This site makes extensive use of JavaScript.
Please enable JavaScript in your browser.
Live
PTR
10.2.7
PTR
10.2.6
Beta
The Euthyphro Dilemma
Post Reply
Return to board index
Post by
Hyperspacerebel
You and MyTie are just asking me questions you know I cannot answer just to squeeze "faith" out of me.
No. I just want you to either point to an non religious objective source for reason and morals, or admit that non religious morals are subjective.
MyTie has a way of saying things more nicely than I :P
Post by
184848
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
Hyperspacerebel
Yes, I do. My morals do change.
He finally said it.
Took long enough :P
Post by
184848
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
Hyperspacerebel
Changing morals means they aren't objective, but subjective. Note MyTie's statement that you replied to right above mine w/o even mentioning subjective morals.
Post by
184848
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
MyTie
No. I just want you to either point to an non religious objective source for reason and morals, or admit that non religious morals are subjective.
We have the need to co-exist. Religion provides structure. And I know that if there was no skeletal system of sorts the needs of the whole would be abandoned for the needs of the one, but not completely--- I haven't denied that.
Then maybe we agree.
Post by
Hyperspacerebel
I'm not going to re-quote this whole thread, needless to say every time someone addressed the point you just ignored it.
To point:
Now you believe morals are subjective. So, say, rape won't always be evil? Slavery will be morally justifiable? Because without objective morality, you're forced to agree with that.
Post by
184848
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
184848
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
Hyperspacerebel
How did this nation pass more than a 100 years of slavery despite being a deeply religious nation? Why are you insinuating that these are religiously based morals? These are more general values.
And who knows, maybe I will someday find a situation in which it had to be done... including rape. Let's set up a hypothetical situation here:
A girl, for whatever reason, is going to be executed if she does not bear a child (let's just say the religion dictates so)
The girl refuses to have sex with her husband, but the husband is deeply in love with her and doesn't want her executed
Would it be moral for the husband to rape the girl if it would save her life? Of course, I've never heard of a case like this... but I think even in cases of rape there should not be a immutable law like that. I'll tell you right now that so far in my life I've only found situations where I consider rape immoral, but I do not think it is necessarily so... there are many cultural pressures in other countries (and even our own) that could possibly make it a moral act.
Religious people can be wrong as you've so adamantly pointed out before. Was slavery morally good/neutral in 1800? When did that change: the second the Civil War began? Or was it gradual, such that it was "kind of morally good?"
She chooses death over having sex with someone...so the husband's justified in raping her? Wow, I honestly can't believe anyone who's concerned about morality would advocate something like that.
Post by
273605
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
Hyperspacerebel
On topic - I don't see why good existing before god makes god's will irrelevant. I'm still assuming that god is omnipotent and watches over humankind - so why is it such a big deal if good was preexisting/existed along with god?
Because, God's will would be determined by the Good; so in other words he wouldn't be omnipotent, because he'd be constrained by something higher than himself.
Post by
273605
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
Hyperspacerebel
On topic - I don't see why good existing before god makes god's will irrelevant. I'm still assuming that god is omnipotent and watches over humankind - so why is it such a big deal if good was preexisting/existed along with god?
Because, God's will would be determined by the Good; so in other words he wouldn't be omnipotent, because he'd be constrained by something higher than himself.
Even if God, by your definition, isn't completely omnipotent, why is it bad if the one restraint is that of ensuring goodness prevails?
Because that contradicts the definition of "God." Essentially you're down to something akin to Zeus who admitted to being constrained by Fate.
Post by
458379
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
Hyperspacerebel
Rape and slavery are not objectively evil.
Ok, so if I went and raped someone right now, if the act itself isn't morally evil, what's making it evil?
Let's make this personal: If I raped you, and there is no objective morality, can you really say you were wronged?
Abortion, for instance, is...morally defensible
Says you...
But that debate is for another time.
Post by
444915
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
Hyperspacerebel
its evil cause you dont care if you hurt anyone to get what you want.
Oh, so hurting someone while trying to get what you want is objectively wrong?
Post by
444915
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post Reply
You are not logged in. Please
log in
to post a reply or
register
if you don't already have an account.