A Challenge for Moral Realists
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
03-01-2016, 07:06 PM
RE: A Challenge for Moral Realists
(03-01-2016 06:59 PM)Tomasia Wrote:  The same can be said about atheists here, most of whom I have difficulty empathizing with, finding any common set of personal experiences, and only exacerbated by the fact that our interactions are limited to the internet. I'll have as much of a difficulty in getting you, of understanding the bald man that lives on what seems to be farm, with an impecible fashion sense, as you would this brown kid who grew up in a city, as a child of poor immigrants.

Do you really think that you can't relate to people on any level other than belief or non?

You seem like a smart guy...why do two (or more) people have to have similar backgrounds to be able to relate to one another? I get that some things are easier to understand with less explanation if your experiences are the same but we are talking about being able to interact with people...all people differ from all other people in some way.

I am disappointed.

See here they are the bruises some were self-inflicted and some showed up along the way. - JF
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Anjele's post
03-01-2016, 07:06 PM
RE: A Challenge for Moral Realists
(03-01-2016 06:48 PM)GirlyMan Wrote:  
(03-01-2016 06:42 PM)Tomasia Wrote:  That a person who claims that torturing babies just for fun is wrong, is no more correct, than a person who claims that Bob Dylan is a better musician than Justin Bieber.

Making up ridiculous analogies on the fly which just happen to pop into my head is just mental masturbation. Read this and then maybe we will have something concrete to discuss.

I think the better book to read here, is Alasdair Macintyre's After Virtue, which argues that our language of morality is in grave disorder, that is all just one set of incoherencies after the next.

The Wikipedia summary will do:

"It begins with an allegory suggestive of the premise of the science-fiction novel A Canticle for Leibowitz: a world where all sciences have been dismantled quickly and completely. MacIntyre asks what the sciences would look like if they were re-assembled from the remnants of scientific knowledge that survived the catastrophe. He claims that the new sciences, though superficially similar to the old, would in fact be devoid of real scientific content, because the key suppositions and attitudes would not be present. "The hypothesis which I wish to advance," he continues, "is that in the actual world which we inhabit the language of morality is in the same state of grave disorder as the language of natural science in the imaginary world which I described."[2] Specifically, MacIntyre applies this hypothesis to advance the notion that the moral structures that emerged from the Enlightenment were philosophically doomed from the start because they were formed using the aforementioned incoherent language of morality. MacIntyre claims that this failure encompasses the work of many significant Enlightenment and post-Enlightenment moral philosophers, including Kierkegaard, Marx, Kant, and Hume. These philosophers "fail because of certain shared characteristics deriving from their highly specific historical background."[2]:51 That background is the Enlightenment's abandonment of Aristotelianism, and in particular the Aristotelian concept of teleology. Ancient and medieval ethics, argues MacIntyre, relied wholly on the teleological idea that human life had a proper end or character, and that human beings could not reach this natural end without preparation. Renaissance science rejected Aristotle's teleological physics as an incorrect and unnecessary account, which led Renaissance philosophy to make a similar rejection in the realm of ethics. But shorn of teleology, ethics as a body of knowledge was expurgated of its central content, and only remained as, essentially, a vocabulary list with few definitions and no context. With such an incomplete framework on which to base their moral understanding, the philosophers of the Enlightenment and their successors were doomed from the beginning."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/After_Virtue

"Tell me, muse, of the storyteller who has been thrust to the edge of the world, both an infant and an ancient, and through him reveal everyman." ---Homer the aged poet.

"In Him was life, and the life was the Light of men. The Light shines in the darkness, and the darkness did not comprehend it."
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
03-01-2016, 07:09 PM (This post was last modified: 03-01-2016 07:13 PM by GirlyMan.)
RE: A Challenge for Moral Realists
(03-01-2016 06:59 PM)Tomasia Wrote:  The same can be said about atheists here, most of whom I have difficulty empathizing with, finding any common set of personal experiences, ...

