Objective Morality
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
11-04-2014, 09:49 AM (This post was last modified: 11-04-2014 09:55 AM by Taqiyya Mockingbird.)
RE: Objective Morality
(11-04-2014 07:56 AM)Artie Wrote:  
(11-04-2014 04:43 AM)Stevil Wrote:  If you give people the idea that morality is the basis for law then people will look to force their own brand of morality onto society.
Christians will always look to the Bible as the source of moral absolutes.
Muslims will always look to the Quran
Jews the Torah etc

Thus we have wars, death, destruction and oppression.
According to these books http://tinyurl.com/kcs4msa only 183 out of 1763 wars have been classified to involve a religious conflict. And more than 50% of those religious wars involved Islam. The US has been one of the most religious countries for the last 200 years. Do you know how many religious conflicts/wars they have started because religious people wanted to inflict their own brand of morality onto societies? None. So who caused the other 1580 wars and what brand of morality do they have?

You copy/pasted this "statistic" from a claim some yahoo on the internet made in the review comments section on Amazon.com. A review which was citing your "statistic" from another book by a different author. Really?

What the fuck is wrong with you.

Do you claim to own this $300 book set? Have you read this book?

Fucking idiot.

It's Special Pleadings all the way down!


Magic Talking Snakes STFU -- revenantx77


You can't have your special pleading and eat it too. -- WillHop
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
11-04-2014, 10:02 AM
RE: Objective Morality
(11-04-2014 09:49 AM)Taqiyya Mockingbird Wrote:  
(11-04-2014 07:56 AM)Artie Wrote:  According to these books http://tinyurl.com/kcs4msa only 183 out of 1763 wars have been classified to involve a religious conflict. And more than 50% of those religious wars involved Islam. The US has been one of the most religious countries for the last 200 years. Do you know how many religious conflicts/wars they have started because religious people wanted to inflict their own brand of morality onto societies? None. So who caused the other 1580 wars and what brand of morality do they have?

You copy/pasted this "statistic" from a claim some yahoo on the internet made in the review comments section on Amazon.com. A review which was citing your "statistic" from another book by a different author. Really?

What the fuck is wrong with you.

Do you claim to own this $300 book set? Have you read this book?

Fucking idiot.

If I'm not mistaken, all of our wars have been based on our interpretation of what is right and wrong. Since we are 'one of the most religious countries,' and since our leadership is mostly Christian...

Think before you paste.

If Jesus died for our sins, why is there still sin? If man was created from dust, why is there still dust? If Americans came from Europe, why are there still Europeans?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
11-04-2014, 10:57 AM
RE: Objective Morality
I've been having a rethink.

Earlier I said...

(10-04-2014 05:00 AM)DLJ Wrote:  ...
Damn the Evolutionary Process! If only it had pre-defined goals and knew right from wrong.
and...
(10-04-2014 06:06 AM)DLJ Wrote:  ...
Processes have no morality.

There is a new(ish) International Standard (ISO15504) that mandates (actually, I'm not sure if it's a 'should' or a 'shall') that processes when defined and documented need to contain a Purpose Statement

Since we all agree that Evolution has no pre-defined Purpose, I should not have used the term "Evolutionary Process".

Also, processes do have pre-defined goals.

I stand by the second statement that "Processes have no morality" but I'm wondering whether I should have said ...
Evolutionary System ... and systems have no morality.

Definition:
system
noun
1.
a set of things working together as parts of a mechanism or an interconnecting network; a complex whole.
"the state railway system"
synonyms: structure, organization, order, arrangement, complex, apparatus, network
2.
a set of principles or procedures according to which something is done; an organised scheme or method.
"a multiparty system of government"
synonyms: method, methodology, technique, process, procedure, approach, practice, line, line of action, line of attack, attack, means, way, manner, mode, framework, modus operandi

I think I'm OK with def 1. for Evolution but not so happy with def 2. because of 'organised'.

Any thoughts, anyone, on what Evolution is (other than a 'theory').

Perhaps I should start a new thread for this question so as to include those who got bored with this one and moved on.

Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
11-04-2014, 11:01 AM
RE: Objective Morality
I just skimmed it, but...

Any English teacher worth their weight in salt will tell you that you should omit yourself from the article. It isn't a a story, it's an article.

"First, let’s look at the implications of this reality if indeed it is so."
No
"The Aztec culture was very different from our own." No No
"For instance, let's use an example..." No No No
"I don’t really see how to be honest." Hobo
"I’ll go so far as..." - urgh...many more examples, I'm sure.

While we're at it, contractions should not be in articles either.

let's, let's, let's, let's, let's, let's, let's
doesn’t
There’s
I'll
I'm
won't

Double qualifiers just make you look stupid. Don't do it!
"there are many, many people who..."

Avoid generalizations by adding qualifiers.

"Christians believe that their moral values are objective because..."
No

You shouldn't capitalize things because you think they are important. Follow the rules of English.

"If God is the cause of objective morality then because He is the ultimate being and never changes then so too must His values be ultimate and unchanging." Beat_stick

Don't start sentences with conjunctions!Angry

"And if God exists then Christians are totally right in this respect." Hobo

I didn't read the article yet, just skimmed it and got annoyed.

