Originally posted by Starlight
View Post
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
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
Moral Realism...
Collapse
X
-
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
-
Originally posted by seer View PostEven if there were common moral themes across cultures (which there are) that does not demonstrate moral realism. It could simply mean that the evolutionary process genetically predisposed us to particular behaviors. One could say that it is an objective fact that men morally act in specific ways, and these acts are cross cultural. But you can not leap to the claim that moral truths are objective in the sense that they are true or valid independent of what anyone thinks. As an example, if the majority of cultures and countries, came to believe that spousal rape was morally acceptable - it would be. There is no higher law or standard to mitigate against that view. We are the law. Unless you bring in a deity or something like Platonic forms.
1. The truth or falsity of moral propositions is dependent on the attitudes of people, but (at least some of) those attitudes are determined by objective facts about human nature. (a subset of ethical subjectivism)
2. Ethical sentences express propositions that refer to objective features of the world (that is, features independent of subjective opinion), some of which may be true to the extent that they report those features accurately. (moral realism)
Comment
-
Originally posted by Stoic View Post
It doesn't seem to me that there is any significant difference between the following two positions:
1. The truth or falsity of moral propositions is dependent on the attitudes of people, but (at least some of) those attitudes are determined by objective facts about human nature. (a subset of ethical subjectivism)
2. Ethical sentences express propositions that refer to objective features of the world (that is, features independent of subjective opinion), some of which may be true to the extent that they report those features accurately. (moral realism)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
-
[QUOTE=seer;n1256666]
So what? That is not the point. For Rawls, for experiment to work, he must assume that all men would be risk averse. That is both ahistorical and an assumption that can not be demonstrated. As far as a majority being exploited for the sake a few, China seems to be doing quite well with the majority of wealth being funneled to their party's oligarchy. With no human rights or equality I might add...[/QUOTE
most men are risk-averse---I think that would be a correct assumption.
The majority of any population simply want to live their lives in peace. In a dog-eat-dog world (or man destroy man world) there would not be much peace....since everyone would want to fight to be top dog. The only way a system would work is if the majority of the population accepts/buys into "the system".
Wealth imbalance is not just a problem for China---it is happening all over the world. Our capitalist "system" has a systemic problem. It is structured for stagnation rather than flow. As long as we accept that "this is the only way"(buy into it)---we cannot come up with a creative solution.
Human rights and equality are also a global problem---democracy has not guaranteed equality/rights, in particular for those who lack the wealth (and therefore power) to influence the judicial and political "systems".
What is or is not "ahistorical" might be subjective?---you are approaching humanity from a Christian/original sin perspective---but this is a minority view in terms of global religio-philosophical understanding of human nature.
Comment
-
Originally posted by siam View Postmost men are risk-averse---I think that would be a correct assumption.
The majority of any population simply want to live their lives in peace. In a dog-eat-dog world (or man destroy man world) there would not be much peace....since everyone would want to fight to be top dog. The only way a system would work is if the majority of the population accepts/buys into "the system".
Wealth imbalance is not just a problem for China---it is happening all over the world. Our capitalist "system" has a systemic problem. It is structured for stagnation rather than flow. As long as we accept that "this is the only way"(buy into it)---we cannot come up with a creative solution.
Human rights and equality are also a global problem---democracy has not guaranteed equality/rights, in particular for those who lack the wealth (and therefore power) to influence the judicial and political "systems".
What is or is not "ahistorical" might be subjective?---you are approaching humanity from a Christian/original sin perspective---but this is a minority view in terms of global religio-philosophical understanding of human nature.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
Siam, for Rawls' experiment to work all men must make the safe choice, if not we are just talking about subjective preference. And the point about China was they are doing quite well, they are not falling apart. They are not self-destructing as you suggested. And as far as equality and human rights are not Muslim countries the most egregious offenders?
all men must make a safe choice---I think the point of Rawls was "selfish choice"---IMO, Western philosophers have 2 premises of human nature from which they begin their theories---1) Man is primarily selfish 2) and Man is an individual ---both of which are a bit problematic.....I think the starting premise should be that humanity is a) both selfish and altruistic and b) man is both individual and social---such a starting premise might yield better theories.....
China is indeed doing well and will do well for some time---but as long as their model is based on the modern capitalist system---it will eventually self destruct. Consider, ---our capitalist system needs 2 things---1) cheap labor and 2) consumers. The reason cheap labor is required is because of inflation---the value of money is devalued over time because of interest. So---capitalist producers need to find cheap sources of labor all the time---otherwise goods are priced out and there wont be consumers. Without consumers there are no profits. The whole system is based on a viscous cycle of exploitation and over consumption. Any disruption of 1) or 2) and the system will encounter a problem. ....(and there may be signs that 1) cheap labor---might become a problem for China---it may need to go outside of China to find cheap labor...?....)
Human rights---The East, in general, may not have a great human rights record regardless of religion (Buddhists, Muslims, Hindus, Christians, others....) However, many are recent democracies and they have had to contend with a legacy of colonialism which had a worse human rights record than whatever is happening now....so it depends on perspective....?....Nevertheless, humanity should do better---that is a goal we should never lose sight of.
Also...it may appear that the West is doing good with human rights---but again---it may be a matter of perception---minorities, indigenous, immigrants, poor, "the other",....etc may have a different opinion of Western "human rights" record?
Comment
-
Originally posted by Stoic View PostIt doesn't seem to me that there is any significant difference between the following two positions:
1. The truth or falsity of moral propositions is dependent on the attitudes of people, but (at least some of) those attitudes are determined by objective facts about human nature. (a subset of ethical subjectivism)
2. Ethical sentences express propositions that refer to objective features of the world (that is, features independent of subjective opinion), some of which may be true to the extent that they report those features accurately. (moral realism)"I hate him passionately", he's "a demonic force" - Tucker Carlson, in private, on Donald Trump
"Every line of serious work that I have written since 1936 has been written, directly or indirectly, against totalitarianism and for democratic socialism" - George Orwell
"[Capitalism] as it exists today is, in my opinion, the real source of evils. I am convinced there is only one way to eliminate these grave evils, namely through the establishment of a socialist economy" - Albert Einstein
Comment
-
Originally posted by seer View PostEven if there were common moral themes across cultures (which there are) that does not demonstrate moral realism.
It could simply mean that the evolutionary process genetically predisposed us to particular behaviors.
One could say that it is an objective fact that men morally act in specific ways, and these acts are cross cultural.
But you can not leap to the claim that moral truths are objective...
...in the sense that they are true or valid independent of what anyone thinks.
As an example, if the majority of cultures and countries, came to believe that spousal rape was morally acceptable - it would be."I hate him passionately", he's "a demonic force" - Tucker Carlson, in private, on Donald Trump
"Every line of serious work that I have written since 1936 has been written, directly or indirectly, against totalitarianism and for democratic socialism" - George Orwell
"[Capitalism] as it exists today is, in my opinion, the real source of evils. I am convinced there is only one way to eliminate these grave evils, namely through the establishment of a socialist economy" - Albert Einstein
Comment
-
Originally posted by Starlight View PostWhy not? If there are common themes across cultures it demonstrates morality is not a matter of human whims, and is instead a product of / grounded in real facts about reality and humanity and does not vary arbitrarily beyond certain limits. The rest of your posts does not appear to supply any convincing arguments against this view.
Indeed, and if they did, those moral behaviors would then not depend on human whims or personal subjective preferences, but rather be shared by all humanity and a product of truths about the world and humanity. I would view the resultant morality as being objective and universal rather than subjective and arbitrary/whimsical.
Indeed, and hence I conclude morality is objective...
I'm putting cause and effect the other way around - morality in my view is not arising because the majority of people think a certain way. Rather the majority of people think a certain way because of underlying truths about the world and about humanity. The existence of moral truths causes multiple societies to acknowledge them.
If morality were different, one would expect the views of multiple societies to converge toward a different view. But morality isn't determined by their view. So your thought experiment doesn't show anything other than if morality were different, people would hold different views.
Last edited by seer; 04-18-2021, 07:03 AM.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 PostIf I follow that logic then the behaviors of rape, murder, greed, theft, fraud, etc... are also universal and objective since we find them in all cultures.
Nope, for something to be objective it must exist independent of the person or viewer.
No minds no morality. Ethics are not objective.
You don't get to change the definition of objective.
And like I said in the past, even if moral realism is true there are no enforcement mechanisms it would be functionally toothless."I hate him passionately", he's "a demonic force" - Tucker Carlson, in private, on Donald Trump
"Every line of serious work that I have written since 1936 has been written, directly or indirectly, against totalitarianism and for democratic socialism" - George Orwell
"[Capitalism] as it exists today is, in my opinion, the real source of evils. I am convinced there is only one way to eliminate these grave evils, namely through the establishment of a socialist economy" - Albert Einstein
Comment
-
Originally posted by Starlight View PostYou have applied my logic wrongly. I did not say a behavior is moral if found in all cultures, I said all cultures having a common core to their moral codes is indicative of the universality of those parts of the moral codes.
That definition seems false to me - you can have objectively true facts about humans. If the humans didn't exist, those facts about them would obviously not exist, but given humans exist, objective facts about humans exist.
expressing or dealing with facts or conditions as perceived without distortion by personal feelings, prejudices, or interpretations
Not dependent on the mind for existence; actual.
I don't think this line of argument is valid. But I would point out, once again, that your own view that locates morality in the nature and mind of God falls as badly victim to this line of attack as my own view does.
You don't.
I addressed that argument previously. Your objection was that it wasn't a response to your other argument.
Last edited by seer; 04-19-2021, 07:11 AM.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
-
Sorry, Quick question here:
"I have said that God's law is subjective to him (I disagree with MM and William Craig on this). But it is universal, authoritative, and absolute."-Seer
Is this what is referred to as Graded Absolutism?
Comment
-
Originally posted by Machinist View PostSorry, Quick question here:
"I have said that God's law is subjective to him (I disagree with MM and William Craig on this). But it is universal, authoritative, and absolute."-Seer
Is this what is referred to as Graded Absolutism?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 Machinist View Post
Would it be possible, in a nutshell, to briefly describe the difference?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 Hypatia_Alexandria, 04-17-2024, 08:31 AM
|
22 responses
103 views
0 likes
|
Last Post Yesterday, 12:28 PM | ||
Started by Neptune7, 04-15-2024, 06:54 AM
|
25 responses
150 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by Cerebrum123
04-17-2024, 08:31 AM
|
||
Started by whag, 04-09-2024, 01:04 PM
|
103 responses
560 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by tabibito
04-18-2024, 11:43 PM
|
||
Started by whag, 04-07-2024, 10:17 AM
|
39 responses
251 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by tabibito
04-12-2024, 02:58 PM
|
||
Started by whag, 03-27-2024, 03:01 PM
|
154 responses
1,017 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by whag
04-12-2024, 12:39 PM
|
Comment