Welfare
-
Then Jbluhm86 I would remind you that your morals are nothing more than a figment of your own imagination no different than an atheist view of religion.
And that you could no better defend your set of morals against reality and human nature than a man of faith can defend his belief in God's will.
WSS
-
How do you see them as a "figure of the imagination" as opposed to having genetic and social reasons?
It's pretty hard to find something that makes sense with the same level of support as "God's will"... Which is none
-
Simply because you can make up your own morals. Doesn't matter if I agree or if anyone else agrees.
Lets say you are married and have the opportunity to sleep with a hot chick and never get caught.
(I'm sure there are dozens of similar examples)
Whatever you decide to do is your decision a moral one?
I don't think you can give me a scientific answer for either decision that I'm going to buy any more than the Bible.
WSS
-
I know this whole 'morals make no more sense than the bible' thing is your pet at the moment, but I maintain you're wrong, for the reasons discussed before (objective/subjective morality).
-
I know this whole 'morals make no more sense than the bible' thing is your pet at the moment, but I maintain you're wrong, for the reasons discussed before (objective/subjective morality).
I know this whole 'morals make no more sense than the bible' thing is your pet at the moment, but I maintain you're wrong, for the reasons discussed before (objective/subjective morality).
If it's not objective, it isn't real. You are just angry because you want your opinion of morality to be true.
If right and wrong is different in every situation depending on your whim then right and wrong doesn't actually exist.
No matter how much you wish or believe. No matter how much faith you have in your own judgement.
WSS
-
I'm not sure how I came across as angry?
The point that was made is there is such a thing as objective morality, and you can probably quantify it if you tried by sampling a sufficiently large number of people from different walks of life and cultures.
-
I'm not sure how I came across as angry?
The point that was made is there is such a thing as objective morality, and you can probably quantify it if you tried by sampling a sufficiently large number of people from different walks of life and cultures.
I'm not sure how I came across as angry?
The point that was made is there is such a thing as objective morality, and you can probably quantify it if you tried by sampling a sufficiently large number of people from different walks of life and cultures.
Upset, disgruntled pick your poison. May be frustrated that you can't really prove the point you really want to make?
I shouldn't even waste my time with ridiculous examples but since it still seems to mean a lot to some of the guys on the left let's take slavery which was an accepted practice a long long time ago.
So since at the time whoever was being sold as slaves were considered lesser in value as human beings.
If even 51% of society agreed with that is it now the morally correct thing?
If yes my point is proven.
WSS
www.westsidesteve.com www.myspace.com/westsidestevemusic www.cdbaby.com/artist/westsidestevesimmons -
You see I'm not saying there is a God upon which we base morality. But basing it on Him is no better or worse than just making it up.
WSS
-
I've always viewed the global concept of morals as what the controlling faction will allow. On an individual level I've always linked morality to the concept of conscience, that gut feeling you know something is wrong and if you never get that feeling you probably have no moral compass. so you must rely on the global concept or risk consequence.
-
I'm not sure how I came across as angry?
The point that was made is there is such a thing as objective morality, and you can probably quantify it if you tried by sampling a sufficiently large number of people from different walks of life and cultures.
Upset, disgruntled pick your poison. May be frustrated that you can't really prove the point you really want to make?
I shouldn't even waste my time with ridiculous examples but since it still seems to mean a lot to some of the guys on the left let's take slavery which was an accepted practice a long long time ago.
So since at the time whoever was being sold as slaves were considered lesser in value as human beings.
If even 51% of society agreed with that is it now the morally correct thing?
If yes my point is proven.
WSS
Upset, disgruntled pick your poison. May be frustrated that you can't really prove the point you really want to make?
I shouldn't even waste my time with ridiculous examples but since it still seems to mean a lot to some of the guys on the left let's take slavery which was an accepted practice a long long time ago.
So since at the time whoever was being sold as slaves were considered lesser in value as human beings.
If even 51% of society agreed with that is it now the morally correct thing?
If yes my point is proven.
WSS
Given that a handful of slave owners would own hundreds or thousands of slaves, I highly doubt the approval rating of slavery among the populace reached anything close to 51%.
Given that voting was restricted to land owners and the like - those that typically owned the slaves - it shouldn't come as a shock to learn that it was considered fine by the voters.
-
Actually given the fact that slavery was a common practice among just about every social group in the world for thousands of years before the Civil War...
WSS
-
Still is in the Islamic world
Hello! It looks like you're interested in this conversation, but you don't have an account yet.
Getting fed up of having to scroll through the same posts each visit? When you register for an account, you'll always come back to exactly where you were before, and choose to be notified of new replies (either via email, or push notification). You'll also be able to save bookmarks and upvote posts to show your appreciation to other community members.
With your input, this post could be even better 💗
Register Login