Lost your password? Questions? Email admin @ theologyweb.com
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!
This is the problem, not only will you not be able to demonstrate this objective standard - how do you then demonstrate that this standard is the morally correct one? Do we have a higher standard to by which we can judge those moral principles? And on and on. So instead of giving in to infinite regression you will have to claim that moral questions must stop somewhere - at this particular objective standard. But why not just stop at God's moral nature? And as far as I know moral truths only exist in, or are formulated, in minds - they have no independent existence.
The actual consequences if there is no moral realityNo one decides A misunderstanding of subjectivity
God is self-definied Charles, we know that God is good because he declares it so.
Just a few questions about this statement, seer.
- How do we know that God is self defined?
- Which self defined God are we talking about here?
- Do we know that he even exists?
- If we do not know that he exists, then how can we know that he is good or self defined?
- And even if he exists and declares that he is good, then how can we know?
- Why would you accept a circular statement about goodness in this context when circularity is a term used to describe a line of reasoning in which the conclusion is given beforehand?
- Is it right to claim knowledge about something that takes belief?
Charles, I'm not calling you a liar I'm saying you are deeply mistake, and wrong in your reasoning. Look lets cut to the chase - make a case here for a universal moral truth, any universal moral truth. The maxim you just referenced is not a universal truth it is one man's opinion on how we should view or practice ethics. Please make a deductive (non-circular) argument for an objective moral truth. Here, now. Thank you.
Charles you are free to reject my position, but logically a universal (omnipresent) Creator could embody universal moral truths. Especially in light of the fact that ethics are mind dependent. There is nothing implausible about that concept - now present yours...
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...
Tell me Charles, why did Kant need to appeal to a just God at the end of the road? And if all of humanity turned on itself tomorrow and destroyed itself would that be a universal moral wrong? Is our survival a universal moral good? And Charles you don't even buy into Kantian Ethics, you completely broke with his principle on lying, you jumped into the utilitarianism/consequentialism camp on that one. So you don't actually buy into his reasoning...
So what do we glean from this Charles - does this lead to the universal truth that all killing (of humans in this case) is wrong? Do you believe that?
And Charles you don't even buy into Kantian Ethics, you completely broke with his principle on lying, you jumped into the utilitarianism/consequentialism camp on that one. So you don't actually buy into his reasoning...
I did use the word consequence. Like Kant would say that the consequence of saying you can always lie is that it leads to a contradiction. You do not become a utlilitarianist for saying so. And by the way, i never claimed to follow Kant strictly.
Charles, I'm not calling you a liar I'm saying you are deeply mistake, and wrong in your reasoning. Look lets cut to the chase - make a case here for a universal moral truth, any universal moral truth. The maxim you just referenced is not a universal truth it is one man's opinion on how we should view or practice ethics. Please make a deductive (non-circular) argument for an objective moral truth. Here, now. Thank you.
I have already done so on told why it is the right way to do it and why it is possible.
But you reject that it is even possible. I go through lots of reasoning in order to explain why your "one man's opinion" does not hold. And then you ignore all of it and ask me to do something i have already done. So you will have to prove my line of reasoning wrong. You cannot just igore it. You should be able to realise the absurdity of asking me to do it. If what I presented was just "one man's opinion" then so would the next thing. But that line of reasoning is based on a misunderstanding which i made very clear. Read it and comment on it, instead of just ignoring it. http://www.theologyweb.com/campus/sh...l=1#post451896
By the way, you said a was lying. Don't try to run from it.
Charles you are free to reject my position, but logically a universal (omnipresent) Creator could embody universal moral truths. Especially in light of the fact that ethics are mind dependent. There is nothing implausible about that concept - now present yours...
Sheesh Charles that is the point - you don't even find Kant's reasoning compelling enough to follow through on it! For goodness sake man, you don't even find universal moral truths here!
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...
I have already done so on told why it is the right way to do it and why it is possible.
But you reject that it is even possible. I go through lots of reasoning in order to explain why your "one man's opinion" does not hold. And then you ignore all of it and ask me to do something i have already done. So you will have to prove my line of reasoning wrong. You cannot just igore it. You should be able to realise the absurdity of asking me to do it. If what I presented was just "one man's opinion" then so would the next thing. But that line of reasoning is based on a misunderstanding which i made very clear. Read it and comment on it, instead of just ignoring it. http://www.theologyweb.com/campus/sh...l=1#post451896
By the way, you said a was lying. Don't try to run from it.
If I actually accuse you of lying I apologize - I did not have that intent. But no where in your post did you actually attempt to make a real argument for a real universal moral truth. And no where did you tell us how ethical concepts could exist apart from a mind. I'm sorry Charles, I have limited time so let's focus.
Basically if what you point to is God's opinion as a foundation for moral truths, then no, that would not do. Sorry. But there is always hope.
Of course ethics are mind dependent, you use an example from Kant that you don't in the end even agree with - your subjective mind disagreed with his subjective mind.
Sheesh Charles that is the point - you don't even find Kant's reasoning compelling enough to follow through on it! For goodness sake man, you don't even find universal moral truths here!
As much as we can disagree I will have to give you that this point is rather funny :-)
On a more serious note:
- I have never claimed to follow Kant all the way
- I have just showed how it is not subjective opinion that is relevant to moral truth
Yes, I think His ethics are subjective to Him, they are His and He is the subject.
Subjective:
a: characteristic of or belonging to reality as perceived rather than as independent of mind:
b: relating to or being experience or knowledge as conditioned by personal mental characteristic or states
In other words God moral sense or moral law does not exist independently of Him.
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...
Yes, I think His ethics are subjective to Him, they are His and He is the subject.
In other words God moral sense or moral law does not exist independently of Him.
Well if we apply subjectivism to God, then God's subjectivism is the absolute objective truth.
. . . the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth; . . . -- Romans 1:16 KJV
. . . that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures; And that he was buried, and that he rose again the third day according to the scriptures: . . . -- 1 Corinthians 15:3-4 KJV
Whosoever believeth that Jesus is the Christ is born of God: . . . -- 1 John 5:1 KJV
Comment