There is No Morality Without God (page 9)

PSacramento

But seriously, you have actually done a lot with these conversations. By talking to you, I no longer dismiss or presume to know what someone believes. I now recognize that you have given things a great deal of deep thought--and I don't want to change you, unless you make that change on your own. But like anything, if we think we are onto something, we have this desire to present the possibility and the proof.

I don't think I can ever stop believing in God but if anything I say helps people to be more tolerant and loving of each other, regardless of beliefs, I would be a very happy camper :)

That's an incredibly simple and black and white view of how people percieve morality. Things that are only right under every given circumstance? The ones throwing the acid think it's right to do so because a woman shouldn't get an education, not because throwing acid is a generally acceptable thing to do. Are they a woman getting an education? No, then why would it be ok to throw acid in their face? Jesus overturned the tables of the moneychangers in the temple, would jesus want his table overturned if he was selling things in the temple? You see why that doesn't work? Even a simple view of morality is situational. That in a given situation it may be ok to do something to some one that you don't want done to yourself, much of morality and ethics is dedicated to sussing out what these sitations are, and how to handle them. Your view simply conflates morality with self preservation, or a survival instinct.

It's impossible to create a clear working evident view of objective morality in the world without using tautologies or weak platitudes. Even at the end of your post you resort to the old "We all know what's right, we just don't all obey it." Which is a cop out that can be applied to any and every moral system.

Also as a side note, the vikings did think it was ok to kill them in battle, that was in fact their greatest goal. To kill others, and then be killed so that they could go to valhalla. So were they moral because they obeyed the golden rule? Or did they march to the beat of a different moral drum?

Edit: Newchapter beat me to it, and added to it with pirates. There are probably countless more examples of cultures where they wanted things done to them that we would consider immoral or unpleasant.

bioflex

Forgive me for just this one but it kind of add to what we are discussing

@bohm: the link you posted, do you really believe that? oh now i know, i guess it easy to graps things like this and accept them as truth.

humans share the same ancestory with chimpanzees and gorillas alike and that is it. One would think we could even share some moral codes since we are related no?.

unshackled

Bioflex doesn't seem worth argueing with.

JonathanH nailed it. He's either a troll or completely incapable of reason and logic. This is already clear with the "humans came from chimps" comment on here, but if you're not already convinced there's this thread with some real gems from Bio...(such as 'why haven't we evolved into angels yet?')

http://www.jehovahs-witness.net/watchtower/beliefs/215053/2/Awake-November-2011-correct-cover

PSacramento

I tend to disagree here PS. At least with the Norse. They believed that a death in battle was the most honorable, and it gave them a place in Valhalla where they would drink mead with the gods. While I'm sure death itself wasn't pleasant, they would much rather die by an axe being driven into their skull in battle than to die the peaceful death of an old man. That was the worst.

Ok, but there is nothing wrong in an honorable death, and you wont find that notion in any culture either.

Rape however, as an example, is something else. No viking would think tha HIS woman or mother or daughter being raped and killed was right.

Pirates are another example. They had their code, and when their code turned on them, they generally accepted it as right.

Pirate code?

bioflex

@unshackled : welcome to the discussion, well i could consider the likes of you incapable of reason and logic too u know. perhaps things like this makes perfect sence to you

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wh0F4FBLJRE

@Psacramento : u nailed it pretty much. I guess whatever we choose to believe as individuals come from sources we dont even know if are trustworthy or not. Who knows if the idea of God was all the plotting of someone. or perhaps misconceptions have let to the belief of evolution.

But one thing stands straight, why does Ushackled and the rest consider me incapable of reason just because i dont accpet their view of life? its not as if anyone existed 6 million years ago to document all they believe now, yet they consider themselves to be right and me a deluded.

I guess life in its self has a hand in the direction of human morality, i for one consider homosexuality as morally incorrect and that is because of my beliefs, but what about the person who does not share my beliefs?

NewChapter

I wish I could give more details on this PS---but they had laws. It's just been a long time since I looked into this. They had laws and methods. And while they would be incredibly brutal with others---they also would not complain when that brutality was used on them. It didn't mean they didn't hurt or weren't negative, but they would take it as it was the right thing. Complaining was not an option.

Think of the dub that get's disfellowshipped but still believes. Shunning is not pleasant for them, but they buy into that code. Even THEY think it is best. They have done it themselves, and now they understand that it also applies to them. I have known SO MANY that claimed DF'ing and shunning were the best things that happened to them.

Sort of like that.

NC

leavingwt

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iUi67LUyDxk

JonathanH

You're just making up the rules of morality now to find something good in the situation. Which shows how flexible morality is. The norse viewed it as an honorable death, but the reality is they were trying to kill people and got killed. There isn't much "honor" (from our moral perspective) in what they were doing or wanted. We aren't talking about a burglar in their home and they died defending their family. We are talking about being the burglar and getting killed. If somebody broke into your house with the intent to kill you, steal your goods, and rape your family, and you shot them, would you be immoral for doing so? and would you say that burglar died an honorable death? And also which innate objective moral systems that we all share make the answer for the first two answers correct?

Which leads to the question, what is this objective moral code that we all agree on, but refuse to obey? It can't even be something as simple as "do to others as you want done to yourself" because as has been shown, even that will lead to problems depending on the culture.

As for the rape aspect, that is for one moving the goal posts. Now that we've shown that murder can be thrown into the golden rule and still work, we'll just say having one's daughters raped crosses that moral line. Except again, the bible gives us examples of that not being such a big deal either. Exodus 21:7 deals with the proper way to sell your daughter to men that are allowed to use her as a sex slave. Of course this in in the era of extreme mysogeny where arranged marriage and all sorts of disgusting things were the norm. But that kind of goes to the point doesn't it, in their culture selling your daughter to men who may force them to marry their sons was perfectly ok, and moral. They didn't ignore some moral sense that told them how horrible it would be for their daughter, they just bought and sold women.

When a man sells his daughter as a slave, she will not be freed at the end of six years as the men are. If she does not please the man who bought her, he may allow her to be bought back again. But he is not allowed to sell her to foreigners, since he is the one who broke the contract with her. And if the slave girl's owner arranges for her to marry his son, he may no longer treat her as a slave girl, but he must treat her as his daughter. If he himself marries her and then takes another wife, he may not reduce her food or clothing or fail to sleep with her as his wife. If he fails in any of these three ways, she may leave as a free woman without making any payment

NewChapter

Bioflex, your posts came off incredibly preachy with no room for discussion. You stated absolutes---God kicked adam and eve out of the garden for immorality. Period. It is our experience that when someone opens like that (we don't even know you) that you have come here to preach. And if you came with the purpose of spreading a message, we have learned that arguing is fruitless. You had negative things to say immediately about how some of us look at the world, with science, and your statements betrayed a certain ignorance of the process. Again we have learned that those that come out criticizing without really having a grasp on what they are criticizing generally are here to save souls, and we get very tired of that. If we have read you wrong, just prove it to us, and we will converse.

Yes, the current understanding is that chimps and humans share a common ancestor. We branched off so to speak. But comparing chimps to humans can be problematic if done simply because it ignores millions more years of evolution. The branch that became US followed an exciting and complex journey.

NC

There is No Morality Without God

Share this