God bless America and the right to write! - For better or for worse until death us do part. Laughat

I don't mean to be insulting, but perhaps a couple of college level English classes would be helpful, especially if you want to do this for money. Good luck! I may read the article later.

Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
11-04-2014, 11:38 AM
RE: Objective Morality
(11-04-2014 11:01 AM)Dark Light Wrote:  I just skimmed it, but...

Any English teacher worth their weight in salt will tell you that you should omit yourself from the article. It isn't a a story, it's an article.

"First, let’s look at the implications of this reality if indeed it is so."
No
"The Aztec culture was very different from our own." No No
"For instance, let's use an example..." No No No
"I don’t really see how to be honest." Hobo
"I’ll go so far as..." - urgh...many more examples, I'm sure.

While we're at it, contractions should not be in articles either.

let's, let's, let's, let's, let's, let's, let's
doesn’t
There’s
I'll
I'm
won't

Double qualifiers just make you look stupid. Don't do it!
"there are many, many people who..."

Avoid generalizations by adding qualifiers.

"Christians believe that their moral values are objective because..."
No

You shouldn't capitalize things because you think they are important. Follow the rules of English.

"If God is the cause of objective morality then because He is the ultimate being and never changes then so too must His values be ultimate and unchanging." Beat_stick

Don't start sentences with conjunctions!Angry

"And if God exists then Christians are totally right in this respect." Hobo

I didn't read the article yet, just skimmed it and got annoyed.

God bless America and the right to write! - For better or for worse until death us do part. Laughat

I don't mean to be insulting, but perhaps a couple of college level English classes would be helpful, especially if you want to do this for money. Good luck! I may read the article later.

Dude hasn't posted in 2 weeks.

It's Special Pleadings all the way down!


Magic Talking Snakes STFU -- revenantx77


You can't have your special pleading and eat it too. -- WillHop
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
11-04-2014, 12:58 PM
RE: Objective Morality
(11-04-2014 07:56 AM)Artie Wrote:  According to these books http://tinyurl.com/kcs4msa only 183 out of 1763 wars have been classified to involve a religious conflict.
Even if this were true it would mean that we could improve by 10%, that is something special right there.

(11-04-2014 07:56 AM)Artie Wrote:  And more than 50% of those religious wars involved Islam. The US has been one of the most religious countries for the last 200 years. Do you know how many religious conflicts/wars they have started because religious people wanted to inflict their own brand of morality onto societies? None. So who caused the other 1580 wars and what brand of morality do they have?
USA are often a war mongering country. Especially when they are run by war lords such as George Bush. George is especially remembered for his proclamation of the "axis of evil", his pre-emptive strikes and his insistence that you are "either for us or against us", also his implementation of torture "Guantanamo". They guy is a religiously fueled douche, hell bent on spreading Christian morality above Muslim morality.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Stevil's post
11-04-2014, 01:05 PM
RE: Objective Morality
(11-04-2014 10:57 AM)DLJ Wrote:  Any thoughts, anyone, on what Evolution is (other than a 'theory').
A natural phenomena?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Stevil's post
11-04-2014, 01:13 PM
RE: Objective Morality
(11-04-2014 12:58 PM)Stevil Wrote:  USA are often a war mongering country. Especially when they are run by war lords such as George Bush. George is especially remembered for his proclamation of the "axis of evil", his pre-emptive strikes and his insistence that you are "either for us or against us", also his implementation of torture "Guantanamo". They guy is a religiously fueled douche, hell bent on spreading Christian morality above Muslim morality.

I think you give Bush too much blame. Obama happily continued the same wars. 6 years after taking office Afghanistan remains a battle-zone and GTMO is still holding prisoners of war without due process. I also have serious doubts that the war was fueled by Bush's religion.

Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
11-04-2014, 01:25 PM
RE: Objective Morality
(11-04-2014 08:11 AM)Artie Wrote:  Even vervet monkeys risk their lives by yelling out and calling attention to themselves in the presence of a predator to alert the group to its presence.
No doubt there would be some vervet monkeys that don't call out and evolution would have produced those individuals as well.
If evolution produced both behaviours in those monkeys, then which behaviour is to be judged right and which is to be judged wrong?

If you maintain that evolution is the source of morality then this means that all behaviours that are produced by evolution are to be judged as right (moral).

If evolution dictates morality then to observe immoral behaviours we need to move away from evolution based bio-chemical entities. We can do this by developing AI robots which aren't a product of evolution. This would mean that all behaviours of an AI robot would be judged as immoral (a.k.a. not a product of evolution)
Consider
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
11-04-2014, 01:37 PM
RE: Objective Morality
(11-04-2014 01:13 PM)Dark Light Wrote:  I think you give Bush too much blame. Obama happily continued the same wars. 6 years after taking office Afghanistan remains a battle-zone and GTMO is still holding prisoners of war without due process. I also have serious doubts that the war was fueled by Bush's religion.
I think Obama and USA were in a pickle. They can't just instantly pull out of a country without stabalising it somehow. If they leave a country worse off than before the war then USA come out looking like monsters. If they leave the local freedom fighters in the lurch to be culled off then they will never get local support for their future wars.

I do however think that due to international "law" there would be a strong case to convict both Bush and Obama of war crimes, in particular, torture of captives. When you try and play a "righteous" game then you will find it very difficult to be consistent.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: