Page 1 of 44 12311 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 438

Thread: Teleology And Human Ethics...

  1. #1
    tWebber seer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    New England
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    19,340
    Amen (Given)
    998
    Amen (Received)
    3934

    Teleology And Human Ethics...

    If the human person was created for a purpose then how a man conforms to that purpose tells us if he is good or bad. And example would be a car. If a car runs according to design we could call it a good car, if it always broke down we could call it a bad car, according to design. Moral behaviors that conform to our teleology would be called good (or moral) and those that don't would be called bad (or immoral). But if naturalism is correct there would be no objective purpose for the human person. No design to conform to, no standard to judge specific behaviors. How ever nature just happened to create us just "is."
    “The only place outside Heaven where you can be perfectly safe from all the dangers and perturbations of love is Hell.” C.S. Lewis

  2. Amen Jedidiah amen'd this post.
  3. #2
    tWebber guacamole's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2016
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    1,226
    Amen (Given)
    201
    Amen (Received)
    450
    I'm holding off commenting because I think this is more pointed at the philosophical naturalists amongst us. You might get more traction in apologetics?
    "Shall we mourn here deedless forever, a shadow-folk, mist-haunting, dropping vain tears in the
    thankless sea?"

  4. #3
    tWebber seer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    New England
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    19,340
    Amen (Given)
    998
    Amen (Received)
    3934
    Quote Originally Posted by guacamole View Post
    I'm holding off commenting because I think this is more pointed at the philosophical naturalists amongst us. You might get more traction in apologetics?
    I think this is the place for it and anyone can jump in...
    “The only place outside Heaven where you can be perfectly safe from all the dangers and perturbations of love is Hell.” C.S. Lewis

  5. #4
    tWebber guacamole's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2016
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    1,226
    Amen (Given)
    201
    Amen (Received)
    450
    The literal only solution for the non-theist is subjectivity or appeal to the natural, either of which can conceal monstrous ethical problems.
    "Shall we mourn here deedless forever, a shadow-folk, mist-haunting, dropping vain tears in the
    thankless sea?"

  6. #5
    tWebber seer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    New England
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    19,340
    Amen (Given)
    998
    Amen (Received)
    3934
    Quote Originally Posted by guacamole View Post
    The literal only solution for the non-theist is subjectivity or appeal to the natural, either of which can conceal monstrous ethical problems.
    Agreed...
    “The only place outside Heaven where you can be perfectly safe from all the dangers and perturbations of love is Hell.” C.S. Lewis

  7. #6
    tWebber shunyadragon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Hillsborough, NC
    Faith
    Agnostic
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    12,536
    Amen (Given)
    1216
    Amen (Received)
    830
    Quote Originally Posted by guacamole View Post
    The literal only solution for the non-theist is subjectivity or appeal to the natural, either of which can conceal monstrous ethical problems.
    What monstrous ethical problems?
    Glendower: I can call spirits from the vasty deep.
    Hotspur: Why, so can I, or so can any man;
    But will they come when you do call for them? Shakespeare’s Henry IV, Part 1, Act III:

    go with the flow the river knows . . .

    Frank

    I do not know, therefore everything is in pencil.

  8. #7
    tWebber stfoskey15's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Central OK, USA
    Faith
    Deist
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    442
    Amen (Given)
    759
    Amen (Received)
    100
    There can still be standards to judge whether or not an action is ethical. Such as whether or not an action helps or harms another.
    Find my speling strange? I'm trying this out: Simplified Speling. Feel free to join me.

    "Nature has placed mankind under the governance of two sovereign masters, pain and pleasure. It is for them alone to point out what we ought to do, as well as to determine what we shall do."-Jeremy Bentham

    "We question all our beliefs, except for the ones that we really believe in, and those we never think to question."-Orson Scott Card

  9. Amen Starlight amen'd this post.
  10. #8
    tWebber shunyadragon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Hillsborough, NC
    Faith
    Agnostic
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    12,536
    Amen (Given)
    1216
    Amen (Received)
    830
    Quote Originally Posted by seer View Post
    If the human person was created for a purpose then how a man conforms to that purpose tells us if he is good or bad. And example would be a car. If a car runs according to design we could call it a good car, if it always broke down we could call it a bad car, according to design. Moral behaviors that conform to our teleology would be called good (or moral) and those that don't would be called bad (or immoral). But if naturalism is correct there would be no objective purpose for the human person. No design to conform to, no standard to judge specific behaviors. How ever nature just happened to create us just "is."

    A circular argument for the existence of God, where the assumption is the purpose and intent 'outside nature' must be for humanity to be as humanity is. It sounds a little like the moldy oldie 747 for intelligent design argument

    Science does not argue for a just "is" scenario to explain the nature of humanity. There is obviously no objective verifiable evidence for an objective purpose outside nature itself, nor is it found to be necessary that this is the case.

    Moldy oldie argument die hard, something like Zombies.
    Glendower: I can call spirits from the vasty deep.
    Hotspur: Why, so can I, or so can any man;
    But will they come when you do call for them? Shakespeare’s Henry IV, Part 1, Act III:

    go with the flow the river knows . . .

    Frank

    I do not know, therefore everything is in pencil.

  11. #9
    Caught in the Matrix
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Faith
    Agnostic
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    8,744
    Amen (Given)
    1018
    Amen (Received)
    1122
    Quote Originally Posted by seer View Post
    If the human person was created for a purpose then how a man conforms to that purpose tells us if he is good or bad.
    Thats one way to look at it.

    And example would be a car. If a car runs according to design we could call it a good car, if it always broke down we could call it a bad car, according to design.
    We could also call it a poorly designed car.

    Moral behaviors that conform to our teleology would be called good (or moral) and those that don't would be called bad (or immoral).
    What do you mean here by teleology? Moral behaviors do serve a purpose, the best interests of the species, of society, and ultimately of the individual members thereof.
    But if naturalism is correct there would be no objective purpose for the human person. No design to conform to, no standard to judge specific behaviors. How ever nature just happened to create us just "is."
    The objective purpose of the human person is a different question than that of the purpose of moral laws. You're starting with the apriori belief that human beings were designed for a purpose. Thats a biased perspective because you want to believe that you, above all other life forms, are special in this regard. I'm sure that if turtles had evolved brains with the ability to think like human beings, they'd think themselves special as well.

  12. #10
    tWebber seer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    New England
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    19,340
    Amen (Given)
    998
    Amen (Received)
    3934
    Quote Originally Posted by shunyadragon View Post
    A circular argument for the existence of God, where the assumption is the purpose and intent 'outside nature' must be for humanity to be as humanity is. It sounds a little like the moldy oldie 747 for intelligent design argument

    Science does not argue for a just "is" scenario to explain the nature of humanity. There is obviously no objective verifiable evidence for an objective purpose outside nature itself, nor is it found to be necessary that this is the case.
    Shuny, I don't care what science says, that is a fact. If atheism is true there is no teleology for humankind, no purpose, not even for survival. But since we are both theists we know that there is a purpose for humankind.
    “The only place outside Heaven where you can be perfectly safe from all the dangers and perturbations of love is Hell.” C.S. Lewis

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •