Morals, Christianity, Atheism
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
20-11-2014, 03:38 PM
RE: Morals, Christianity, Atheism
(20-11-2014 01:27 PM)Tomasia Wrote:  
(20-11-2014 06:31 AM)Chas Wrote:  You are required to meet your obligations. Drinking Beverage

So I am required to meet obligations that I don't believe exist, in an imaginary contract I never signed, or agreed to the terms of?

That's only true in your fantasy world.

In the real world, we are obligated to follow the rules of society or risk various levels of opprobrium.
And, yes, you had no choice to be born into the society in which you were, or to be born at all. Tough shit.

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
20-11-2014, 03:43 PM
RE: Morals, Christianity, Atheism
(20-11-2014 03:03 PM)Tomasia Wrote:  
Quote:Some other people in society may also deem that he has an obligation (based on their own beliefs).

Err. So other people believing I have an obligation, makes me have an obligation?
No.
You are not bound (in a universal sense) to live up to their expectation of your obligations.

(20-11-2014 03:03 PM)Tomasia Wrote:  Or no, were just illustrating that some people might not like me all that much if i don't share their belief in belief?
Strangely enough, even many atheists, whom state that morality is subjective, have expectations of what others ought to do and get disappointed with others don't live up to their own subjective expectations. That disappointment can lead to resentment, anger, a desire to distance one self from the actor, a desire to punish or stop the actor from behaving in such a way.

If you accept that people are diverse and capable of making their own choices then you don't really suffer from this disappointment and the ensuing resentment and anger.

But there are actions that are more than just a failure to meet an observer's expectations. Some actions are dangerous to the observer or endanger the society that the observer belongs to. In these circumstances, even if the observer didn't have an expectation, they may need to react to protect themselves from the threat you (or your actions) present.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
20-11-2014, 03:49 PM
RE: Morals, Christianity, Atheism
(20-11-2014 03:43 PM)Stevil Wrote:  
(20-11-2014 03:03 PM)Tomasia Wrote:  Or no, were just illustrating that some people might not like me all that much if i don't share their belief in belief?
Strangely enough, even many atheists, whom state that morality is subjective, have expectations of what others ought to do...

There is nothing strange at all in that. It follows inevitably.

(20-11-2014 03:43 PM)Stevil Wrote:  ... and get disappointed with others don't live up to their own subjective expectations. That disappointment can lead to resentment, anger, a desire to distance one self from the actor, a desire to punish or stop the actor from behaving in such a way.

I think you are, at best, confusing disappointment with disapproval.

... this is my signature!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes cjlr's post
20-11-2014, 03:59 PM
RE: Morals, Christianity, Atheism
(20-11-2014 03:49 PM)cjlr Wrote:  
(20-11-2014 03:43 PM)Stevil Wrote:  Strangely enough, even many atheists, whom state that morality is subjective, have expectations of what others ought to do...

There is nothing strange at all in that. It follows inevitably.
No it doesn't. But we will just have to agree to disagree on this.

(20-11-2014 03:49 PM)cjlr Wrote:  I think you are, at best, confusing disappointment with disapproval.
No confusion here.
To "disapprove" one assumes others need their approval.
I do not need your approval cjlr. I couldn't care less about your opinions on how I ought to live my life. And I'm not even sorry to disappoint you. Dealt with it!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
20-11-2014, 03:59 PM
RE: Morals, Christianity, Atheism
(17-11-2014 01:57 PM)The Q Continuum Wrote:  It's been claimed recently by some on this thread that atheists may be as moral as Christians or anyone else. I would debate that proposition but would mention that the Bible nowhere commands any person to be moral or ethical, but rather, to be holy or righteous, which is different.

Your comments?

Little late here, but I do have something to say.

Are you inferring that being Holy and Righteous is independent from being Moral or ethical?

So you can be a giant ass dick and still be holy or righteous?

And can you be a generally nice guy and not be either/or?

If that's what you mean, why does God place importance on Holy and Righteous? Why does he not say be all four?

Unless Goodness is independent from his wishes. He does not wish you to be moral, but to be holy.

If they are related (if Moral is a qualification of Righteousness or Holiness), then why the distinction you proposed?

[Image: 0013382F-E507-48AE-906B-53008666631C-757...cc3639.jpg]
Credit goes to UndercoverAtheist.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
20-11-2014, 04:11 PM
RE: Morals, Christianity, Atheism
(20-11-2014 03:59 PM)Stevil Wrote:  
(20-11-2014 03:49 PM)cjlr Wrote:  There is nothing strange at all in that. It follows inevitably.
No it doesn't. But we will just have to agree to disagree on this.

Having an opinion on what outcomes would be better/worse means that one can - and will - continue to hold those opinions, even knowing full well that others have different standards.

I utterly fail to see how you can deny that?

(20-11-2014 03:59 PM)Stevil Wrote:  
(20-11-2014 03:49 PM)cjlr Wrote:  I think you are, at best, confusing disappointment with disapproval.
No confusion here.

Disappointment presupposes expectations. Lacking expectations, one cannot be disappointed.

The word does not mean what you are trying to say.

(20-11-2014 03:59 PM)Stevil Wrote:  To "disapprove" one assumes others need their approval.

No. It does not require that in any sense.

Where do you get these bizarre definitions from, mate?

(20-11-2014 03:59 PM)Stevil Wrote:  I do not need your approval cjlr. I couldn't care less about your opinions on how I ought to live my life. And I'm not even sorry to disappoint you. Dealt with it!

I can't for the life of me figure out how this is a relevant response?
(and not just within this thread - to anything)

I mean, kudos to you for being able to read my mind not just to the extent that you know what I apparently think you should do (?) but also knowing exactly how I feel about your (not) meeting those (apparent) standards (!)...

"Deal" with "it", indeed.

... this is my signature!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like cjlr's post
20-11-2014, 04:32 PM (This post was last modified: 20-11-2014 04:44 PM by Stevil.)
RE: Morals, Christianity, Atheism
(20-11-2014 04:11 PM)cjlr Wrote:  Having an opinion on what outcomes would be better/worse means that one can - and will - continue to hold those opinions, even knowing full well that others have different standards.

I utterly fail to see how you can deny that?
Sure you can have an opinion as to what outcomes would be better or worse.
Your opinion is no more or less valid than mine.

HOWEVER, when it comes to my choices then your opinions are not even useful.
I make my choices, you observe them. You might believe that you would have made a different choice given the same situation. So what? you can play imaginary "what ifs" in that head of yours. But what matters is that I was the one in the situation and that I was the one making the choice.

You aren't me, I make my decisions based on my opinions not your opinions.
You haven't lived my life, you have no idea what I should or shouldn't do. At best you can only state that if YOU were in that same situation then YOU may have chosen differently. I don't see much value in this approach of imagining "what if" and judging others based on that.

(20-11-2014 04:11 PM)cjlr Wrote:  
(20-11-2014 03:59 PM)Stevil Wrote:  No confusion here.

Disappointment presupposes expectations. Lacking expectations, one cannot be disappointed.
If you have no expectations then how are you making a judgement of whether my actions conformed to your "ought's"

FFS cljr, your claim of "ought to" means that you have an expectation.
You're just arguing for the sake of it right?
(20-11-2014 04:11 PM)cjlr Wrote:  
(20-11-2014 03:59 PM)Stevil Wrote:  To "disapprove" one assumes others need their approval.


No. It does not require that in any sense.

Where do you get these bizarre definitions from, mate?
I'm not your mate.

Why would I care if you have disapproval or are disappointed with regards to my actions?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
20-11-2014, 04:52 PM
RE: Morals, Christianity, Atheism
(20-11-2014 04:32 PM)Stevil Wrote:  
(20-11-2014 04:11 PM)cjlr Wrote:  Having an opinion on what outcomes would be better/worse means that one can - and will - continue to hold those opinions, even knowing full well that others have different standards.

I utterly fail to see how you can deny that?
Sure you can have an opinion as to what outcomes would be better or worse.
Your opinion is no more or less valid than mine.

Indeed.

(20-11-2014 04:32 PM)Stevil Wrote:  HOWEVER, when it comes to my choices then your opinions are not even useful.

That doesn't make it "strange" that I still have them.

But for that matter - define "useful" in this context?

(20-11-2014 04:32 PM)Stevil Wrote:  I make my choices, you observe them. You might believe that you would have made a different choice given the same situation. So what? you can play imaginary "what ifs" in that head of yours. But what matters is that I was the one in the situation and that I was the one making the choice.

You aren't me, I make my decisions based on my opinions not your opinions.
You haven't lived my life, you have no idea what I should or shouldn't do. At best you can only state that if YOU were in that same situation then YOU may have chosen differently. I don't see much value in this approach of imagining "what if" and judging others based on that.

This may shock you to learn, but I am not in fact in control of whether my mirror neurons fire or not.

What "value" or "use" you imagine others' thoughts to have is itself a matter I struggle to see the use of...

(20-11-2014 04:32 PM)Stevil Wrote:  
(20-11-2014 04:11 PM)cjlr Wrote:  Disappointment presupposes expectations. Lacking expectations, one cannot be disappointed.
If you have no expectations then how are you making a judgement of whether my actions conformed to your "ought's"

That doesn't even make sense.

(20-11-2014 04:32 PM)Stevil Wrote:  FFS cljr, your claim of "ought to" means that you have an expectation.
You're just arguing for the sake of it right?

You appear to have misunderstood me - and quite thoroughly, at that.

Saying "ought" expresses, fundamentally, a preference. This is not the same as an expectation. Do you understand the difference?

(20-11-2014 04:32 PM)Stevil Wrote:  
(20-11-2014 04:11 PM)cjlr Wrote:  No. It does not require that in any sense.

Where do you get these bizarre definitions from, mate?
I'm not your mate.

Damn.

(20-11-2014 04:32 PM)Stevil Wrote:  http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/disapprove
Quote: 2. to withhold approval from; decline to sanction:
"The Senate disapproved the nominations."

Indeed; to disapprove means one does not approve. That is not what I disputed, and not what you claimed:
(20-11-2014 03:59 PM)Stevil Wrote:  To "disapprove" one assumes others need their approval.

Your statement here does not follow from your own provided definition. At all.

EDIT - since you did:
(20-11-2014 04:32 PM)Stevil Wrote:  Why would I care if you have disapproval or are disappointed with regards to my actions?

Being a social member of a social species, I would think you'd express at least some concern for how the other members of your society will regard and respond to you.

... this is my signature!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like cjlr's post
20-11-2014, 05:15 PM
RE: Morals, Christianity, Atheism
(20-11-2014 04:52 PM)cjlr Wrote:  
(20-11-2014 04:32 PM)Stevil Wrote:  HOWEVER, when it comes to my choices then your opinions are not even useful.

That doesn't make it "strange" that I still have them.
I've never said it was strange you have opinions.
I've said it is strange if you believe morality is subjective that you expect me to conform to your own moral beliefs.
"Expect" in such a way that you make a claim as to what I "ought to do"


(20-11-2014 04:52 PM)cjlr Wrote:  
(20-11-2014 04:32 PM)Stevil Wrote:  FFS cljr, your claim of "ought to" means that you have an expectation.
You're just arguing for the sake of it right?

You appear to have misunderstood me - and quite thoroughly, at that.

Saying "ought" expresses, fundamentally, a preference. This is not the same as an expectation. Do you understand the difference?

"Ought" means more than a preference. Is seems you don't understand.

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/ought
Quote:(used to express duty or moral obligation):
Every citizen ought to help.
2.
(used to express justice, moral rightness, or the like):
He ought to be punished. You ought to be ashamed.
3.
(used to express propriety, appropriateness, etc.):
You ought to be home early. We ought to bring her some flowers.
4.
(used to express probability or natural consequence):
That ought to be our train now.

(20-11-2014 04:52 PM)cjlr Wrote:  
(20-11-2014 04:32 PM)Stevil Wrote:  Why would I care if you have disapproval or are disappointed with regards to my actions?
Being a social member of a social species, I would think you'd express at least some concern for how the other members of your society will regard and respond to you.
I care about how their response impacts me. I don't care about their preferences or their moral beliefs.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
20-11-2014, 06:02 PM
RE: Morals, Christianity, Atheism
(20-11-2014 04:52 PM)cjlr Wrote:  Saying "ought" expresses, fundamentally, a preference. This is not the same as an expectation. Do you understand the difference?

Let's try this a different way.

Which statements do you see as equivalent?

Scenario 1 (moral action) You ought to do X
A) You are obligated to do X
B) If I were you I would do X
C) I would prefer it if you do X
D) I give my approval of you doing X


Scenario 2 (immoral action) - You ought not do X
A) You are obligated not to do X
B) If I were you I would not do X
C) I would prefer it if you don't do X
D) I give my disapproval of you doing X
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: