Science of Morality

[AlecWelsh]

It seems this question has quite a bit of controversy for both Atheist and Christians. Arguments from both sides reject that there can be an objective morality, Christians reject a science of morality without God to define give morals a objective standard. Other atheist and agnostics argue that good is relative and that what is good or moral for one person is different for someone else. I reject both of these claims to argue that morality is based on the suffer vs well-being of conscious individuals that exist on a continuum. Causing unjustified suffering among a conscious individual is the definition of an immoral action.

[Cow Poke]

Welcome to Tweb, Alec!

[jpholding]

So why's this in my area?

[AlecWelsh]

What is your area?

[JonathanL]

What is your area?

Tektonics, the sub-section of the forum where you created this thread. A mod is probably going to move this thread to a more appropriate area of the forum.

[AlecWelsh]

Tektonics, the sub-section of the forum where you created this thread. A mod is probably going to move this thread to a more appropriate area of the forum.

How is it different than the law and morality topic under the same sub section?

[JonathanL]

How is it different than the law and morality topic under the same sub section?

The Tektonics area of the forum is mainly for stuff regarding Tektonics itself, J.P. Holding's apologetics ministry. Your thread would probably fit better in Philosophy 201 or Apologetics 301. Unless you wanted input specifically from Holding himself of course, but since he doesn't involve himself very much in these sorts of topics I don't really know what good it would do you.

You shouldn't create a new thread though, just ask a mod move this one to a more appropriate area (or wait for one to do it of their own accord).

[JonathanL]

How is it different than the law and morality topic under the same sub section?

As to your question of how it's different, the Law and Morality thread was created from an off-topic discussion in the screwball thread that threatened to derail the original thread. It's not an original thread in it's own right, but more of an offshoot of an existing one. If it was an original thread it would probably have been started in a more "appropriate" area.

[jpholding]

Yeah...that.

[Bill the Cat]

It seems this question has quite a bit of controversy for both Atheist and Christians. Arguments from both sides reject that there can be an objective morality, Christians reject a science of morality without God to define give morals a objective standard. Other atheist and agnostics argue that good is relative and that what is good or moral for one person is different for someone else. I reject both of these claims to argue that morality is based on the suffer vs well-being of conscious individuals that exist on a continuum. Causing unjustified suffering among a conscious individual is the definition of an immoral action.

Why does it matter if we are nothing more than cosmic accidents and coincidences? And what makes our species so different that we can cause unjust suffering among other species, but not our own?

[Darth Executor]

I reject both of these claims to argue that morality is based on the suffer vs well-being of conscious individuals that exist on a continuum. Causing unjustified suffering among a conscious individual is the definition of an immoral action.

So you claim. How is this "objective"? It looks like it's just your opinion to me.

[AlecWelsh]

I see right on. Ill move it soon if a mod doesn't

[AlecWelsh]

Why does it matter if we are nothing more than cosmic accidents and coincidences? And what makes our species so different that we can cause unjust suffering among other species, but not our own?

It matters because if this is the only life we get how we spend it is all that matters, and any individual should be allowed to experience the only life they have with as much opportunity for well-being as they can get.

[AlecWelsh]

So you claim. How is this "objective"? It looks like it's just your opinion to me.

I am not sure what part is an opinion. Conscious beings suffer. The point of morality is to reduce suffering among conscious beings and that suffering is not an opinion or relative to individuals.

[Bill the Cat]

It matters because if this is the only life we get how we spend it is all that matters, and any individual should be allowed to experience the only life they have with as much opportunity for well-being as they can get.

Why? As I have said before, walk into a random graveyard and tell me if anyone in that ground matters to you. Does it matter to anyone at all if those people were happy, sad, rich or poor? No. Nothing they did mattered.