Announcement

Collapse

Apologetics 301 Guidelines

If you think this is the area where you tell everyone you are sorry for eating their lunch out of the fridge, it probably isn't the place for you


This forum is open discussion between atheists and all theists to defend and debate their views on religion or non-religion. Please respect that this is a Christian-owned forum and refrain from gratuitous blasphemy. VERY wide leeway is given in range of expression and allowable behavior as compared to other areas of the forum, and moderation is not overly involved unless necessary. Please keep this in mind. Atheists who wish to interact with theists in a way that does not seek to undermine theistic faith may participate in the World Religions Department. Non-debate question and answers and mild and less confrontational discussions can take place in General Theistics.


Forum Rules: Here
See more
See less

To what extent can ethics be anchored in reason?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Originally posted by JimL View Post
    Already gave my opinion on that seer, the evil you can do to others today can also be done to you tommorow. Ultimately, thats not in the best interests of anyone or society as a whole.
    That doesn't make sense Jim, evil can be done to me even if I never did it to another - and often is.
    Atheism is the cult of death, the death of hope. The universe is doomed, you are doomed, the only thing that remains is to await your execution...

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jbnueb2OI4o&t=3s

    Comment


    • #17
      Originally posted by seer View Post
      That doesn't make sense Jim, evil can be done to me even if I never did it to another - and often is.
      Evils could always be done to you regardless, thats why we make laws with respect to social morals. People break the laws all the time, but they are far less likely to do so if morality is inculcated as well as their knowing the consequences they will likely face should they do so.

      Comment


      • #18
        Originally posted by guacamole View Post
        I agree with this. I would further add that I think the best approach--though I don't know if I can adequately explain it--is that we know that there is God because the universe has a tilt toward justice.
        Not really. There doesn't seem to be any correlation between nastiness and non-human-induced premature deaths.
        That this is part of natural revelation and that we can deduce the character of God from the natural justice-tilt of Creation--hence we know God's character and his revulsion to sin from observation.
        Does god have an even greater revulsion to people living on the flanks of volcanos or shores near tectonic faults? Or in areas of poor sanitation and substandard water supply?

        Famine, pestilence, drought, tsunamis and landslides kill many, many people in ways that are usually impossible for those affected to prevent. Sin is not an apparent factor.
        Jorge: Functional Complex Information is INFORMATION that is complex and functional.

        MM: First of all, the Bible is a fixed document.
        MM on covid-19: We're talking about an illness with a better than 99.9% rate of survival.

        seer: I believe that so called 'compassion' [for starving Palestinian kids] maybe a cover for anti Semitism, ...

        Comment


        • #19
          Originally posted by guacamole View Post
          I'm curious how atheists and other non-religious folk find or create ethical rules. A lot of Christians assert that with out God, there is no reason to be good. I'm interested in turning the question around. What is the basis of ethics in non-theistic systems? Preference? Popularity?
          Coming up with a non-theistic system of morality is relatively easy. Consequential ethics and pragmatism are reasonably intuitive, but where the atheist runs into a brick wall is when he tries to explain why someone ought to prefer one course of action over another. Suppose someone is rich and powerful enough to skate through life without ever having to face the negative consequences of their behavior. If an Ultimate Judge doesn't exist then why shouldn't they?
          Some may call me foolish, and some may call me odd
          But I'd rather be a fool in the eyes of man
          Than a fool in the eyes of God


          From "Fools Gold" by Petra

          Comment


          • #20
            Originally posted by Mountain Man View Post
            Coming up with a non-theistic system of morality is relatively easy. Consequential ethics and pragmatism are reasonably intuitive, but where the atheist runs into a brick wall is when he tries to explain why someone ought to prefer one course of action over another. Suppose someone is rich and powerful enough to skate through life without ever having to face the negative consequences of their behavior. If an Ultimate Judge doesn't exist then why shouldn't they?
            Kant’s Moral Argument For God

            (1) Moral behaviour is rational.
            (2) Morality behaviour is only rational if justice will be done.
            (3) Justice will only be done if God exists.
            Therefore:
            (4) God exists.


            http://www.philosophyofreligion.info...oral-argument/
            Atheism is the cult of death, the death of hope. The universe is doomed, you are doomed, the only thing that remains is to await your execution...

            https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jbnueb2OI4o&t=3s

            Comment


            • #21
              Originally posted by Mountain Man View Post
              Coming up with a non-theistic system of morality is relatively easy. Consequential ethics and pragmatism are reasonably intuitive, but where the atheist runs into a brick wall is when he tries to explain why someone ought to prefer one course of action over another. Suppose someone is rich and powerful enough to skate through life without ever having to face the negative consequences of their behavior. If an Ultimate Judge doesn't exist then why shouldn't they?
              Thats why we have laws so that even the rich and powerful can not necessarily escape the negative consequences of their behavior. Many a very wealthy and powerful person has murdered someone and not escaped the consequences.

              Comment


              • #22
                Originally posted by JimLamebrain View Post
                Thats why we have laws so that even the rich and powerful can not necessarily escape the negative consequences of their behavior. Many a very wealthy and powerful person has murdered someone and not escaped the consequences.
                That doesn't answer the question, Jimmy.

                Besides, the rich and powerful are very adept at circumventing the law, and many of them have done so throughout history. For that matter, even a common criminal on the street can live outside the law if he's sufficiently careful. And if there's no Ultimate Authority to hold them accountable then why shouldn't they?
                Some may call me foolish, and some may call me odd
                But I'd rather be a fool in the eyes of man
                Than a fool in the eyes of God


                From "Fools Gold" by Petra

                Comment


                • #23
                  Originally posted by Mountain Man View Post
                  That doesn't answer the question, Jimmy.

