Morality vs. Legalism
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
18-09-2015, 05:12 PM
RE: Morality vs. Legalism
(16-09-2015 01:44 PM)Stevil Wrote:  I've been a visitor to a Catholic forum. These guys beat each other up if they don't tow the line. They remind each other of the official Church position they tell each other that if they don't tow the line then they aren't Catholic.

Toe the line. Drinking Beverage

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
18-09-2015, 05:24 PM
RE: Morality vs. Legalism
(17-09-2015 06:18 AM)Tomasia Wrote:  Ah yes, your appeal to karma. Some law of the universe it which if I do bad shit to people it's gonna eventually come back to me. There's no eventually here.

Karma? Are you even trying?

He described cause and effect, not karma.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
18-09-2015, 05:26 PM
RE: Morality vs. Legalism
(17-09-2015 08:18 AM)Tomasia Wrote:  
(17-09-2015 07:41 AM)morondog Wrote:  ^^ Um, that's all very nice, but there's still no absolute morality.

If you're an atheists of course, you can't believe in that stuff, because the existence of of absolute morality, would undermine your disbelief in a God, so we can't have that now can we?

I'm also not sure why you want to put the brakes on absolute morality, why not extend it a bit further, to moral realism, to moral subjectivism, etc... until you embrace Stevil's Nihilism?

You just went full circular. Facepalm

When you show us the evidence for a god, and then provide evidence that that god is the source of morality, your objection might be rational.

So far, it is not. Drinking Beverage

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
18-09-2015, 05:28 PM
RE: Morality vs. Legalism
(17-09-2015 04:06 PM)popsthebuilder Wrote:  Everyone, in theory, should be able to agree that there is a higher power, or creative force, at least to some extent.

Nope. That is simply your wishful thinking.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Chas's post
18-09-2015, 05:32 PM
RE: Morality vs. Legalism
(18-09-2015 06:23 AM)Tomasia Wrote:  
(17-09-2015 04:59 PM)GirlyMan Wrote:  Mainly because you would get your ass kicked.

You might as well tell me that I'd go to hell.

Nope. Ass whoopings actually exist. Drinking Beverage

Quote:There's no law of the universe that guaranteed an ass whooping.

No, it's called human nature.

Quote:I remember working in customer service, and every so often you'd get a customer threatening to sue you, to come over and kick your ass. And I'd just laugh inside. A scenario in which the person or group your using force and aggression towards, being so powerless that even they recognize that using force and aggression is futile, and would only make it worse for them, is just as likely. And among folks who threaten force their actual capacity to do so, can be non-existent.

Another of your ridiculous examples. Facepalm

That customer is not interfering with you or using force.

Quote:How many successful slave revolts have there been? Nat Turner had a short lived one, that ended up enraging those he revolted against, who retaliated ten fold. The Romans strung the leaders of jewish revolts on crosses. This didn't fuel the fire of the communities behind them, but diminished them.

It's not about slaves. Try to stay on point.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Chas's post
18-09-2015, 05:34 PM (This post was last modified: 18-09-2015 05:59 PM by GirlyMan.)
RE: Morality vs. Legalism
(18-09-2015 01:56 PM)Stevil Wrote:  
(18-09-2015 09:49 AM)Tomasia Wrote:  It's not my problem. I'm not the moral nihilist. I'm not the one claiming that universal principles are not evidence of morality you are, without ever really justifying this.
The burdon of proof is on those with the claim.
The claim is "universal morals exist"

A moral nihilst is a position of lack of belief.

You provide convincing proof and then I will accept universal morals.

I can't even parse "universal morals" or "absolute morals". Morality is an artificial concept. All concepts are artificial. To suggest that there are ANY concepts which are not artificial is to suggest there are concepts just floating around independent of any of us just looking to implant themselves in our brain. It's dualism to the ludicrous.

#sigh
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes GirlyMan's post
18-09-2015, 05:36 PM
RE: Morality vs. Legalism
(18-09-2015 03:08 PM)Tomasia Wrote:  
(18-09-2015 01:45 PM)Stevil Wrote:  There is no power higher than the fundamental forces (gravity, electromagnetic, strong and weak nuclear) that's why they are called fundamental.

Consciousness is an emergent abstract consequence of these fundamental force.
No thought or original idea has ever come to be without being a direct consequence of an event caused by the fundamental forces.

So basically it all reduces to physics. You're just peddling physiciallism.

Peddling? Consider There is no evidence for anything else.

You are the one peddling unsupported horseshit.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Chas's post
18-09-2015, 05:36 PM
RE: Morality vs. Legalism
(18-09-2015 03:13 PM)popsthebuilder Wrote:  
(18-09-2015 03:08 PM)Tomasia Wrote:  So basically it all reduces to physics. You're just peddling physiciallism.
You make it look like I said something that I indeed did not. It does not stop at physics. Physics is just a result of God, not the cause.

[Image: 1390269212824.png]

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
18-09-2015, 05:49 PM (This post was last modified: 18-09-2015 05:57 PM by GirlyMan.)
RE: Morality vs. Legalism
(18-09-2015 02:01 PM)Stevil Wrote:  
(18-09-2015 01:56 PM)popsthebuilder Wrote:  For God has literally supplied all in great splendor and wealth. If we but could see.
Nice story. Do you have anything to back that up with?

I think what he's trying to say is we all hit the lottery by virtue of the fact we are breathing. Can't argue with that. The more I keep reading him the more I think I get him. I think he is some sorta pantheist/panentheist/Buddhist but I'm not sure. He really sucks at conveying his thoughts. And he really really sucks at counter attacks. ... That, and he's every bit batshit insane as I am.

#sigh
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
18-09-2015, 05:56 PM
RE: Morality vs. Legalism
(18-09-2015 03:13 PM)popsthebuilder Wrote:  Physics is just a result of God, not the cause.

Physics is an incomplete description of God. Physics will always be incomplete description of God.

#sigh
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: