Originally posted by seer
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
Philosophy 201 Guidelines
Cogito ergo sum
Here in the Philosophy forum we will talk about all the "why" questions. We'll have conversations about the way in which philosophy and theology and religion interact with each other. Metaphysics, ontology, origins, truth? They're all fair game so jump right in and have some fun! But remember...play nice!
Forum Rules: Here
Here in the Philosophy forum we will talk about all the "why" questions. We'll have conversations about the way in which philosophy and theology and religion interact with each other. Metaphysics, ontology, origins, truth? They're all fair game so jump right in and have some fun! But remember...play nice!
Forum Rules: Here
See more
See less
On Moral Realism
Collapse
X
-
Originally posted by shunyadragon View Post
I thought I would add that the necessity of the physical survival of the species being objectively necessary is the Objective foundation of the systems of morals, ethics and the 'Tule of Law,' are independent of the Subjectivism and exists independent of the mind.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
That makes no sense. Our survival is not necessary any more than the survival of the dinosaurs was necessary.
I disagree with much of these philosophical arguments arguments by their inherent subjective nature, because of the nature of these arguments they are not based on any sort of consistent objective evidence basis concerning the nature of the human species, and biased agendas abound. Though I have given concise and specific responses based on these philosophies the natural nature of being human trumps all. The conclusion that the extreme black or white conclusions of arguments from philosophies considered 'absolute' by some are not reliable in terms of philosophical perspectives.
. . . but, as a matter of fact our existence as well as life itself exists based on the necessity of survival through change and diversity in evolution, based on the adaption to the changing environment, whether you believe in God or not. If you are a Theistic Evolutionist like me, this constantly changing adaptive evolutionary process is necessary for the existence and survival pf our species and all of life on earth with a Created purpose. In the evolution of life diverse differences are a part of the natural course of life and the nature of humanity. The diverse differences in the morals, ethics and 'Rule of Law' is a part of the natural process of the evolution of human behavior to survive as a species. As with the necessity of physical and behavioral diversity naturally in life this is necessary for natural evolution of life and species to survive The consistency of the basic morals, ethics and 'Rules of Law' reflects the objectively necessity for humanity to survive
Comment
-
Originally posted by shunyadragon View Post
The diverse differences in the morals, ethics and 'Rule of Law' is a part of the natural process of the evolution of human behavior to survive as a species. As with the necessity of physical and behavioral diversity naturally in life this is necessary for natural evolution of life and species to survive The consistency of the basic morals, ethics and 'Rules of Law' reflects the objectively necessity for humanity to survive
2. 'Rule of law' can mean anything, from liberal Western states to totalitarian slave states. Like China or North Korea. So you are not saying anything.
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 shunyadragon View Post
This is a common response from the perspective of those with an extreme subjective religious agendaP1) If , then I win.
P2)
C) I win.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Diogenes View Post
The survival of the species Homo sapiens sapiens is not necessary. Now please show me my "extreme subjective religious agenda".
Sure the survival of the human species is not necessary from the greater natural perspective, but we exist and there are objective natural explanations we exist and physically and behaviorally evolved
First ALL religious argument down to the existence of God are subjective. Second, the issue of philosophical 'beliefs' such as objectivism subjectivism, moral realism definitely have a subjective religious perspective.
Comment
-
Originally posted by shunyadragon View Post
Addressed all of the above previously
Sure the survival of the human species is not necessary from the greater natural perspective, but we exist and there are objective natural explanations we exist and physically and behaviorally evolved.
Ethical subjectivism, as we have seen above, is the opposite of ethical objectivism. Subjectivism says that the moral values are dependent on a human or divine will, that they can change from one situation to another. Please note that a large majority of Christians, Jews, and Muslims believe in moral absolutism, which is a form of ethical objectivism. Also note that Buddhists may have a weaker definition of the law of karma. For some Buddhists it may simply mean that actions have consequences.
So do you agree that human morals and laws fall in the Ethical subjectivism camp?
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 PostGood so you agree that human survival is not necessary.
Ethical subjectivism, as we have seen above, is the opposite of ethical objectivism. Subjectivism says that the moral values are dependent on a human or divine will, that they can change from one situation to another. Please note that a large majority of Christians, Jews, and Muslims believe in moral absolutism, which is a form of ethical objectivism. Also note that Buddhists may have a weaker definition of the law of karma. For some Buddhists it may simply mean that actions have consequences.
So do you agree that human morals and laws fall in the Ethical subjectivism camp?
Comment
-
Originally posted by shunyadragon View Post
No reread my post and respond honestly
Ethical subjectivism, as we have seen above, is the opposite of ethical objectivism. Subjectivism says that the moral values are dependent on a human or divine will, that they can change from one situation to another. Please note that a large majority of Christians, Jews, and Muslims believe in moral absolutism, which is a form of ethical objectivism. Also note that Buddhists may have a weaker definition of the law of karma. For some Buddhists it may simply mean that actions have consequences.
No, again your posts are dishonest, selective and biased based on a subjective religious agenda.
In ethical objectivism moral values and virtues are intrinsic, not dependent on anything outside of them. In ethical objectivism moral law is uncreated and eternal and not subject to any will, divine or human. (One form of ethical objectivism is moral 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 Diogenes View Post
The survival of the species Homo sapiens sapiens is not necessary. Now please show me my "extreme subjective religious agenda".
Science is not based on either ethical objectivism not subjectivism.
Comment
-
Originally posted by shunyadragon View Post
Addressed all of the above previously
Sure the survival of the human species is not necessary from the greater natural perspective, but we exist and there are objective natural explanations we exist and physically and behaviorally evolved
Natural explanations of why people behave certain ways does not say why people should behave certain ways. You cannot derive an "ought" from an "is". Moral realism includes within it that moral properties have a real ontological existence and such properties are ontologically independent
.
First ALL religious argument down to the existence of God are subjective. Second, the issue of philosophical 'beliefs' such as objectivism subjectivism, moral realism definitely have a subjective religious perspective.
"Intrinsic value" contradiction in terms. Valuation is necessarily a function of minds and cannot be mind independent. "Intrinsic value", much like "objective value", is a red flag of ignorance.
Originally posted by shunyadragon View Post
Those of an extreme religious agenda do not consider the evolution of the survival of life and any species legitimate science that explains the nature of being human,
Science is not based on either ethical objectivism not subjectivism.Last edited by Diogenes; 03-22-2023, 02:33 PM.P1) If , then I win.
P2)
C) I win.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Diogenes View Post
Natural explanations of why people behave certain ways does not say why people should behave certain ways.
[quote[] You cannot derive an "ought" from an "is" [/quote]
True.
[quote]. Moral realism includes within it that moral properties have a real ontological existence and such properties are ontologically independent.
"Intrinsic value" contradiction in terms. Valuation is necessarily a function of minds and cannot be mind independent. "Intrinsic value", much like "objective value", is a red flag of ignorance.
Science cannot derive an "ought" from an "is".
Comment
-
Originally posted by Diogenes View Post
Natural explanations of why people behave certain ways does not say why people should behave certain ways.
You cannot derive an "ought" from an "is"
. Moral realism includes within it that moral properties have a real ontological existence and such properties are ontologically independent.
"Intrinsic value" contradiction in terms. Valuation is necessarily a function of minds and cannot be mind independent. "Intrinsic value", much like "objective value", is a red flag of ignorance.
Science cannot derive an "ought" from an "is".
Comment
-
Originally posted by seer View Post
Which is it? Is human survival necessary or not?
Please note what I said: First ALL religious argument down to the existence of God are subjective. Second, the issue of philosophical 'beliefs' such as objectivism subjectivism, moral realism definitely have a subjective religious perspective.
I just quoted your link! If you don't hold to Ethical subjectivism then you must hold Ethical objectivism...
Which is it?Last edited by shunyadragon; 03-22-2023, 08:47 PM.
Comment
Related Threads
Collapse
Topics | Statistics | Last Post | ||
---|---|---|---|---|
Started by shunyadragon, 03-01-2024, 09:40 AM
|
172 responses
606 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by seer
04-15-2024, 11:55 AM
|
Comment