Originally posted by JimL
View Post
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
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
-
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
-
Originally posted by seer View PostThat doesn't make sense Jim, evil can be done to me even if I never did it to another - and often is.
Comment
-
Originally posted by guacamole View PostI 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.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.
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
-
Originally posted by guacamole View PostI'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?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
-
Originally posted by Mountain Man View PostComing 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?
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
-
Originally posted by Mountain Man View PostComing 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?
Comment
-
Originally posted by JimLamebrain View PostThats 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.
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
-
Originally posted by Mountain Man View PostThat 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?
Comment
-
Originally posted by JimL View PostActually 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.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
-
Originally posted by Mountain Man View PostYou'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.
Comment
-
Originally posted by guacamole View PostI'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 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.
Comment
-
Originally posted by JimL View PostIt'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.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
-
Originally posted by Mountain Man View PostThat'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?
Comment
-
Originally posted by seer View PostHow could anyone really know the long term consequences of any act?
Comment
-
Originally posted by guacamole View PostHow do you reckon the beneficial or harmful quality of consequences then?
Comment
Related Threads
Collapse
Topics | Statistics | Last Post | ||
---|---|---|---|---|
Started by whag, 04-22-2024, 06:28 PM
|
17 responses
79 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by Sparko
Yesterday, 01:46 PM
|
||
Started by Hypatia_Alexandria, 04-17-2024, 08:31 AM
|
67 responses
321 views
0 likes
|
Last Post Today, 01:36 PM | ||
Started by Neptune7, 04-15-2024, 06:54 AM
|
25 responses
158 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by Cerebrum123
04-17-2024, 08:31 AM
|
||
Started by whag, 04-09-2024, 01:04 PM
|
107 responses
588 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by tabibito
Today, 09:55 AM
|
||
Started by whag, 04-07-2024, 10:17 AM
|
39 responses
252 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by tabibito
04-12-2024, 02:58 PM
|
Comment