An introspective look at moral theology
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
02-07-2014, 02:12 AM (This post was last modified: 02-07-2014 04:47 AM by DLJ.)
RE: An introspective look at moral theology
(01-07-2014 08:40 PM)δοῦλος Wrote:  
(01-07-2014 08:26 PM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  You can't possibly be THAT stupid.

why do you say that?

This sounds like a familiar line of argument

Consider

:goes off to check something:

EDIT: Yup, I thought so. Bye, bye Jeremy!

Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes DLJ's post
02-07-2014, 02:23 AM
RE: An introspective look at moral theology
(01-07-2014 08:27 PM)Revenant77x Wrote:  
(01-07-2014 08:26 PM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  You can't possibly be THAT stupid.

I don't know about that. Some people are exceptionally stupid.

This

"If you want a happy ending, that depends, of course, on where you stop your story." Orson Welles
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
02-07-2014, 02:51 AM
RE: An introspective look at moral theology
(01-07-2014 07:56 PM)δοῦλος Wrote:  if there is no God, what reason is there why people should not live however they want?

Read history and find out. Read about Julius Caesar, Calicugula and the other Roman Claudian Emperors all of whom lived exactly the way they wanted and ended up being murdered because people hated them so much.

When you take an approach to life which is self centred, selfish, hedonistic and "wanton" for want of a better word, history suggests that you become disliked.

Reason, thererfore, suggests that it is better to lead a life based on some moral code which approximates the Golden Rule or Kant's Categoriacal Imperative and those leaders such as the Flavian Emperors who tended towards this view were liked and had better lives and longer lives than their predecessors.

That's the problem around here. Not only are there a lot of people who don't like relgion but there are also a lot who don't care about ethics or history either.

Being an atheist is not an excuse for a dissolute life where anything goes and having the intelligence to see through religion should mean that one has the intelligence also to see that morality has nothing to do with a "big" being having created the world or that being using some kind of threat to make people "behave".

The argument that we need a big being to make us do right is treating humans as being not much smarter than dogs. That may apply to some people but I can decide whether to steal or not, commit crime or not, lie or not without reference to how the universe was created or whether there are superior beings "out there". I don't need "them" or any one to offer me a reward of eternal life or any other illusory benefit in order to treat people properly and be a decent, thinking human being.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Deltabravo's post
02-07-2014, 04:46 AM (This post was last modified: 02-07-2014 04:51 AM by DLJ.)
RE: An introspective look at moral theology
(01-07-2014 09:26 AM)goodwithoutgod Wrote:  ...
John Paul II said that social sins are “collective behavior of certain social groups, big or small, or even of whole nations or blocks of nations” (Mueller 258). Social sin becomes personal sin of individuals through complicity, indifference, or reluctance of those in a position to exert influence for change who do not do so (Mueller 258).
...

This is the bit I didn't know.

So what is the penalty for 'social sin'?

The recent court cases spring to mind. I guess the old pope, who knew of the rapes, has committed this social sin and will be asked to do more prayer or similar.

That'll stop him doing it again!

In the branch of ethics that concerns me (businesses and services) I have been wondering about this aspect.

Societally (I don't think I should be adverbising that word (or verbing that one)), I don't think, for example, moderates (feminists, christians, atheists, whoever) can be held accountable for the actions of the extremists... so I am not in accord with Sam Harris and others.
Perhaps they provide a 'cloak of respectability' but I do not think they are can be held to account.

In business, if you see the guy in the next cubicle downloading porn when that is against the code of conduct so to do that you signed up to when you joined the company, I do not think you are obliged to report it.

If however, the code of conduct (that you signed up to) states that you are obliged to report it, and you do not, then you have committed this 'social sin'.

Does the Cafia-membership terms-of-agreement state the personal obligation on this?

Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes DLJ's post
02-07-2014, 05:02 AM
RE: An introspective look at moral theology
(01-07-2014 07:56 PM)δοῦλος Wrote:  if there is no God, what reason is there why people should not live however they want?

"Our moral consciousness is part of our subconscience, which we cannot change as we please. We approve or disapprove because we cannot do otherwise."

"Owing to their exceptional importantance for human welfare, the facts of the moral consciousness are emphasied in much higher degree than would be ordinary subjective facts."

"As clearness and distinctness of the conception of an object easily produces the belief in it's truth, so the intensity of a moral emotion makes him who feels it disposed to objectivize the moral estimate to which it gives rise, in other words, to assign to it universal validity."

"There are different degrees of badness and goodness, a duty may be more or less stringent, and merit may be smaller or greater. These quantitative differences are due to the emotional origin of basic moral concepts. "
(Edward Westermarck )
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
02-07-2014, 05:25 PM
RE: An introspective look at moral theology
(02-07-2014 02:12 AM)DLJ Wrote:  
(01-07-2014 08:40 PM)δοῦλος Wrote:  why do you say that?

This sounds like a familiar line of argument

Consider

:goes off to check something:

EDIT: Yup, I thought so. Bye, bye Jeremy!

wow, he actually made a sock puppet account to try to derail my moral thread? that is pretty lame.

