Christian vs. Humanist Morality
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
02-02-2017, 10:14 AM
RE: Christian vs. Humanist Morality
(02-02-2017 09:59 AM)Peebothuhul Wrote:  Hello. Smile
Okay, why?
Why a 'Mind'? Or... why any 'cognitive' thing?

I'm speaking from my metpahysics here to make it more brief. The Prinicple of Proportionate Causality justifies the claim that it is a mind. There must be potency within the cause that allows it to lead to the effect.

"I think part of the appeal of mathematical logic is that the formulas look mysterious - you write backward Es!" - Hilary Putnam
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
02-02-2017, 10:16 AM
RE: Christian vs. Humanist Morality
(02-02-2017 09:57 AM)adey67 Wrote:  Ok so you're kind of a theist am I understanding you correctly?

Somewhat. I don't necessarily believe in the divinity of the necessary being, but I have no problem with the label of "theist" as long as it's understood what is meant by it in this context.

"I think part of the appeal of mathematical logic is that the formulas look mysterious - you write backward Es!" - Hilary Putnam
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
02-02-2017, 10:17 AM
RE: Christian vs. Humanist Morality
(02-02-2017 10:14 AM)Naielis Wrote:  The Prinicple of Proportionate Causality justifies the claim that it is a mind. There must be potency within the cause that allows it to lead to the effect.

Then you're left with the problem of infinite regress; that is, if everything created has a creator, what created the creator? You're no further ahead.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
02-02-2017, 10:17 AM
RE: Christian vs. Humanist Morality
(02-02-2017 10:05 AM)TheBeardedDude Wrote:  So you think skeptics have no knowledge from which to question from? Skeptics can't have world-views? Wtf?

Skeptics have worldviews that are incoherent. They still have worldviews.

"I think part of the appeal of mathematical logic is that the formulas look mysterious - you write backward Es!" - Hilary Putnam
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
02-02-2017, 10:22 AM
RE: Christian vs. Humanist Morality
(02-02-2017 10:17 AM)Heath_Tierney Wrote:  Then you're left with the problem of infinite regress; that is, if everything created has a creator, what created the creator? You're no further ahead.

That's simple. The creator was not created so it needs no creator. The creator is the necessary being. This is shown from a collection of cosmological arguments. There must be a necessary being grounded in itself or you're left with an infinite regress of spacetime. This would suggest that space and time are themselves the necessary being. This would then lead to several problems. The main issue I'm seeing is that the Principle of Proportionate Causality is violated. Spacetime doesn't have the potency to cause energy, matter, or minds.

"I think part of the appeal of mathematical logic is that the formulas look mysterious - you write backward Es!" - Hilary Putnam
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
02-02-2017, 10:22 AM
RE: Christian vs. Humanist Morality
(02-02-2017 10:17 AM)Naielis Wrote:  
(02-02-2017 10:05 AM)TheBeardedDude Wrote:  So you think skeptics have no knowledge from which to question from? Skeptics can't have world-views? Wtf?

Skeptics have worldviews that are incoherent. They still have worldviews.

Skeptics can have world-views that are coherent. So what? It doesn't make your point that skepticism is without foundation or not a method of inquiry.

Being nice is something stupid people do to hedge their bets
-Rick
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes TheBeardedDude's post
02-02-2017, 10:22 AM
RE: Christian vs. Humanist Morality
(02-02-2017 10:14 AM)Naielis Wrote:  
(02-02-2017 09:59 AM)Peebothuhul Wrote:  Hello. Smile
Okay, why?
Why a 'Mind'? Or... why any 'cognitive' thing?

I'm speaking from my metpahysics here to make it more brief. The Prinicple of Proportionate Causality justifies the claim that it is a mind.

Cool! Thumbsup

(02-02-2017 10:14 AM)Naielis Wrote:  There must be potency within the cause that allows it to lead to the effect.

Riiiight... so you're then saying that this 'Potency', therefore, must be a mind?

Consider

Am I right?

(02-02-2017 10:22 AM)Naielis Wrote:  The main issue I'm seeing is that the Principle of Proportionate Causality is violated. Spacetime doesn't have the potency to cause energy, matter, or minds.

Citation needed plz.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Peebothuhul's post
02-02-2017, 10:29 AM
RE: Christian vs. Humanist Morality
(02-02-2017 10:08 AM)Astreja Wrote:  We need not "justify" anything. We need only practice it.
Oh, and all morality is subjective because it is a value judgement. "Objective morality" is an oxymoron.

If justification is not needed, then the Principle of Sufficient Reason is violated. This means it's a nonrealist and non-cognitivist ethic. The Frege Geach problem seems to apply here.

"I think part of the appeal of mathematical logic is that the formulas look mysterious - you write backward Es!" - Hilary Putnam
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
02-02-2017, 10:29 AM
RE: Christian vs. Humanist Morality
(02-02-2017 10:22 AM)Naielis Wrote:  
(02-02-2017 10:17 AM)Heath_Tierney Wrote:  Then you're left with the problem of infinite regress; that is, if everything created has a creator, what created the creator? You're no further ahead.

That's simple. The creator was not created so it needs no creator. The creator is the necessary being. This is shown from a collection of cosmological arguments. There must be a necessary being grounded in itself or you're left with an infinite regress of spacetime. This would suggest that space and time are themselves the necessary being. This would then lead to several problems. The main issue I'm seeing is that the Principle of Proportionate Causality is violated.

Not so simple.

It violates both Occam's Razor and your understanding of physics. To point: "Spacetime doesn't have the potency to cause energy, matter, or minds." That's factually incorrect. Empty space does contain energy (source: Empty space has more energy than everything in the Universe, combined)

It's also a well-worn method of designing a God that's conveniently untestable, unreachable, unfalsifiable.

Again, you have yet to make any headway with your argument.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 5 users Like Heath_Tierney's post
02-02-2017, 10:36 AM
RE: Christian vs. Humanist Morality
(02-02-2017 10:29 AM)Heath_Tierney Wrote:  Not so simple. It violates both Occam's Razor and your understanding of physics. To point: "Spacetime doesn't have the potency to cause energy, matter, or minds." That's factually incorrect. Empty space does contain energy (source: Empty space has more energy than everything in the Universe, combined)

It's also a well-worn method of designing a God that's conveniently untestable, unreachable, unfalsifiable.

Again, you have yet to make any headway with your argument.

I don't see how it violates Occam's Razor or physics. Spacetime doesn't have the potency to cause energy. This doesn't contradict the observation that empty space contains energy.

"I think part of the appeal of mathematical logic is that the formulas look mysterious - you write backward Es!" - Hilary Putnam
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: