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
Atheism And Moral Progress
Collapse
X
-
Originally posted by Electric Skeptic View PostDo you mean moral relativism? If so, I've never seen a good argument for anything else.
They are generally moral realists.
That moral progress is relative does not mean it's not real progress.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. Who decides what real moral progress is?
Comment
-
Originally posted by Tassman View PostIn the broadest sense 'moral progress' is determined on the basis of the greatest, most comprehensive justice that's available for all. .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 PostNo moral realism, you said: I think it's important to note that some atheists hold that there is an objective morality...
They are generally moral realists.
Originally posted by seer View PostThat makes no sense. Who decides what real moral progress is?
I sometimes find it useful to compare morality with beauty. Both lie in the "eye of the beholder". You might thing something moral while I think it immoral, the same way you might thing some scene (a sunset, or mountains, or whatever) to be plain, while I think it beautiful. Nevertheless, nobody thinks that because of beauty's subjectivity, it is a useless or worthless concept, and in many spheres (architecture, art, music) we strive toward beauty, even though it's subjective. And we might well (largely) agree that we have, in some particular avenue or endeavour, made progress toward beauty, despite some people disagreeing. I've no personal doubt that Beethoven's 5th is beautiful, and that the world in general is more beautiful because that piece of music exists in it. You might hate it. But there's no misunderstanding what I mean when I say that it is beautiful, and nobody would fail to understand why I think it beautiful, even if they do not, and nobody thinks that me calling it beautiful is meaningless.
But can we ever determine that we (the world collectively, or that particular artist, or the other one over there) made "real progress" toward beauty? Only on a subjective basis. Beethoven made real progress toward it (IMO), as we (as a society) made real progress toward morality when we legalised same sex marriage. If you say that you disagree with either of those then fair enough. I don't believe that either you or I can be wrong on either of those points.
Does that make sense?Last edited by Electric Skeptic; 08-29-2020, 03:48 PM.America - too good to let the conservatives drag it back to 1950.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Electric Skeptic View PostBut can we ever determine that we (the world collectively, or that particular artist, or the other one over there) made "real progress" toward beauty? Only on a subjective basis. Beethoven made real progress toward it (IMO), as we (as a society) made real progress toward morality when we legalised same sex marriage. If you say that you disagree with either of those then fair enough. I don't believe that either you or I can be wrong on either of those points.
Does that make sense?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 PostSo real progress is subjective. Then something is only real progress if I agree with it. For instance I see homosexual behavior as moral regression - back to animalistic, carnal behavior. And if neither of us can't be wrong then there is no universal standard fore moral progress. Hence - it does not exist.
And regarding your signature - no, it's not. I have plenty of hope, and I sure have lots of things to do before my execution.America - too good to let the conservatives drag it back to 1950.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Electric Skeptic View PostIt exists just like beautification exists - it's just subjective.
And regarding your signature - no, it's not. I have plenty of hope, and I sure have lots of things to do before my execution.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 there is no universal moral standard to move toward then how do you know when there is progress?
Originally posted by seer View PostI suspect that in your more quite moments you know it is all hopeless in the end.America - too good to let the conservatives drag it back to 1950.
Comment
-
Originally posted by seer View PostSo real progress is subjective. Then something is only real progress if I agree with it. For instance I see homosexual behavior as moral regression - back to animalistic, carnal behavior. And if neither of us can't be wrong then there is no universal standard fore moral progress. Hence - it does not exist.
But I agree, it's subjective. (But I think morality is subjective, so that's hardly a problem.) So what I see as progress, you might see as regression.
Comment
-
Originally posted by seer View PostAccording to whom?
Comment
-
Originally posted by Electric Skeptic View PostTHe same way I know what is morally wrong or right.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 Stoic View PostBut I agree, it's subjective. (But I think morality is subjective, so that's hardly a problem.) So what I see as progress, you might see as regression.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 PostAll you are saying is that if you agree with a moral position that is real progress.
But if I see a series of moral positions that over time get closer and closer to my own, that is progress, in my opinion.
But to the Nazi eliminating the Jewish race is real progress. Who is right and why?
Comment
Related Threads
Collapse
Topics | Statistics | Last Post | ||
---|---|---|---|---|
Started by shunyadragon, 03-01-2024, 09:40 AM
|
173 responses
649 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by shunyadragon
06-07-2024, 07:30 AM
|
Comment