                  Besides, the rich and powerful are very adept at circumventing the law, and many of them have done so throughout history. For that matter, even a common criminal on the street can live outside the law if he's sufficiently careful. And if there's no Ultimate Authority to hold them accountable then why shouldn't they?
                  Actually it does answer the question. The rich and powerful, as well as the common criminal on the street, should they be unprincipled, may escape the negative consequences of their immoral behavior, but it is never a given, and that is enough to keep most of them in check. The reason they ought to behave in a moral way is because the society within which they live, being a moral society, is ultimately in their own best interests.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Originally posted by JimL View Post
                    Actually it does answer the question. The rich and powerful, as well as the common criminal on the street, should they be unprincipled, may escape the negative consequences of their immoral behavior, but it is never a given, and that is enough to keep most of them in check. The reason they ought to behave in a moral way is because the society within which they live, being a moral society, is ultimately in their own best interests.
                    You're naive if you think it can't be in someone's best interests to exploit society for their own gain. History is full of examples. That's the problem with pragmatism and situational ethics, because moral behaviour isn't necessarily optimal.
                    Some may call me foolish, and some may call me odd
                    But I'd rather be a fool in the eyes of man
                    Than a fool in the eyes of God


                    From "Fools Gold" by Petra

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Originally posted by Mountain Man View Post
                      You're naive if you think it can't be in someone's best interests to exploit society for their own gain. History is full of examples. That's the problem with pragmatism and situational ethics, because moral behaviour isn't necessarily optimal.
                      It's possible for a particular immoral action to be in ones best interest, should they wish to risk it and get away with it, but in general a more secure society is in their, and in everyone else's best interest. You're whole argument is "oh, but they might get away with it." So what? Some people will sometimes get away with crimes, but society, and life therein, is better off for having laws even if sometimes some immoral behavior goes unpunished.

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Originally posted by guacamole View Post
                        I'm curious how atheists and other non-religious folk find or create ethical rules. A lot of Christians assert that with out God, there is no reason to be good. I'm interested in turning the question around. What is the basis of ethics in non-theistic systems? Preference? Popularity?

                        fwiw,
                        guac.
                        The prevailing view in science,and among many atheists is that humans cannot create ethics and morals anchored in reason. The foundation of morals and ethics is evolution, and survival of the species. Social animals require cooperation, social, stability, and a hierarchy of morals and ethics to survive. These characteristics of human behavior are apparent in simpler forms in higher mammals, for similar reasons.

                        The concept of consequences mentioned before ties into this, in that the consequences of the lack of morality and ethics is social chaos, and human societies and cultures do not survive, and humanity cannot survive.
                        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.

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Originally posted by JimL View Post
                          It's possible for a particular immoral action to be in ones best interest, should they wish to risk it and get away with it, but in general a more secure society is in their, and in everyone else's best interest. You're whole argument is "oh, but they might get away with it." So what? Some people will sometimes get away with crimes, but society, and life therein, is better off for having laws even if sometimes some immoral behavior goes unpunished.
                          That's just a hand-wave, Jimmy. Try actually answering the argument. You say that society is better when people live morally, but why ought one value what's best for society if it's in their own best interest to live selfishly? Why ought someone like the late Pablo Escobar care about society when his crimes made him richer and more powerful than the country he was living in?
                          Some may call me foolish, and some may call me odd
                          But I'd rather be a fool in the eyes of man
                          Than a fool in the eyes of God


                          From "Fools Gold" by Petra

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Originally posted by Mountain Man View Post
                            That's just a hand-wave, Jimmy. Try actually answering the argument. You say that society is better when people live morally, but why ought one value what's best for society if it's in their own best interest to live selfishly? Why ought someone like the late Pablo Escobar care about society when his crimes made him richer and more powerful than the country he was living in?
                            Pablo Escobar was killed at the age of 44 MM. Was it in his best interests?

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Originally posted by seer View Post
                              How could anyone really know the long term consequences of any act?
                              We can't be infallibly certain about anything, but that is no excuse for shirking our responsibility for exercising our judgment to the best of our ability. Sometimes our judgment will be wrong, and we have to live with that. The only way to never do anything wrong is to never do anything, and even that won't work when inaction itself is the wrong option.

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Originally posted by guacamole View Post
                                How do you reckon the beneficial or harmful quality of consequences then?
                                The reckoning can get complicated, but I'd start by presupposing that no rational person wants to live in world in which some people can cause other people to suffer gratuitously.

                                Comment

                                Related Threads

                                Collapse

                                Topics Statistics Last Post
                                Started by whag, Yesterday, 03:01 PM
                                39 responses
                                162 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post whag
                                by whag
                                 
                                Started by whag, 03-17-2024, 04:55 PM
                                21 responses
                                130 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Hypatia_Alexandria  
                                Started by whag, 03-14-2024, 06:04 PM
                                80 responses
                                426 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post tabibito  
                                Started by whag, 03-13-2024, 12:06 PM
                                45 responses
                                303 views
                                1 like
                                Last Post Hypatia_Alexandria  
                                Started by rogue06, 12-26-2023, 11:05 AM
                                406 responses
                                2,506 views
                                2 likes
                                Last Post tabibito  
                                Working...
                                X