On Moral Realism

[shunyadragon]

Shuny, does God, in your opinion, have any moral preferences concerning our behaviors?

Yes, that is the reason we have natural uniform evolved moral codes, ie the 7commandments, common to all the cultures since humans became human. God Created the Natural Laws and processes that determined the evolution of life, humanity and moral codes.There is also progressive Revelation where the standards for moral codes evolve through Revelation.

[seer]

Yes, that is the reason we have natural uniform evolved moral codes, ie the 7commandments, common to all the cultures since humans became human. God Created the Natural Laws and processes that determined the evolution of life, humanity and moral codes.There is also progressive Revelation where the standards for moral codes evolve through Revelation.

And can you list these seven commandments?

[shunyadragon]

And can you list these seven commandments?

I believe the reference provided listed the seven commandments. The following is another reference that addresses this:

[cite=https://today.yougov.com/topics/society/articles-reports/2019/10/29/atheists-agnostics-christians-ten-commandments]

Where Atheists, Agnostics, and Christians agree on the Ten Commandments

As the Christian story goes, the Ten Commandments of God were handed down to Moses as the set moral rules for humanity. Even in the 21st Century, these Biblical rules provide an ongoing foundation for what people deem acceptable in modern society. And while a majority of US adults say that most of the tenets remain important today, there are significant differences—and moments of consensus—between religious and non-religious Americans.

YouGov research indicates that US Adults overall are more likely to say every commandment is “an important principle to live by” rather than an unimportant principle. The top Commandments that are still accepted as important in America today: don’t murder (91%), don't steal (90%), don't bear false witness (88%), don't commit adultery (81%), honor father and mother (77%), and do not covet another person’s possessions (73%).

The least popular Commandment for modern significance is to keep the Sabbath holy (47%),

[Diogenes]

I believe the reference provided listed the seven commandments. The following is another reference that addresses this:

[cite=https://today.yougov.com/topics/society/articles-reports/2019/10/29/atheists-agnostics-christians-ten-commandments]

Where Atheists, Agnostics, and Christians agree on the Ten Commandments

As the Christian story goes, the Ten Commandments of God were handed down to Moses as the set moral rules for humanity. Even in the 21st Century, these Biblical rules provide an ongoing foundation for what people deem acceptable in modern society. And while a majority of US adults say that most of the tenets remain important today, there are significant differences—and moments of consensus—between religious and non-religious Americans.

YouGov research indicates that US Adults overall are more likely to say every commandment is “an important principle to live by” rather than an unimportant principle. The top Commandments that are still accepted as important in America today: don’t murder (91%), don't steal (90%), don't bear false witness (88%), don't commit adultery (81%), honor father and mother (77%), and do not covet another person’s possessions (73%).

The least popular Commandment for modern significance is to keep the Sabbath holy (47%),

So 10% of "agnostics" and "atheists" have no problem with murder? I would doubt the rest of those percentages.

[shunyadragon]

So 10% of "agnostics" and "atheists" have no problem with murder? I would doubt the rest of those percentages.

Selective dishonest miss reading the reference based on our biased agenda. Do you really consider yourself an agnostic?

[Diogenes]

Selective dishonest miss reading the reference based on our biased agenda.

My apologies, 9% of polled "agnostics" and "atheists" don't consider the commandment "don't murder" as important as, per your own source, only 91% consider it important.

Do you really consider yourself an agnostic?

I would accept the label of "agnostic". My beliefs and attitudes vary in strength. I consider "agnostic" as a mid-tier label. I would never call myself as an "atheist".

[shunyadragon]

My apologies, 9% of polled "agnostics" and "atheists" don't consider the commandment "don't murder" as important as, per your own source, only 91% consider it important.

Still remains an extremely onesided dishonest reading of the reference cited.

I would accept the label of "agnostic". My beliefs and attitudes vary in strength. I consider "agnostic" as a mid-tier label. I would never call myself as an "atheist".

Very slippery considering the nature and content of your posts.

[Diogenes]

Still remains an extremely onesided dishonest reading of the reference cited.

Saying so doesn't make it so. If 91% of those polled consider the commandment "don't murder" as important to say, then 9% don't consider it important

Very slippery considering the nature and content of your posts.

I have never given any indication otherwise so there is no slipperyness to the nature and content of my posts.

[shunyadragon]

Saying so doesn't make it so. If 91% of those polled consider the commandment "don't murder" as important to say, then 9% don't consider it important

Yes, but the polls did not define what the 9% believed. You are making an assumption based on your bias what the 9% believed.

It remains, your misrepresentation of the percentages of the polls reflects your bias. The polls simply reflect the fact that yes people of many diverse beliefs have variable moral codes.Seer and your failure to acknowledge the fact that moral codes are universal and natural with ALL human cultures on th ehistory of humanity regardless of whether they are Theist, atheist, non-theist.

I have never given any indication otherwise so there is no slipperyness to the nature and content of my posts.

I believe your selective interpretation of the poll reflects your slippery bias.

[Diogenes]

Yes, but the polls did not define what the 9% believed. You are making an assumption based on your bias what the 9% believed.

Either they agreed the commandment "don't murder" was still relevant or not. 91%. Said it was still relevant. Ergo the remaining per cent did not agree that the commandment "don't murder" was still relevant.

I believe your selective interpretation of the poll reflects your slippery bias.

Or that you disagree with basic logic because of the implications.

[shunyadragon]

Either they agreed the commandment "don't murder" was still relevant or not. 91%. Said it was still relevant. Ergo the remaining per cent did not agree that the commandment "don't murder" was still relevant.

Only relevant to the whole population and not one belief or another' belief

Or that you disagree with basic logic because of the implications.

The problem with logic is that it depends on the assumptions, and is often selfish circular logic to justify what one believes.

I will go with the facts that moral codes are universal and natural with ALL human cultures on the history of humanity regardless of whether they are Theist, atheist, non-theist. Also as with logic one's use of 'what are the implications?' are justified from one's own beliefs.

I do believe that morality and moral codes are ultimately universally part of the progressive evolution of humanity determined by God's Creation, but that is a blief, and as far as my argument goes, I go with the facts.

[shunyadragon]

Either they agreed the commandment "don't murder" was still relevant or not. 91%. Said it was still relevant. Ergo the remaining per cent did not agree that the commandment "don't murder" was still relevant.

Again . . . Only relevant to the whole population and not one belief or another' belief

Or that you disagree with basic logic because of the implications.

Read again and do not just see what you want to see, again . . .

The problem with logic is that it depends on the assumptions, and is often selfish circular logic to justify what one believes.

I will go with the facts that moral codes are universal and natural with ALL human cultures on the history of humanity regardless of whether they are Theist, atheist, non-theist. Also as with logic one's use of 'what are the implications?' are justified from one's own beliefs..

I do believe that morality and moral codes are ultimately universally part of the progressive evolution of humanity determined by God's Creation, but that is a blief, and as far as my argument goes, I go with the facts.

[seer]

I will go with the facts that moral codes are universal and natural with ALL human cultures on the history of humanity regardless of whether they are Theist, atheist, non-theist. Also as with logic one's use of 'what are the implications?' are justified from one's own beliefs.

If these codes are universal then why don't all men practice them. Why do individuals or groups or countries still murder, war, rape, steal, etc...?

[shunyadragon]

If these codes are universal then why don't all men practice them. Why do individuals or groups or countries still murder, war, rape, steal, etc...?

All the different cultures and religions ask this question and come up with their own rationalization why people violate moral codes, but the bottom line is the fallible human nature. Humans have always been very human since the first human walked the earth, and yes by the evidence our ancestors.

Of course moral codes are universal, but also the universal natural fallible human nature is apparent that humans fail to universally follow moral codes sometimes. Though moral codes do work enough for humans to survive and prosper, though likely prosper and reproduce to much.

One important point is moral codes are a product and reflect the nature of the culture and society, and not individuals standards of what they ought to do in response to culture's moral codes.

[seer]

All the different cultures and religions ask this question and come up with their own rationalization why people violate moral codes, but the bottom line is the fallible human nature. Humans have always been very human since the first human walked the earth, and yes by the evidence our ancestors.

Of course moral codes are universal, but also the universal natural fallible human nature is apparent that humans fail to universally follow moral codes sometimes. Though moral codes do work enough for humans to survive and prosper, though likely prosper and reproduce to much.

One important point is moral codes are a product and reflect the nature of the culture and society, and not individuals standards of what they ought to do in response to culture's moral codes.

So when the Maoist slaughters his political adversaries what moral code has he violated? And what difference does it make?