Mother Teresa to be made a saint
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
16-03-2016, 08:22 AM
RE: Mother Teresa to be made a saint
(16-03-2016 08:07 AM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  Asking fools to define their terms, is not griping.

I'm using the common understanding of the terms, that you can look up in any dictionary. Apparently the meanings of the terms elude you to the point where you don't even know whether your claim as to what's ethical or not, is an objective or subjective statement. So what is it? Do you understand the meaning of the terms, but believe that neither of them apply to moral, or ethical statements? Do you prefer to dodge the question at every turn, as is typical with you?

Quote:I reject your simplistic categories, and will not get sucked into your infantile game. You were given MANY examples which proven there is no such thing as "objective" morality. You cannot define it. You have not done it.

Well it appears that not only do you reject the concept of objective morality, you also reject the concept of subjective morality. Your own ethical statements, are one's you find yourself unable to categorize one way or the other. Not only do you lack a belief whether your own ethical statements are objective claims, you also lack a belief that they're subjective ones.

You positions is entirely scatterbrained, and for some reason you want to pin that on me.

"Tell me, muse, of the storyteller who has been thrust to the edge of the world, both an infant and an ancient, and through him reveal everyman." ---Homer the aged poet.

"In Him was life, and the life was the Light of men. The Light shines in the darkness, and the darkness did not comprehend it."
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
16-03-2016, 08:23 AM
RE: Mother Teresa to be made a saint
(16-03-2016 08:10 AM)Tomasia Wrote:  And there's plenty of books, web articles, magazine articles that defend, and paint a positive picture of her as well.
You lied and said we were basing our opinions on imagination. Are you going to acknowledge that or not?

(16-03-2016 08:10 AM)Tomasia Wrote:  There's plenty of books articles, demonizing Obama, website dedicated to demonizing Martin Luther King, etc...
We're not talking about them, are we? We are talking about you.

(16-03-2016 08:10 AM)Tomasia Wrote:  You can point to those articles as much as you want, as much I can point to counter articles etc..., but I prefer to know what facts are they based on.
Yes, and pointing out potential discrepancies or conflicts of interest would be a valid point.

Lying about it, on the other hand, would not.

(16-03-2016 08:10 AM)Tomasia Wrote:  If any of this leads you to see her as the scum of the earth, on par with Hitler, deserving a special place in hell, then I feel sorry for your mothers.
That's nice. Drinking Beverage

Help for the living. Hope for the dead. ~ R.G. Ingersoll

Freedom offers opportunity. Opportunity confers responsibility. Responsibility to use the freedom we enjoy wisely, honestly and humanely. ~ Noam Chomsky
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Fatbaldhobbit's post
16-03-2016, 08:41 AM (This post was last modified: 16-03-2016 08:49 AM by Tomasia.)
RE: Mother Teresa to be made a saint
(16-03-2016 08:23 AM)Fatbaldhobbit Wrote:  You lied and said we were basing our opinions on imagination. Are you going to acknowledge that or not?

Yes, when you base your views less on what can be drawn by the available facts, such as in the case of her association with Keating, her lack of a response from a letter sent to her by an attorney, you're relying primarily on your imagination. Inferring a variety of things, that the available facts don't allow you to infer. When you make claims that she was driven to do what she did, because of her desire for fame and praise, that's a portrait less driven by any aspects of her, and more so by your wild imagination. You're desire for someone to despise.

This is the same things folks like Dinesh Desouza, and rabid right wingers do to folks like Obama, actively combing through their history trying to find whatever scant things they can cling to, to paint him as some monster. It's the same thing folks do to folks like MLK. Less driven by the pursuit of truth, and more driven by their own contempt. Revealing more about their maladaptive selves, then her.

But those trapped in this too frequent deception are unable to recognize that. The entire portrait of her more of a caricature, than a picture of an actual human being. If that's the way you feel about her, than I seriously feel sorry for your mothers.

"Tell me, muse, of the storyteller who has been thrust to the edge of the world, both an infant and an ancient, and through him reveal everyman." ---Homer the aged poet.