"Belief is so often the death of reason" - Qyburn, Game of Thrones

"The Christian community continues to exist because the conclusions of the critical study of the Bible are largely withheld from them." -Hans Conzelmann (1915-1989)
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes goodwithoutgod's post
03-07-2014, 10:11 AM
RE: An introspective look at moral theology
(02-07-2014 04:46 AM)DLJ Wrote:  
(01-07-2014 09:26 AM)goodwithoutgod Wrote:  ...
John Paul II said that social sins are “collective behavior of certain social groups, big or small, or even of whole nations or blocks of nations” (Mueller 258). Social sin becomes personal sin of individuals through complicity, indifference, or reluctance of those in a position to exert influence for change who do not do so (Mueller 258).
...

This is the bit I didn't know.

So what is the penalty for 'social sin'?

The recent court cases spring to mind. I guess the old pope, who knew of the rapes, has committed this social sin and will be asked to do more prayer or similar.

That'll stop him doing it again!

In the branch of ethics that concerns me (businesses and services) I have been wondering about this aspect.

Societally (I don't think I should be adverbising that word (or verbing that one)), I don't think, for example, moderates (feminists, christians, atheists, whoever) can be held accountable for the actions of the extremists... so I am not in accord with Sam Harris and others.
Perhaps they provide a 'cloak of respectability' but I do not think they are can be held to account.

In business, if you see the guy in the next cubicle downloading porn when that is against the code of conduct so to do that you signed up to when you joined the company, I do not think you are obliged to report it.

If however, the code of conduct (that you signed up to) states that you are obliged to report it, and you do not, then you have committed this 'social sin'.

Does the Cafia-membership terms-of-agreement state the personal obligation on this?

Yeah that whole social sin theory was news to me too, I learned that taking Christian Spirituality Vision course a few semesters back....amazing how no matter what, you can be tied to sin, thus require theistic cleansing of the soul, you wretched, sinful being you Facepalm Great business model though. Blink

"Belief is so often the death of reason" - Qyburn, Game of Thrones

"The Christian community continues to exist because the conclusions of the critical study of the Bible are largely withheld from them." -Hans Conzelmann (1915-1989)
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
03-07-2014, 11:24 AM
RE: An introspective look at moral theology
(01-07-2014 08:26 PM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  
(01-07-2014 07:56 PM)δοῦλος Wrote:  if there is no God, what reason is there why people should not live however they want?

You can't possibly be THAT stupid.

Turns out that it was a Jermy Sock, and he CAN in fact be that stupid!

Hobo

It's Special Pleadings all the way down!


Magic Talking Snakes STFU -- revenantx77


You can't have your special pleading and eat it too. -- WillHop
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
03-07-2014, 01:16 PM
RE: An introspective look at moral theology
(01-07-2014 09:26 AM)goodwithoutgod Wrote:  So it seems that a plethora of evidence exists to show that not only do we not need religion in our lives to be good humans, but that having it in our lives can be counter-productive and unhealthy.


----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
So what is your perspective? I know this has been beaten to death many times, but we do get new people daily, and perhaps they would like to provide some fresh insight into this morals question.

Comments? Opinions? Counters?
The problem in this analysis is that God has been conflated with religion, which makes the entire conclusion invalid.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
03-07-2014, 03:52 PM (This post was last modified: 03-07-2014 03:56 PM by goodwithoutgod.)
RE: An introspective look at moral theology
(03-07-2014 01:16 PM)childeye Wrote:  
(01-07-2014 09:26 AM)goodwithoutgod Wrote:  So it seems that a plethora of evidence exists to show that not only do we not need religion in our lives to be good humans, but that having it in our lives can be counter-productive and unhealthy.


----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
So what is your perspective? I know this has been beaten to death many times, but we do get new people daily, and perhaps they would like to provide some fresh insight into this morals question.

Comments? Opinions? Counters?
The problem in this analysis is that God has been conflated with religion, which makes the entire conclusion invalid.

mmmmm yes, but would you know of god without religion? That is the hard introspective question one must ask of themselves. I can delve quite deeply into philosophical subjective theories of an existence or not of a "god", but philosophy is just that, subjective.

So now we come back around to, how do you know of god, what is the true basis of your faith? Why must you posit a supernatural answer to a physical question?

I can not prove god doesn't exist, and neither can a believer prove his existence...I can't prove that bigfoot doesn't exist either, but that doesn't make it so. The probability of a creator is so slight due to the preponderance of the evidence at hand that it makes its very discussion laughable. Now we can bat philosophies back and forth all day, the world's brightest minds have debated that for centuries...we hardly will uncover new ground today here in the forums.

On the one hand the believers have some philosophy, inner feelings, a lot of hope, and a fictional book written by man...the non believers have philosophy, empirical evidence that the major stories of the fictional book never happened, intellectual contemplation of physical evidence and scientific breakthroughs that suggest otherwise. Scientifically ripping apart the bible is child's play...unless they default to the GODDIDIT escape hatch...

So what is your argument for the existence of a creator...and which one of the thousands that man has made up over the years...

I have long thought that to base your faith on a fictional book is folly, so there must be something else, articulate it...is it the complexity of the world around you, consciousness, pre-conditions of intelligibility, cosmological argument, argument from design, watch makers theory etc etc.... dazzle me with your brilliance.

Asking “If there is no god, what is the purpose of life?” is like asking, “If there is no master, whose slave will I be?”

"Belief is so often the death of reason" - Qyburn, Game of Thrones

"The Christian community continues to exist because the conclusions of the critical study of the Bible are largely withheld from them." -Hans Conzelmann (1915-1989)
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: