is required. Animals have a variety of ways of forming leadership of their group and in chimps, the criteria is strength. The alpha chimp becomes the leader.
                      https://edition.cnn.com/2021/01/20/w...scn/index.html
                      Because humans are innovative---they use weapons--not just strength, in leadership formation and transfer of leadership.... making them potentially more deadly affairs, and thereby unsustainable as a long-term practice. Also---the fight for power is disruptive of social cohesion. A peaceful transfer of leadership requires an innovative solution---and "legitimizing myths" can be such a solution. (myths such as mandate of heaven, divine lineage, "wisdom"/seniority...etc...)

                      Tribalism has the potential to be toxic. Strong tribalism that depends on fear/hate of the other for social cohesion can dehumanize and this is self-destructive. It goes against the evolutionary mechanism for survival. That is why myths that can curtail strong tribalism and instead promote unity become a necessary evolutionary mechanism for human survival. Only by recognizing the humanity of the "other" can intratribal co-operation and peaceful conflict resolution occur. Otherwise constant tribal warfare would destroy humanity....because the use of weapons has always made the consequence of human warfare more deadly.

                      So...IMO, myths are necessary evolutionary mechanism for humanity to survive and function. The promotion of Unity and peace (peaceful conflict resolution) is the only end game for the survival of humanity.

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by Tassman View Post

                        We are “right” for our era of belief in equal rights, just as the era of Christian slave-owners was “right” according to the acceptance of racial discrimination as the norm.
                        Dehumanization of the "other" is never right in whatever era or justification used---because it leads to harm and destruction.

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by Hypatia_Alexandria View Post

                          We do not know it was "religious ceremonial". That is conjecture. Certain Neanderthal burials appear to exhibit ritualistic elements; the foetal position of the body, the presence of animal bones, often deliberately placed, and grave goods.
                          True, although the apparent ritualistic nature suggests a religious component to Neanderthal burials.

                          I would certainly agree that a belief in something above and beyond human control probably existed. The word "gods" is perhaps rather confusing, being that it is an advanced [later] human concept of deity. It is possible that the earliest "religious beliefs" were animistic and that a female principle was of more significance.
                          Yes, I’m sure you’re right about animism preceding gods as such but my point remains. Namely that people existed before spiritual explanations were invoked to explain the otherwise inexplicable mysteries of nature in the prescientific era.


                          “He felt that his whole life was a kind of dream and he sometimes wondered whose it was and whether they were enjoying it.” - Douglas Adams.

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by seer View Post
                            The argument would go something like this:
                            • (1) For morality to be rational, there must be ultimate justice.
                            • (2) We mortal and fallible beings cannot achieve ultimate justice.
                            • (3) There must be some supernatural being who can achieve ultimate justice.
                            • (4) For morality to be rational, God must exist.
                            I'm a bit late to this debate.
                            I'm starting from the OP.
                            Morality?
                            Could you give me an example of a moral condition? ......a moral action?

                            I ask because you mention it's links to ultimate justice, and I wonder what that is as well.

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by siam View Post

                              Unsure of your position...?...are you saying that tribalism is the evolutionary mechanism for human survival and not intelligence?
                              I’m saying that the survival of social species’ such as us – along with the other primates – depends upon tribalism. But for the more intelligent human, tribalism has evolved over millennia in groupings of “tribes” into clans, kingdoms and empires.

                              that our concepts/abstractions/myths are simply a byproduct, of little use/consequence in the evolutionary process?
                              Our “concepts/abstractions/myths” have no part in the evolutionary process per se. Although as a curious, intelligent species we ponder and philosophize as to WHY we behave the way we do.

                              I am theist therefore may be biased, but as our discussion progresses, my opinion is leaning towards the centrality of myths in our human evolution....and seeing it as a necessary evolutionary difference between chimps and humans precisely because humans are so unfit (weak) for survival.....
                              and this is why the mechanism of social cohesion is fundamentally and necessarily different between chimps and humans.
                              Chimps are equally unfit for survival in the brutal world of predatory carnivores etc. and they survive precisely they same way we do. Namely, by living in cohesive, cooperative, supportive, protective communities.

                              The formation of tribes aids in co-operation, but in order for such a group/tribe to function cohesively/collectively , a leader is required. Animals have a variety of ways of forming leadership of their group and in chimps, the criteria is strength. The alpha chimp becomes the leader.

                              Because humans are innovative---they use weapons--not just strength, in leadership formation and transfer of leadership.... making them potentially more deadly affairs, and thereby unsustainable as a long-term practice. Also---the fight for power is disruptive of social cohesion. A peaceful transfer of leadership requires an innovative solution---and "legitimizing myths" can be such a solution. (myths such as mandate of heaven, divine lineage, "wisdom"/seniority...etc...)
                              We too have our “alpha chimps” we call them kings, or presidents or prime-ministers etc. and their rise to power can be just as vicious as the battle for power among chimps. Study our history. Myths have nothing to do their rise to power as such, although they are often used to memorialize them or to lend them authority once they have achieved power.

                              Tribalism has the potential to be toxic. Strong tribalism that depends on fear/hate of the other for social cohesion can dehumanize and this is self-destructive. It goes against the evolutionary mechanism for survival. That is why myths that can curtail strong tribalism and instead promote unity become a necessary evolutionary mechanism for human survival. Only by recognizing the humanity of the "other" can intratribal co-operation and peaceful conflict resolution occur. Otherwise constant tribal warfare would destroy humanity....because the use of weapons has always made the consequence of human warfare more deadly.

                              So...IMO, myths are necessary evolutionary mechanism for humanity to survive and function. The promotion of Unity and peace (peaceful conflict resolution) is the only end game for the survival of humanity.
                              I think you have it back-to-front. Cooperative tribes came first and the myths that legitimize them and their leaders came later.




                              “He felt that his whole life was a kind of dream and he sometimes wondered whose it was and whether they were enjoying it.” - Douglas Adams.

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by Stoic View Post

                                I thought we had had this conversation before. The law of non-contradiction doesn't have to be absolute.

                                See paraconsistent logic, for example.
                                Yes, and I read your link back then - and no it does not show that the law of non-contradiction is not absolute. If it isn't then reasoning is dead. It is self defeating, for instance:

                                The law of non-contradiction doesn't have to be absolute.

                                Could that statement be both true and false?

                                Atheism is the cult of death, the death of hope. The universe is doomed, you are doomed, the only thing that remains is to await your execution...

                                https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jbnueb2OI4o&t=3s

                                Comment

                                Related Threads

                                Collapse

                                Topics Statistics Last Post
                                Started by whag, Yesterday, 03:01 PM
                                39 responses
                                142 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post tabibito  
                                Started by whag, 03-17-2024, 04:55 PM
                                21 responses
                                129 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Hypatia_Alexandria  
                                Started by whag, 03-14-2024, 06:04 PM
                                80 responses
                                425 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post tabibito  
                                Started by whag, 03-13-2024, 12:06 PM
                                45 responses
                                303 views
                                1 like
                                Last Post Hypatia_Alexandria  
                                Working...
                                X