"In Him was life, and the life was the Light of men. The Light shines in the darkness, and the darkness did not comprehend it."
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
16-03-2016, 08:50 AM
RE: Mother Teresa to be made a saint
(15-03-2016 09:19 PM)Tomasia Wrote:  
(15-03-2016 08:43 PM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  When she was told it was ill-gotten money, she refused to take responsibility for the consequences of her using it for her purposes. That is unethical.

I don't see the ethical line here is all that clear. A variety of charities have benefitted form ill-gotten money, hardly any of them saw the ethical line here as clearly as you suggest.

And clearly the law hasn't provided any clarity here either. Perhaps a bill should be passed that obligates charities to pay back any donations that they may have received through ill-gotten gains, whether they knew this at the time or not? Rather than an act that is currently just a voluntary gesture, if you feel so strongly about it.

If morality were objective, the line would be clear. If it isn't, then they aren't. 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
[+] 1 user Likes Chas's post
16-03-2016, 08:59 AM
RE: Mother Teresa to be made a saint
(16-03-2016 08:22 AM)Tomasia Wrote:  
(16-03-2016 08:07 AM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  Asking fools to define their terms, is not griping.

I'm using the common understanding of the terms, that you can look up in any dictionary. Apparently the meanings of the terms elude you to the point where you don't even know whether your claim as to what's ethical or not, is an objective or subjective statement. So what is it? Do you understand the meaning of the terms, but believe that neither of them apply to moral, or ethical statements? Do you prefer to dodge the question at every turn, as is typical with you?

Quote:I reject your simplistic categories, and will not get sucked into your infantile game. You were given MANY examples which proven there is no such thing as "objective" morality. You cannot define it. You have not done it.

Well it appears that not only do you reject the concept of objective morality, you also reject the concept of subjective morality. Your own ethical statements, are one's you find yourself unable to categorize one way or the other. Not only do you lack a belief whether your own ethical statements are objective claims, you also lack a belief that they're subjective ones.

You positions is entirely scatterbrained, and for some reason you want to pin that on me.

I know dear. It's hard for the simple-minded to deal with difficult complex topics.
At least you're getting a little closer. What dictionary ? Post you definitions. Then we'll show you why your use of them of ridiculous.

I get that you want to leave weasel-room, as you sense you're about to get your ass nailed to the wall here. I already told you where the ethics of the matter in this case arise from. It's NEITHER "objective" nor "subjective". The human community has collectively determined that returning ill-gotten (stolen) money promotes justice. That is a *legal* process, which can be agreed upon. It's NOT from the gods. It's not "objective". It's not "subjective. Now, we all see Bible College teaches you MUST only think in the rigid confines of their simplistic two dimensional nonsense. But please. Do try to grow up .... just a little. Please.

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein God has a plan for us. Please stop screwing it up with your prayers.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
16-03-2016, 09:10 AM (This post was last modified: 16-03-2016 09:27 AM by Tomasia.)
RE: Mother Teresa to be made a saint
(16-03-2016 08:59 AM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  I know dear. It's hard for the simple-minded to deal with difficult complex topics.
At least you're getting a little closer. What dictionary ? Post you definitions. Then we'll show you why your use of them of ridiculous.

I just want you to give an honest response to the question, you can use whichever definition you have in mind to do so. If you believe that moral statements, and ethical claims can't be categorized as either subjective or objective, than why not just say this?

If you believe that your claim of what's unethical doesn't classify as either subjective or objective, under the various definitions of the term, just say so.

** On closer reading of you previous post, it seems that you do believe this. That your basic criticism here falls on parties claiming morality is subjective, as well as objective. That there's something special about moral statements, that distinguishes them from falling into either of these categories, as to what exactly that magic sauce is that allows us to evade this categorization, will just remain unclear.

Do you believe that there are non-moral statements that are objective, and non-moral statements that are subjective? If so what makes a statement objective in your view, and another statement subjective?

"Tell me, muse, of the storyteller who has been thrust to the edge of the world, both an infant and an ancient, and through him reveal everyman." ---Homer the aged poet.

"In Him was life, and the life was the Light of men. The Light shines in the darkness, and the darkness did not comprehend it."
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
16-03-2016, 09:23 AM
RE: Mother Teresa to be made a saint
(16-03-2016 09:10 AM)Tomasia Wrote:  
(16-03-2016 08:59 AM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  I know dear. It's hard for the simple-minded to deal with difficult complex topics.
At least you're getting a little closer. What dictionary ? Post you definitions. Then we'll show you why your use of them of ridiculous.