You do realize that many of the atheists here were indoctrinated into religion from an early age and have substantial insight into the respective denominations we were taught, right? You reckon you got some special knowledge I don't?

(03-01-2016 06:59 PM)Tomasia Wrote:  I'll have as much of a difficulty in getting you, of understanding the bald man that lives on what seems to be farm, with an impecible fashion sense, as you would this brown kid who grew up in a city, as a child of poor immigrants.

How about a poor white kid who grew up in the ghetto? Can you feel me now?

#sigh
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like GirlyMan's post
03-01-2016, 07:10 PM
RE: A Challenge for Moral Realists
doublemint gum

#sigh
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
03-01-2016, 07:12 PM (This post was last modified: 03-01-2016 07:19 PM by GirlyMan.)
RE: A Challenge for Moral Realists
(03-01-2016 07:06 PM)Tomasia Wrote:  
(03-01-2016 06:48 PM)GirlyMan Wrote:  Making up ridiculous analogies on the fly which just happen to pop into my head is just mental masturbation. Read this and then maybe we will have something concrete to discuss.

I think the better book to read here, is Alasdair Macintyre's After Virtue, which argues that our language of morality is in grave disorder, that is all just one set of incoherencies after the next.

Instead of continuing to evade and distract and attempt to deflect, why don't you just read Hume and come back and talk and then I will read your suggestion and come back and talk. Fair? Or do you think my reading suggestions are not deserving of your consideration?

#sigh
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
03-01-2016, 07:19 PM (This post was last modified: 03-01-2016 07:22 PM by Stevil.)
RE: A Challenge for Moral Realists
(03-01-2016 06:59 PM)Tomasia Wrote:  Stevil lives in NZ, we've had plenty of discussions between us, that what I said is neither presumptuous or arrogant, but likely to be factually correct.
What you have said is factually incorrect. Even though I live in NZ, I am surrounded by people that believe in imaginary invisible undetectable magical creature which they call their god. As ridiculous as it is, it is apparantly true that these adults have this imaginary relationship and imagine having a one way relationship with "him".
I personally have a few friends that self identify as Christians, and my wife has a good friend who is a Muslim. My wife's parents are Buddhists, my sister in-law's husband is Catholic. My neighbor is Orthodox Christian. I work with a great deal of people from various beliefs. My kid's friend's parents whom I interact with hold onto a variety of beliefs.

I have never read the bible and I have never been to a church sermon, I have had enough conversations both online and in person to know that many Christians believe that the bible is the inspired word of god.

Hell, just do a google search on "is the bible the inspired word of god" Many, many, many Christians believe this to be the case. Christianity is an umbrella term that covers a huge amount of beliefs in a personal god under the guise of the name "Jesus" (which by the way was not the name of the guy that was supposedly written about).
Tomasia doesn't even belong to a church, he is a ministry of one, his religion is of his making although he adopts the bible as inspiration and the name "Jesus" as a focus and desires to call himself a "Christian".
Just the fact that you do not believe that the bible is the inspired word of god seperates you and your beliefs from that of many Christians.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Stevil's post
03-01-2016, 07:22 PM
RE: A Challenge for Moral Realists
(03-01-2016 07:06 PM)Anjele Wrote:  Do you really think that you can't relate to people on any level other than belief or non?

You seem like a smart guy...why do two (or more) people have to have similar backgrounds to be able to relate to one another? I get that some things are easier to understand with less explanation if your experiences are the same but we are talking about being able to interact with people...all people differ from all other people in some way.

I am disappointed.

I think it has almost next to nothing to do with belief or unbelief, and almost exclusively to do with differences in backgrounds. That things like ethnic background, and experiences have more to do with this divide than a belief or lack of belief in God.

If your white american christian, or ex-christian, your lens of christianity is likely to be through that paritcular history and set of experiences, a christianity tied to a political structure, and history, unique sets of values, and perspectives, quite distinct from my own, of those of my community.

I have no relationship to that. You descriptions of your parents, your family, uncles, spouses, etc... find little parallel between my own. You see a history of Christianity tied to men endorsing Guns, and Confederate flags, who strung black folks on lynching trees. Where as my history connects me to that of slave spirituals, of the victims of western violence, more so than the perpetuators.

It's not that I don't want to empathize, I don't know how to, because it all seems so alien to me, and this is only exacerbated by the fact these interactions are solely on the internet.

"Tell me, muse, of the storyteller who has been thrust to the edge of the world, both an infant and an ancient, and through him reveal everyman." ---Homer the aged poet.

"In Him was life, and the life was the Light of men. The Light shines in the darkness, and the darkness did not comprehend it."
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
03-01-2016, 07:23 PM
RE: A Challenge for Moral Realists
(03-01-2016 07:19 PM)Stevil Wrote:  Even though I live in NZ, I am surrounded by people that believe in imaginary invisible undetectable magical creature which they call their god.

Is it the Maori? Tell me it's the Maori. Big Grin

#sigh
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
03-01-2016, 07:25 PM
RE: A Challenge for Moral Realists
(03-01-2016 07:06 PM)Anjele Wrote:  
(03-01-2016 06:59 PM)Tomasia Wrote:  The same can be said about atheists here, most of whom I have difficulty empathizing with, finding any common set of personal experiences, and only exacerbated by the fact that our interactions are limited to the internet. I'll have as much of a difficulty in getting you, of understanding the bald man that lives on what seems to be farm, with an impecible fashion sense, as you would this brown kid who grew up in a city, as a child of poor immigrants.

Do you really think that you can't relate to people on any level other than belief or non?

You seem like a smart guy...why do two (or more) people have to have similar backgrounds to be able to relate to one another? I get that some things are easier to understand with less explanation if your experiences are the same but we are talking about being able to interact with people...all people differ from all other people in some way.

I am disappointed.

Right, I am a white American of Germanic ancestry, and have chosen to live in the Dominican Republic where 80 per cent of the people are of African descent. I can live, love and interact with them though Spanish is my third language.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
03-01-2016, 07:28 PM (This post was last modified: 03-01-2016 07:35 PM by Anjele.)
RE: A Challenge for Moral Realists
(03-01-2016 07:22 PM)Tomasia Wrote:  
(03-01-2016 07:06 PM)Anjele Wrote:  Do you really think that you can't relate to people on any level other than belief or non?

You seem like a smart guy...why do two (or more) people have to have similar backgrounds to be able to relate to one another? I get that some things are easier to understand with less explanation if your experiences are the same but we are talking about being able to interact with people...all people differ from all other people in some way.

I am disappointed.

I think it has almost next to nothing to do with belief or unbelief, and almost exclusively to do with differences in backgrounds. That things like ethnic background, and experiences have more to do with this divide than a belief or lack of belief in God.

If your white american christian, or ex-christian, your lens of christianity is likely to be through that paritcular history and set of experiences, a christianity tied to a political structure, and history, unique sets of values, and perspectives, quite distinct from my own, of those of my community.

I have no relationship to that. You descriptions of your parents, your family, uncles, spouses, etc... find little parallel between my own. You see a history of Christianity tied to men endorsing Guns, and Confederate flags, who strung black folks on lynching trees. Where as my history connects me to that of slave spirituals, of the victims of western violence, more so than the perpetuators.

It's not that I don't want to empathize, I don't know how to, because it all seems so alien to me, and this is only exacerbated by the fact these interactions are solely on the internet.

I grew up in Iowa...didn't see a Confederate flag in real life till I moved to SC as an adult.

One side of my family is southern, however they are from an isolated island that was not like the Tara you describe. My grandmother wouldn't make the black men who came to work eat outside, as was the law of the state. She had better principles and morals than that.

If your mind is so closed that you can't accept that I and no one else here ever owned slaves there is no hope for open discourse with you. Get over your victim self.

You really do disappoint.

See here they are the bruises some were self-inflicted and some showed up along the way. - JF
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Anjele's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: