J
- Status
C
chrisb
Guest
The Chinese appear to have been able to have morality without God… 
J
JDaniel
Guest
Goodness! Will someone please answer Chris? Otherwise, I might explode into a plurality of pluralism.The Chinese appear to have been able to have morality without God…
JD
R
reggieM
Guest
Some people think that suicide is good. But that does not mean that the good is subjective.
W
warpspeedpetey
Guest
we claim to have an idea of G-ds mind from the Bible, and i have yet to see a reasonable argument that can deny the validity of the Bible. though i have seen several good arguments that support its validity in comparison to all other religious texts. thats another argument that hasn’t been settled
W
warpspeedpetey
Guest
pretty sure he was being sarcasticGoodness! Will someone please answer Chris? Otherwise, I might explode into a plurality of pluralism.
JD
J
JDaniel
Guest
You’re not making any sense. I think, unless I’ve had too much grog, that I was talking about beauty.
JD
C
crowonsnow
Guest
I’m just discussing the OP. I’m not here to argue or to insult.
I personally consider it an immoral act to compare a dead child to a euthanized dog or dead fowl. It is certainly something I would never do and is why I made the point. I don’t think anyone of maturity and conscience would do that either. It is certainly not a behavior I would encourage in my children.
That’s the only point I was making.
W
warpspeedpetey
Guest
you keep comparing a dead child to a euthanized dog, so if you make an immoral comparison, its on you.
but i never said that, i said that God had the right to drown those people in the flood because they were his property.
and if you say different than produce the post, they are all recorded.
so on this issue put up, or shut up
W
warpspeedpetey
Guest
you are being dishonest, no one has made that comparison but you, the post you have repeatedly referred to is #163
[Edited]
E
Ender
Guest
The question is whether morality can exist without God, not whether belief in God is required for one to behave morally.
If morality exists, anyone can behave morally whether or not they believe in the source of the moral code they follow; if morality does not exist then obviously no one can behave morally regardless of what they believe. I’ve not seen an explanation of morality-without-God that is any different than pragmatism … but then I don’t get out much and came late to this thread. If there is a post that provides an explanation of how morality can exist without God would someone please point it out?
Ender
C
crowonsnow
Guest
Hello Ender,
The answer to your question is to ask yourself whether your god can exist without morality.
J
JDaniel
Guest
E
Ender
Guest
Um… yeah, what he said. I don’t think answering either yes or no to your (crowonsnow) question takes us anywhere. The question still remains whether morality can exist without God so even if I was unable to demonstrate that God is the source of morality that still leaves unanswered the questions of whether morality really exists and what is its source.
Ender
C
crowonsnow
Guest
If you cannot answer the question it is simply because you don’t know what you mean by “morality.” So perhaps you can first state what you mean by “morality.” Having done that you should then be able to easily answer the question of whether your god can exist without “morality.”
J
JDaniel
Guest
Ender:
Repeat after me, “ICPK THEREFORE YCPK” Now, do this about 10 times. After about the tenth time, your exasperation will ebb. You will sink into a euphoria unlike any you have ever felt.
(BTW, ICPK THREFORE YCPK translates to: “I can’t possibly know therefore you can’t possibly know”.)
Ultimately (I am sorry, I don’t mean to be mean) the non-believer resorts to childish pseudo-refutations. Read some of the earlier post; you’ll see what I mean.
God bless you,
JD
C
CatsAndDogs
Guest
Firstly, no one is “without God”.The Chinese appear to have been able to have morality without God…
Secondly, you must know too much about chinese morality.
It is a very “absolutist” and “mandate of heaven” based “meritocracy”.
It is not a “marketplace of ideas”, where “marketplace of ideas” means “without God”.
:shamrock2:
L
Leela
Guest
Hi Ender,
Pragmatism is not “what works” as a philosophy, it is more about figuring out HOW things work. “What something means”, “how something is used,” “what is the purpose of something,” “what something is”…all cash out to the same thing in terms of behavior. Morality functions to foster human flourishing through human solidarity, so from a pragmatists point of view, that is what morality is.
You would be correct that a perspective on morality as concerned with human flourishing would mean doing away with certain taboos such as for masturbation.
Best,
Leela
If what you mean by morality is discovering how to behave so that we don’t anger gods, then my argument has nothing to do with morality. But that is not what I think morality is.
Pragmatism is not “what works” as a philosophy, it is more about figuring out HOW things work. “What something means”, “how something is used,” “what is the purpose of something,” “what something is”…all cash out to the same thing in terms of behavior. Morality functions to foster human flourishing through human solidarity, so from a pragmatists point of view, that is what morality is.
Morality based on mandates from gods has resulted in behaviors such as human sacrifice that none of us would consider moral.
You would be correct that a perspective on morality as concerned with human flourishing would mean doing away with certain taboos such as for masturbation.
Societies generally have learned that though the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few, and it is important that we instill that value, it is also important that people choose to make sacrifices on their own rather than having such choices forced upon them. A society that does not value the individual does not encourage human flourishing. Wouldn’t you agree?
We don’t usually talk about morality for animals since they don’t have the ability to think about the causes of suffering and how to promote animal flourishing.
Virtually every society has come up with some version of the Golden Rule. It is hard to think of a more rational moral precept.
No, though it may have been a necessary step in moral evolution. But here you can already see an expansion of consciousness as compared to your earlier “why should an individual care about what behavior is beneficial to society.” People have expanded their idea of personal interest from their selves, to their offspring, to their clan, to their village, to the country, to the world.
Best,
Leela
L
Leela
Guest
B
buffalo
Guest
- Status