I just want you to an honest response to the question, you can use which ever definition you have in mind to do so. If you believe that moral statements, and ethical claims can't be categorized as either subjective or objective, than why not just say this?

If you believe that your claim of what's unethical doesn't classify as either subjective or objective, under the various definitions of the term, just say so.

I ALREADY told you, child.
I reject your fool categories. What is it about that you are unable to grasp ?

Morality is complex. It arises from many sources, and is PROCESSED, IN EVERY CASE by human brains. There is nothing about that that is "objective". It also does not meet any definition of "subjective". Maybe you should ask Bible College to let you take Ethics at an outside school, so you can actually learn something.

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein God has a plan for us. Please stop screwing it up with your prayers.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
16-03-2016, 09:30 AM
RE: Mother Teresa to be made a saint
(16-03-2016 08:50 AM)Chas Wrote:  If morality were objective, the line would be clear. If it isn't, then they aren't. Drinking Beverage

Do you believe morality is subjective, unlike Bucky?

Or do you prefer to define your view as lacking a belief one way or the other?

"Tell me, muse, of the storyteller who has been thrust to the edge of the world, both an infant and an ancient, and through him reveal everyman." ---Homer the aged poet.

"In Him was life, and the life was the Light of men. The Light shines in the darkness, and the darkness did not comprehend it."
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
16-03-2016, 09:32 AM
RE: Mother Teresa to be made a saint
(16-03-2016 09:23 AM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  
(16-03-2016 09:10 AM)Tomasia Wrote:  I just want you to an honest response to the question, you can use which ever definition you have in mind to do so. If you believe that moral statements, and ethical claims can't be categorized as either subjective or objective, than why not just say this?

If you believe that your claim of what's unethical doesn't classify as either subjective or objective, under the various definitions of the term, just say so.

I ALREADY told you, child.
I reject your fool categories. What is it about that you are unable to grasp ?

Morality is complex. It arises from many sources, and is PROCESSED, IN EVERY CASE by human brains. There is nothing about that that is "objective". It also does not meet any definition of "subjective". Maybe you should ask Bible College to let you take Ethics at an outside school, so you can actually learn something.

It appears you responded prior to me editing the previous post.

I'll copy and paste the follow up question, particularly the question in bold:

** On closer reading of you previous post, it seems that you do believe this. That your basic criticism here falls on parties claiming morality is subjective, as well as objective. That there's something special about moral and ethical statements, that prevents them from falling into either of these categories, as to what exactly that magic sauce is that allows us to evade this categorization, will just remain unclear.

Do you believe that there are non-moral statements that are objective, and non-moral statements that are subjective? If so what makes a statement objective in your view, and another statement subjective?

"Tell me, muse, of the storyteller who has been thrust to the edge of the world, both an infant and an ancient, and through him reveal everyman." ---Homer the aged poet.

"In Him was life, and the life was the Light of men. The Light shines in the darkness, and the darkness did not comprehend it."
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
16-03-2016, 09:57 AM
RE: Mother Teresa to be made a saint
(16-03-2016 08:41 AM)Tomasia Wrote:  Yes, when you base your views less on what can be drawn by the available facts, such as in the case of her association with Keating, her lack of a response from a letter sent to her by an attorney, you're relying primarily on your imagination.

Multiple people have cited multiple sources, many with internet links. The Wikipedia page alone contained no less than (31) linked references.

That is not imagination. That is information.


(16-03-2016 08:41 AM)Tomasia Wrote:  If that's the way you feel about her, than I seriously feel sorry for your mothers.

And this is at least the second time you've made this pathetic emotional appeal.

Unless you are willing to begin arguing more honestly and accurately, I see little reason to continue this discussion.

Help for the living. Hope for the dead. ~ R.G. Ingersoll

Freedom offers opportunity. Opportunity confers responsibility. Responsibility to use the freedom we enjoy wisely, honestly and humanely. ~ Noam Chomsky
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Fatbaldhobbit's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: