Right & Wrong on a Desert Isle
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
29-10-2013, 05:43 PM
RE: Right & Wrong on a Desert Isle
(29-10-2013 05:38 PM)Stevil Wrote:  
(27-10-2013 04:35 PM)Slowminded Wrote:  Another "atheists have no morals" exercise?
I'm an atheist and I totally agree with the theists on this one. Atheists have no morals.

But I go a step further, Theists have no morals either.

Moral beliefs exist but morals don't. If they did objectively exist then they would apply to everyone and everything.

But they don't so we don't need to worry about them.

Right on. Morals don't exist, moral concepts do. And concepts are as subjective as the individuals holding them but are influenced by the society that they are in. (for the most part)

But now I have come to believe that the whole world is an enigma, a harmless enigma that is made terrible by our own mad attempt to interpret it as though it had an underlying truth.

~ Umberto Eco
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like evenheathen's post
29-10-2013, 05:45 PM
Right & Wrong on a Desert Isle
(29-10-2013 05:38 PM)Stevil Wrote:  
(27-10-2013 04:35 PM)Slowminded Wrote:  Another "atheists have no morals" exercise?
I'm an atheist and I totally agree with the theists on this one. Atheists have no morals.

But I go a step further, Theists have no morals either.

Moral beliefs exist but morals don't. If they did objectively exist then they would apply to everyone and everything.

But they don't so we don't need to worry about them.

If with morals we mean absolute morals then I agree.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes black_squirrel's post
29-10-2013, 06:16 PM
RE: Right & Wrong on a Desert Isle
(29-10-2013 05:38 PM)Stevil Wrote:  
(27-10-2013 04:35 PM)Slowminded Wrote:  Another "atheists have no morals" exercise?
I'm an atheist and I totally agree with the theists on this one. Atheists have no morals.

But I go a step further, Theists have no morals either.

Moral beliefs exist but morals don't. If they did objectively exist then they would apply to everyone and everything.

But they don't so we don't need to worry about them.
Is this about semantics?

Maybe it's my English but by "morals" I meant moral beliefs of an individual , not some absolute objective moral rules that apply to everybody or exist outside of human comprehension of them or whatever you assumed I meant by "morals" .

. . . ................................ ......................................... . [Image: 2dsmnow.gif] Eat at Joe's
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
29-10-2013, 06:55 PM (This post was last modified: 29-10-2013 07:21 PM by Stevil.)
RE: Right & Wrong on a Desert Isle
(29-10-2013 06:16 PM)Slowminded Wrote:  Is this about semantics?

Maybe it's my English but by "morals" I meant moral beliefs of an individual , not some absolute objective moral rules that apply to everybody or exist outside of human comprehension of them or whatever you assumed I meant by "morals" .
I assumed you were using the English language.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Morality
Quote:Morality (from the Latin moralitas "manner, character, proper behavior") is the differentiation of intentions, decisions, and actions between those that are "good" (or right) and those that are "bad" (or wrong).
Many people believe that actions can be distinguished as "good" or "bad".
These people have moral beliefs as opposed to having moral truths.
The moral beliefs are beliefs in moral truths, beliefs that it is true that certain actions are "good" and certain actions are "bad".

"Morals" is ambiguous so I was just clarifying my own position rather than assuming what you meant.

I accept that many theists believe in moral truths, thus they have moral beliefs.
I accept that many atheists believe in moral truths, thus they have moral beliefs.

I don't believe in moral truths thus I do not have moral beliefs.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
29-10-2013, 08:56 PM
RE: Right & Wrong on a Desert Isle
(29-10-2013 06:16 PM)Slowminded Wrote:  
(29-10-2013 05:38 PM)Stevil Wrote:  I'm an atheist and I totally agree with the theists on this one. Atheists have no morals.

But I go a step further, Theists have no morals either.

Moral beliefs exist but morals don't. If they did objectively exist then they would apply to everyone and everything.

But they don't so we don't need to worry about them.
Is this about semantics?

Maybe it's my English but by "morals" I meant moral beliefs of an individual , not some absolute objective moral rules that apply to everybody or exist outside of human comprehension of them or whatever you assumed I meant by "morals" .

When it comes to the OP, it's all semantics. That's all his argument has going for him is semantics. Drinking Beverage

But now I have come to believe that the whole world is an enigma, a harmless enigma that is made terrible by our own mad attempt to interpret it as though it had an underlying truth.

~ Umberto Eco
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
29-10-2013, 09:22 PM
RE: Right & Wrong on a Desert Isle
(29-10-2013 07:30 AM)Dearthair Wrote:  Every thread has a focus, and the focus on this one is about right/wrong & why on a desert isle. The question presented on an atheist forum by a theist is obviously directed only to atheists (everyone knows the answer of a theist already). Attempts to turn the subject to what a theist personally thinks is merely attempts to divert attention away from the focus of the question, and its results.

The results are this: The answers all varied per person, and even each answer had no foundation other than personal "taste". Like the taste of milk, there is no disputing taste. One atheist says it is circular argument, another chooses the golden rule, another reason, and another says it doesn't matter, etc.

It is essentially anarchy.

Atheists will overlook their differences, not wanting to argue too heatedly with their own kind (particularly in the presence of a theist). This comraderie of atheists, I see, is based on the principle of "common ground", expressed specifially as, "the enemy of my enemy is my friend". So, regardless of the acceptable "a la carte" personal morality of another atheist, he is a friend, because he knows the other opposes religion that has a supreme being. The anti-religion is the bond of the comraderie.

Morals is essentially the "should" and "should not" of human action. Although atheists often try to argue this concept, they really have no basis at all for doing so. But, hey, who says inconsistency and contradiction are wrong, right?

So, for the atheist, his own personal free-will and pleasure, for the moment, is his god. Yet, if an atheist uses his own free-will and good pleasure to choose a supreme being, that is the atheist heresy; all things acceptable by free choice except for freely choosing the supreme being, the Creator.

This OP of this thread is a red herring. Apparently this theist hangs around people who up and murder people for no, or trivial reasons, on desert islands, and has a best friend he goes to desert islands with, who is psychotic. If he lives in that chaotic a world, no wonder he needs a Jebus security blankey.

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein
Those who were seen dancing were thought to be insane by those who could not hear the music - Friedrich Nietzsche
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
29-10-2013, 10:05 PM
RE: Right & Wrong on a Desert Isle
Lord of the Flies.


RIP Piggy.

Sad
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like LadyJane's post
30-10-2013, 07:28 AM
RE: Right & Wrong on a Desert Isle
(29-10-2013 09:22 PM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  This OP of this thread is a red herring. Apparently this theist hangs around people who up and murder people for no, or trivial reasons, on desert islands, and ...

"Apparently..."?
Is that what your brain really concludes must be the case? So much for that thinking atheist! No
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
30-10-2013, 07:40 AM
RE: Right & Wrong on a Desert Isle
(29-10-2013 08:56 PM)evenheathen Wrote:  When it comes to the OP, it's all semantics. That's all his argument has going for him is semantics.

When you explain why, then you'd be saying something.

Leave the term "moral" out of it, see if I care.

If you are in a land with no government, and you see a stranger kill another stranger merely because he didn't like the way he combed his hair, do you have any basis for thinking, objectively, that "he SHOULD NOT have done that"? Or, that "he acted badly"? Or, "That his self-determination to do it was wrong"?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
30-10-2013, 07:47 AM
RE: Right & Wrong on a Desert Isle
(30-10-2013 07:40 AM)Dearthair Wrote:  
(29-10-2013 08:56 PM)evenheathen Wrote:  When it comes to the OP, it's all semantics. That's all his argument has going for him is semantics.

When you explain why, then you'd be saying something.

Leave the term "moral" out of it, see if I care.

If you are in a land with no government, and you see a stranger kill another stranger merely because he didn't like the way he combed his hair, do you have any basis for thinking, objectively, that "he SHOULD NOT have done that"? Or, that "he acted badly"? Or, "That his self-determination to do it was wrong"?

Post #108 of this thread.

Look, we've seen this crap over and over. You need to present your argument that you, as a theist, have any better basis for morality than an atheist does. I don't wish to keep going around in circles with your stupid island scenario.

But now I have come to believe that the whole world is an enigma, a harmless enigma that is made terrible by our own mad attempt to interpret it as though it had an underlying truth.

~ Umberto Eco
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: