Morals, Christianity, Atheism
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
19-11-2014, 08:25 AM
RE: Morals, Christianity, Atheism
(19-11-2014 08:19 AM)Tomasia Wrote:  
(19-11-2014 08:15 AM)wazzel Wrote:  I think the proper way to state "moral obligation" would be "an expectation of acceptable behavior". The acceptable behavior is what we are obligated to do to remain a part of society. There are lots of grey in that and some actions become acceptable given the correct set of circumstances.

And these expectation are the expectations of the particular society one finds himself in correct?
Yes correct, different societies have different expectations of what is acceptable.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes wazzel's post
19-11-2014, 08:30 AM (This post was last modified: 19-11-2014 08:36 AM by Tomasia.)
RE: Morals, Christianity, Atheism
(19-11-2014 08:25 AM)wazzel Wrote:  Yes correct, different societies have different expectations of what is acceptable.

But you do understand that societies expectations are not really obligations either, as we can see when we think of those who go against the status quo. They are not acting as we expect them to, but they are not breaking any obligation.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
19-11-2014, 08:36 AM
RE: Morals, Christianity, Atheism
(19-11-2014 08:30 AM)Tomasia Wrote:  
(19-11-2014 08:25 AM)wazzel Wrote:  Yes correct, different societies have different expectations of what is acceptable.

But you do understand that societies expectations are not really obligations either, as we can see when we think of those who go against that status quo. They are not acting as we expect them to, but they are not breaking any obligation.
Some are and some are not.

Example,

You are obligated to not walk around killing people. If you do you get removed from society.

You are not obligated to be kind, you can be a jerk if you like. This may get you shunned by some, but not removed.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
19-11-2014, 08:46 AM
RE: Morals, Christianity, Atheism
(18-11-2014 04:18 PM)Chas Wrote:  
(18-11-2014 03:17 PM)TreeSapNest Wrote:  Doesn't that mean that you're not really obligated?
No, it doesn't mean that. The obligations are the price for participating in society.

This topic has really grown in one night. :-)

Society's prosperity is effected by its members. I don't, however, see any obligation to any of it. I don't confuse devotion with obligation.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes TreeSapNest's post
19-11-2014, 08:47 AM
RE: Morals, Christianity, Atheism
(19-11-2014 08:36 AM)wazzel Wrote:  You are obligated to not walk around killing people. If you do you get removed from society.

You're legally obligated to the state to not walk around killing people, just like in my city we're legally obligated to not feed the homeless in the park, but yet we have dissenters who break this legal obligation, because of some perceived moral obligation to feed them. We can easily imagine unjust, immoral laws.

I'm sure you can see why legal obligations don't necessarily equate to moral obligations, because it's not hard to imagine legal obligations that are immoral. I'm also sure that you can see the problem in attempting to link one's moral obligations to the state.

Quote:You are not obligated to be kind, you can be a jerk if you like.

I'm not obligated to be moral either.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
19-11-2014, 10:21 AM
RE: Morals, Christianity, Atheism
(19-11-2014 08:36 AM)wazzel Wrote:  You are obligated to not walk around killing people. If you do you get removed from society.

Just begs the question of whether anyone is obligated to comply with the wishes others. And I don't see where that is. I see the opposite. I see that we are not obligated to anyone or anything.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
19-11-2014, 10:30 AM
Re: RE: Morals, Christianity, Atheism
(19-11-2014 10:21 AM)TreeSapNest Wrote:  
(19-11-2014 08:36 AM)wazzel Wrote:  You are obligated to not walk around killing people. If you do you get removed from society.

Just begs the question of whether anyone is obligated to comply with the wishes others. And I don't see where that is. I see the opposite. I see that we are not obligated to anyone or anything.
As creatures that have evolved complex social behavior including empathy, we are certainly obligated, and to a certain degree genetically predisposed to not wantonly kill each other. If we had evolved with such killer instincts it is unlikely that our species would still be around to talk about it.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
19-11-2014, 10:44 AM
RE: Morals, Christianity, Atheism
(19-11-2014 10:30 AM)photon9 Wrote:  As creatures that have evolved complex social behavior including empathy, we are certainly obligated, and to a certain degree genetically predisposed to not wantonly kill each other. If we had evolved with such killer instincts it is unlikely that our species would still be around to talk about it.

While I am empathetic and compassionate, I don't see any obligation to be so.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes TreeSapNest's post
19-11-2014, 10:49 AM
RE: Morals, Christianity, Atheism
(19-11-2014 07:06 AM)Tomasia Wrote:  
(18-11-2014 09:19 PM)unfogged Wrote:  So you claim that we have moral obligations but we can assume that they don't exist?

I made no claims here about us having moral obligations, therefore I have no need to defend claims here that I did not make.

You are such a lying piece of shit.

(18-11-2014 02:35 PM)Tomasia Wrote:  
(17-11-2014 11:36 PM)EvolutionKills Wrote:  "Name me an ethical statement made or an action performed by a believer that could not have been made or performed by a non-believer." -Christopher Hitchens

Easy, "We have moral obligations".

A non-believer who claims to believe this would just be a closeted believer of some sort.

Discuss.

You DID make the claim you fuck wit. You then made a claim that you know what is in the minds of other people. Two dumb cunt claims that you have failed miserably to defend. You are not spanking anyone, you flat out ran from my challenge to demonstrate your claim. Now you are lying and trying to shuck your burden of proof, you are one of the most poorly intellectually equipped and pedestrian theist currently on this site.

If the ability to make claims you don't have to defend, justify or prove is in your minds grounds to celebrate a victory then you have horrendously lower standards then everyone here.

When valour preys on reason, it eats the sword it fights with.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
19-11-2014, 10:55 AM
RE: Morals, Christianity, Atheism
(19-11-2014 10:21 AM)TreeSapNest Wrote:  
(19-11-2014 08:36 AM)wazzel Wrote:  You are obligated to not walk around killing people. If you do you get removed from society.

Just begs the question of whether anyone is obligated to comply with the wishes others. And I don't see where that is. I see the opposite. I see that we are not obligated to anyone or anything.
I think both you and tomasia are nitpicking.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: